Chicken Cannon Lovers

"Peter Skelton" wrote in message

We have conditional and absolute discharge, ie. the court saying
don't do it again, and don't bug us with this trivia respectively
to deal with this sort of sillyness. Isn't there something
similar in the states?

No, Sir.

Life can get a bit unpleasant for a judge
who lets things get tied up with too much effort for too little
crime.

Our Federal judges serve for life or good behavior (U.S. Constitution, Art.
III, Sec. 1).

Not much can happen to such an official who does get "tied down" in trivia.

It's not perfect but it helps

Perhaps. On the other hand it does keep the heavy hand of any given
administration from bringing direct pressure on judges for some specific
outcome.

Bill Kambic

If, by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 10:27:56 -0500, "Bill Kambic"
wrote:

"Peter Skelton" wrote in message

We have conditional and absolute discharge, ie. the court saying
don't do it again, and don't bug us with this trivia respectively
to deal with this sort of sillyness. Isn't there something
similar in the states?

No, Sir.

Life can get a bit unpleasant for a judge
who lets things get tied up with too much effort for too little
crime.

Our Federal judges serve for life or good behavior (U.S. Constitution, Art.
III, Sec. 1).

Not much can happen to such an official who does get "tied down" in trivia.

It's not perfect but it helps

Perhaps. On the other hand it does keep the heavy hand of any given
administration from bringing direct pressure on judges for some specific
outcome.

Judges here are not subject to job pressure from politicians, but
there is a certain amount of peer review, and their decisions
are, of course, public knowledge. How do you react to a coworker
who's anal slowness keeps you from your family or who's nasty
behaviour makes customers yell at you?

Peter Skelton

"Peter Skelton" wrote in message

Judges here are not subject to job pressure from politicians,

With all due respect, if you believe this then you have not spent much time
down at the local court house!G

but
there is a certain amount of peer review, and their decisions
are, of course, public knowledge.

Ayup.

How do you react to a coworker
who's anal slowness keeps you from your family or who's nasty
behaviour makes customers yell at you?

Depends on the coworker!g

Bill Kambic

If, by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

Peter Skelton wrote in message . ..
On Tue, 20 Jan 2004 10:27:56 -0500, "Bill Kambic"
wrote:

"Peter Skelton" wrote in message

We have conditional and absolute discharge, ie. the court saying
don't do it again, and don't bug us with this trivia respectively
to deal with this sort of sillyness. Isn't there something
similar in the states?

No, Sir.

Life can get a bit unpleasant for a judge
who lets things get tied up with too much effort for too little
crime.

Our Federal judges serve for life or good behavior (U.S. Constitution, Art.
III, Sec. 1).

Not much can happen to such an official who does get "tied down" in trivia.

It's not perfect but it helps

Perhaps. On the other hand it does keep the heavy hand of any given
administration from bringing direct pressure on judges for some specific
outcome.

Judges here are not subject to job pressure from politicians, but
there is a certain amount of peer review, and their decisions
are, of course, public knowledge. How do you react to a coworker
who's anal slowness keeps you from your family or who's nasty
behaviour makes customers yell at you?

We don't know. In the US we usually tell Judges
that if you're interested in customers and
Lawyers, you should be a *New York* Judge.
Since the rest of the universe doesn't
work like New York.

"Bill Kambic" wrote in message
...
"Peter Skelton" wrote in message

We have conditional and absolute discharge, ie. the court saying
don't do it again, and don't bug us with this trivia respectively
to deal with this sort of sillyness. Isn't there something
similar in the states?

No, Sir.

Life can get a bit unpleasant for a judge
who lets things get tied up with too much effort for too little
crime.

Our Federal judges serve for life or good behavior (U.S. Constitution,
Art.
III, Sec. 1).


So are Canadian judges

http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/trib/page4.html

Not much can happen to such an official who does get "tied down" in
trivia.


Except that he becomes unable to spend time on important matters.


It's not perfect but it helps

Perhaps. On the other hand it does keep the heavy hand of any given
administration from bringing direct pressure on judges for some specific
outcome.

Bill Kambic



How does spending time on trivial cases do that exactly ?

The point Peter makes is valid. There have been similar cases
in the UK where a trial judge found for the prosecution on
the point of law but gave the defendant an absolute discharge
and made the prosecution pay his costs after lecturing the
prosecuting counsel about bringing such trivial matters before
the court. This ****ed off the Crown Prosecution Service to be sure
but was hardly evidence of the subservience of judges, quite
the reverse in fact.

Keith

"Keith Willshaw" wrote in message

Our Federal judges serve for life or good behavior (U.S. Constitution,
Art.
III, Sec. 1).


So are Canadian judges

http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/trib/page4.html

No, not exactly.

Their "security of tenture" seems to be based on statute, not Constitution
(although I may be mistaken; the source of the tenure is not clearly
stated).

They may be removed for ethical violations by a council of other judges (who
may or may not be subject to political pressure).

A U.S. Federal judge holds a lifetime commission and can only be removed by
impeachment. Very few have suffered this fate.

Note that financial security also flows from the Constitution.
Administrative independance has a clear basis in common law.

Not much can happen to such an official who does get "tied down" in
trivia.


Except that he becomes unable to spend time on important matters.

Indeed. But it is the judge, him/herself that determines what is or is not
important.

It's not perfect but it helps

Perhaps. On the other hand it does keep the heavy hand of any given
administration from bringing direct pressure on judges for some specific
outcome.

Bill Kambic



How does spending time on trivial cases do that exactly ?

It doesn't.

The point Peter makes is valid. There have been similar cases
in the UK where a trial judge found for the prosecution on
the point of law but gave the defendant an absolute discharge
and made the prosecution pay his costs after lecturing the
prosecuting counsel about bringing such trivial matters before
the court. This ****ed off the Crown Prosecution Service to be sure
but was hardly evidence of the subservience of judges, quite
the reverse in fact.

Never suggested that British or Commonwealth judges don't have a measure of
independance. Just that their power, and their degree of independance, flow
from Parliament (if that's how the legislature is styled).

I have also seen Federal and state court judges dismiss cases where the
defendant was clearly guilty with costs to the state and give the prosecutor
a first class "red ass" for wasting the court's time. I have also seen
judges at both levels reject plea agreements because it was too lienient and
force the case to trial.

An independant judiciary is a Very Good Thing, but no guarantee against
judicial silliness.

Bill Kambic

If, by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

"Bill Kambic" wrote:


A U.S. Federal judge holds a lifetime commission and can only be removed by
impeachment. Very few have suffered this fate.

Impeachment [i.e., House of Representatives charging a "crime"]
*and* conviction by the Senate removing the judge. Impeachment
doesn't result in removal. Only conviction of the offenses for
which the official was impeached.

One of the few judges impeached by the House and convicted by the
Senate got his revenge. Election to the House of Representatives
that impeached him. He's still serving, having been reelected
regularly.
--
OJ III
[Email sent to Yahoo addy is burned before reading.
Lower and crunch the sig and you'll net me at comcast]

"Ogden Johnson III" wrote in message

A U.S. Federal judge holds a lifetime commission and can only be removed
by
impeachment. Very few have suffered this fate.

Impeachment [i.e., House of Representatives charging a "crime"]
*and* conviction by the Senate removing the judge. Impeachment
doesn't result in removal. Only conviction of the offenses for
which the official was impeached.

The verb "to impeach" means to accuse, charge a liability on, or to sue. In
the context in which it was in the Consititution of the U.S. (and in that of
most states) it means a proceeding charging a public official with mis, mal,
or non-feasance before a quasi-political court.

You are "impeached" when a bill of charges is brought before the
approprirate body. If you are convicted by the finders of fact there seems
to be no other specific term of art (at least I can't find oneg). So
"impeachment" may have a double, if sloppy, meaning.

One of the few judges impeached by the House and convicted by the
Senate got his revenge. Election to the House of Representatives
that impeached him. He's still serving, having been reelected
regularly.

Ah, yes. Proving that impeachment is a political process, not a judicial
conviction.g

Bill Kambic

If, by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.

In ,
Ogden Johnson III radiated into the WorldWideWait:

One of the few judges impeached by the House and convicted by the
Senate got his revenge. Election to the House of Representatives
that impeached him. He's still serving, having been reelected
regularly.

??? Who the HELL is that?

"Duke of URL" wrote in message

One of the few judges impeached by the House and convicted by the
Senate got his revenge. Election to the House of Representatives
that impeached him. He's still serving, having been reelected
regularly.

??? Who the HELL is that?

The ex-Federal judge from Miami who got nailed for tax evasion, if memory
serves?

I just can't quite recall his name.

Bill Kambic

If, by any act, error, or omission, I have, intentionally or
unintentionally, displayed any breedist, disciplinist, sexist, racist,
culturalist, nationalist, regionalist, localist, ageist, lookist, ableist,
sizeist, speciesist, intellectualist, socioeconomicist, ethnocentrist,
phallocentrist, heteropatriarchalist, or other violation of the rules of
political correctness, known or unknown, I am not sorry and I encourage you
to get over it.