Wednesday, December 31, 2008

re: and then he snapped at the Courthouse

Those guys at the lets-hate-judges blogosphere keep on keeping it on. Now, truther says that maybe if judges get beat up, things will be better:

Taking away their security force is an excellent way to reform the unlawful and out of control family court. Think about it. Would little Paula Casey arrogantly and abusively disparage, extort and lecture some Green Beret who did nothing more than make a poor choice in a mate if she was not protected by guards and have an office behind locked doors and bullet proof glass?
Yes, because a judge being rude to you is totally the right reason to attack them. Maybe if that's your logic, there's a reason a judge is disparaging you in the first place?

I don't know, I'd say that someone who'd physically assault a judge might be in their own right a bad choice of a mate.

8 comments:

Rolandovich said...

I'm more concerned about the attorneys, but that's just me.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Emmett said...

@ Anonymous at 314p: You can feel free to say something like that, but just leave your real name, k?

Anonymous said...

Dear Emmitt - Is the truth too inconvenient? Go sit in the family court for a day or an hour. You will get quite an education. But, if you prefer socialist, communist rule like many Olympians, the American principles of individual liberties, justice and law don't matter anyway. Family court reform is long overdue as is judicial and Bar Association accountability. If you do beleive in freedom, liberty and absence of tyranny, go sit in the family court and see what they do to people and families EVERY day.
Signed, Liberty Valence

Emmett said...

No, its just the implication that you're ok with violence against lawyers representing a party opposed to you in court.

Anyway, in the movie, Liberty Valance is a "might makes right" criminal. Fitting, I guess.

Ken Camp said...

@Liberty Valence (which I'd be shocked to learn is your real name)

Regardless of your personal feelings for family court, there is no American value (espoused by any political party) which calls for violence against judges or attorneys. The only people who subscribe to such values are lunatics, idiots, and the people who regularly appear before the Court with the label "defendant" in criminal cases.

Don't pervert the values of my country to suit your personal needs. You may not like the outcomes you've seen in family court, but there is no reason to advocate/support violence against the Court.

Anonymous said...

You are all missing the point. Relax. Nobody is advocating violence or trying to argue violence is an "American Value." Nowhere was that connection made. The point is the court is not "honorable" and family law court is a system of racketeering (by definition). It is a big dollar business, period. The TC court routinely destroys men financially, forces homes into foreclosure and keeps good dads from children who deserve them. Go educate yourself by sitting in court or reading through the cases at the court house computer. They have a well oiled system that pushes sane and law abiding people to their outer limits. It is no wonder that people "snap" and it is obvious why the judges and lieyers need maximum security.
-Liberty V.

Joel Johnston said...

Anyone that accepts any Judge or commission speaking rudely to them does not understand the Judicial Canons. A Judge has Canons they must follow, and one is to treat everyone in the court with respect. Being rude, condescending, or belittling of anyone is forbidden and should be reported immediately by anyone that is treated that way.

If you accept their behavior, you are a part of the issue.

And isn't that the problem here, the citizens are so excited about how great their life is here, they fail to be responsible citizens by holding elected officials, and hired staff to the level of service they should be providing to those they serve. You - the taxpayor.