Do not mess with a Judge

[Nuno]

Or maybe the powers that be should ask why the drug is freely available without perscription in the US.?:|

It's not. It is a a prescription drug and is assigned to Schedule IV of the Controlled Substances Act by the Drug Enforcement Administration.

 

It's not. It is a a prescription drug and is assigned to Schedule IV of the Controlled Substances Act by the Drug Enforcement Administration.

I believe I said freely available without perscription.:|

https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=Xanax&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GBfficial&client=firefox-a#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=2&gs_ri=serp&pq=xanax&cp=11&gs_id=8e&xhr=t&q=Xanax+for+sale&es_nrs=true&pf=p&client=firefox-a&hs=qxW&tbo=d&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&oq=Xanax+for+s&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.42080656,d.d2k&fp=97679045f5bb65e0&biw=939&bih=561

 

[Nuno]

This is yet more of your time wasting attempts to deflect a thread.

I'm not playing either this or the game of getting another warning for publicly saying exactly what I think about this sort of posting on a forum.

Why not? Because ultimately it is boring: threads are deflected and ruined, valuable posters are discouraged by the idiotic banality, some people are appalled by the racism, nothing of value comes forth.

If I want spurious teenage drivel I can go to 4chan or Reddit.

 

[Cylon]

Never the scrote's fault is it? Always someone else. Feh.

Don't forget the parents, that always a good one.

Course the scrote should apologise and is totally to blame for taking the Xanax (provided she took it of her own free will) but the Judge in the whole court proceedings (call it phase two of the blame game) is not without blame as his actions in some way contributed to the whole 30 day contempt charge, thats no excuse for flipping the bird (as the cool kids call it).

I'm sure he has had advisors in this that recommended to accept the apology and video it for the internet and it all seems a bit contrived to me.

 

[cjd]

but you are missing my point........Now thanks for the guidelines.

And you're missing mine. I had two points:

1. The girl was clearly unfit to be in court - she was obviously either pissed or high. That's why the judge needed to ask if she'd taken anything in the last 24 hours. And of course she said no.

2. He fined her for contempt for something that plainly wasn't contempt.
He dealt with her exceptionally harshly and then, unsurprisingly, she was provoked into real contempt.

The whole thing looked like a kangeroo court, with no obvious representation - god knows what was happening but it wasn't not justice.

 

[Steve Sellers]

And you're missing mine. I had two points:

1. The girl was clearly unfit to be in court - she was obviously either pissed or high. That's why the judge needed to ask if she'd taken anything in the last 24 hours. And of course she said no.

2. He fined her for contempt for something that plainly wasn't contempt.
He dealt with her exceptionally harshly and then, unsurprisingly, she was provoked into real contempt.

The whole thing looked like a kangeroo court, with no obvious representation - god knows what was happening but it wasn't not justice.

Ok then http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fOaZYhTd2BU

I acknowledged your point, despite you being pedantic and wrong about DJ's (by the way many mags are actually "recorders"), and all I did was ask you to put forward an actual legal argument for it not being contempt.

1. I agree.

2. "2. He fined her for contempt for something that plainly wasn't contempt.". Again no evidence to back up this opinion, and you don't even make it clear it is your opinion. Give me a case to show it is not contempt in the UK, or actually in the US. Just because you say something CJD doesn't make it right. All I wanted was a sensible discussion not for a "whose is biggest" confrontation. In fact I clearly say I am no expert on this subject. But whilst I do some research and back up my opinion with cases you just make a series of unqualified and insidious remarks.

 

[cjd]

I acknowledged your point, despite you being pedantic and wrong about DJ's (by the way many mags are actually "recorders"), and all I did was ask you to put forward an actual legal argument for it not being contempt.

I think you need to let this go. My statement was that a Stipendiary Magistrate is actually an old and unused name for a District Judge. Which it is. It distinguishes a paid magistrate from a vounteer magistrate or JP. Which it does.

2. "2. He fined her for contempt for something that plainly wasn't contempt.". Again no evidence to back up this opinion, and you don't even make it clear it is your opinion. Give me a case to show it is not contempt in the UK, or actually in the US. Just because you say something CJD doesn't make it right. All I wanted was a sensible discussion not for a "whose is biggest" confrontation. In fact I clearly say I am no expert on this subject. But whilst I do some research and back up my opinion with cases you just make a series of unqualified and insidious remarks.

The evidence is the video. It is NOT contempt to say 'adios' to a judge - particularly if Spanish is your native language and the Judge says 'bye, bye' to you.

Any junior could have argued that one out of court

The test is what is reasonable. In my opinion the Judge was not behaving reasonably.

 

[Steve Sellers]

I think you need to let this go. My statement was that a Stipendiary Magistrate is actually an old and unused name for a District Judge. Which it is. It distinguishes a paid magistrate from a vounteer magistrate or JP. Which it does.

Stipend is not an unused term with those in the legal industry. You are right in your last sentence though.

The evidence is the video. It is NOT contempt to say 'adios' to a judge - particularly if Spanish is your native language and the Judge says 'bye, bye' to you.

You need to actually listen to what other people say. It was alluded to above, by another poster - and myself, that she was held in contempt for saying eff off to the judge NOT for saying adios.

Which kind of makes the rest of your argument a palpable nonsense.

I think I have been more than willing to meet you half way and admit on what points you are correct on. Instead you are intent on just having an argument, not based on facts or law but on your own moral interpretation on what is right or wrong. Not dissimilar from what another poster tends to do.

 

[trebor8]

She reacted badly for having her bail increased for saying 'Adios' and using whatever little power she could muster.

He reacted badly by using power bestowed to him

Unfortunately sometimes, as ever those with the biggest power usually win

 

[cjd]

You need to actually listen to what other people say. It was alluded to above, by another poster - and myself, that she was held in contempt for saying eff off to the judge NOT for saying adios.

Which kind of makes the rest of your argument a palpable nonsense.

Watch it again.

The judge sets count 1 at $5,000. He says 'bye, bye'. She says 'adios'.

He calls her back

"Come back ma'am. Gimme the paper again. Count 1 will be $10,000, Adios"

He doubled her original bond for contempt.

Of course after that she lost it and was given 30 days for what he formally called 'direct criminal contempt' and any UK court could do something similar - though 30 days would be extreme.

Mostly those things are dealt with by convenient deafness, the job being to get them out of court, not make more work for it.

If they are charged with contempt, they're normally sent down to the cells for a few hours to cool off, then given a hearing. If they apologise and the contempt was relatively trivial the charge is usually dropped. (As seems to have happened here.)

The girl was obviously high, she shouldn't have been in court, the judge should not have reacted to her adios by doubling her bond. He provoked the entire action - he needs to climb down off his horse and re-think how to deal with people.

And she needs to get sober and grow up.

 

[Steve Sellers]

I see your point, but I just happen to disagree with it. And I think reading between the lines that whilst it wasn't doubled by reason of contempt (it was more him making a point, rather than a "you're in contempt im doubling it), that on this point an appeal may lie - in which case your point is a good one. Although my train of thought is that he was exercising a power to set the bond as he saw fit(I am sure there are guidelines and the 10 was possibly still within those), and when she gave him backchat he went in at the top end.

Agree about sending her down for a couple of hours, and I think I may have said the same myself above.

Also agree she needs to grow up.

Thank you for your post, and you raise some good points.

 

[MrCloser]

The judge needs to have a word with himself. The girl shouldn't even have been in court when under the influence and without legal representation. In Uk this would get a caution.

Sending a teenage girls with no previous offences to an adult prison for 30 days for a minor misdemeanor is totally irresponsible. The USA and their private prisons is stain on the land of the free.

 

[FIZIX Agency]

And you're missing mine. I had two points:

1. The girl was clearly unfit to be in court - she was obviously either pissed or high. That's why the judge needed to ask if she'd taken anything in the last 24 hours. And of course she said no.

2. He fined her for contempt for something that plainly wasn't contempt.
He dealt with her exceptionally harshly and then, unsurprisingly, she was provoked into real contempt.

The whole thing looked like a kangeroo court, with no obvious representation - god knows what was happening but it wasn't not justice.

It did feel like I was watching an episode of Judge Judy as opposed to a real court. Judge Judy is entertainment, but it's certainly not how I would expect a real court to be run. The tone was all wrong throughout.

I think your two points are bang on, as you could tell she was still high right at the start, even though she said no, why did he carry on. It was obvious she was high.


Also why do people have to call the girl a scroat, there are reasons why people take drugs and is an anti-depressant really a party drug? It sounds more like a drug addiction to me, for which people need help over.

I don't think it's fair to label people who become addicted to anti-depressants and drugs like that. They tend to be dished out far too freely by doctors and are incredibly addictive. So people who otherwise might not have a problem can develop a problem and then that can escalate.

We don't know why she is on the stuff but there tends to be this instant assumption from people that they are "no good" which isn't particularly fair.

All IMHO of course.

 

Also why do people have to call the girl a scroat,

.

Pure lack of intelligence.

How anyone can come to such a collusion with so little evidence is beyond me.

Behind such swift statements is in general an inferiority complex and the belief that identifying inferior people types classifies them as belonging to a higher form of life.

 

[Nuno]

Pure lack of intelligence.

How anyone can come to such a collusion

Just lovin' it.

 

Just lovin' it.

Yes the word should have been conclusion.

But thank you for presenting a perfect example of what I was on about.

 

[Nuno]

Yes the word should have been conclusion.

But thank you for presenting a perfect example of what I was on about.

My pleasure.
Always good to point to the errors people make when they are rude about other people.

 

My pleasure.
Always good to point to the errors people make when they are rude about other people.

Not sure in what context you are using the word rude?

I don't see how an explanation of human behaviour can be termed rude.:|

"An individual who is not properly trained to answer life's problems may turn from striving for superiority in useful ways to that of a personal superiority at all cost. If an individual cannot be better than another on their own merit, they will attempt to tear down another other person or group to maintain their superior position."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superiority_complex#Definition_by_Adler

 

[Nuno]

Pure lack of intelligence.

How anyone can come to such a collusion with so little evidence is beyond me.

Behind such swift statements is in general an inferiority complex and the belief that identifying inferior people types classifies them as belonging to a higher form of life.

Not sure in what context you are using the word rude?

I don't see how an explanation of human behaviour can be termed rude.:|

"An individual who is not properly trained to answer life's problems may turn from striving for superiority in useful ways to that of a personal superiority at all cost. If an individual cannot be better than another on their own merit, they will attempt to tear down another other person or group to maintain their superior position."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Superiority_complex#Definition_by_Adler

An inferior superiority complex, or a superior inferiority complex? Perhaps a superior superiority complex, which would trump an inferior inferiority complex?

Any which way linking to psychobabble on Wiki is not complex at all. A simpleton could do it.

 

Any which way linking to psychobabble on Wiki is not complex at all. A simpleton could do it.

I take it you are not big on self knowledge.

 

[Nuno]

I take it you are not big on self knowledge.

Take anything you want. That reverse Midas touch of yours turns it all into **** anyway.

 

[Steve Sellers]

I think your two points are bang on, as you could tell she was still high right at the start, even though she said no, why did he carry on. It was obvious she was high.

Then anyone could get high before a hearing to avoid it. Drugs are very easy to get in prison.

Also why do people have to call the girl a scroat, there are reasons why people take drugs and is an anti-depressant really a party drug? It sounds more like a drug addiction to me, for which people need help over.

Because if the cap fits. Some people need help, and some people dont want help.

I don't think it's fair to label people who become addicted to anti-depressants and drugs like that. They tend to be dished out far too freely by doctors and are incredibly addictive. So people who otherwise might not have a problem can develop a problem and then that can escalate.

She is being labelled as such for her behaviour. I am sick of paying tax for a never ending conveyor belt of people like that.

We don't know why she is on the stuff but there tends to be this instant assumption from people that they are "no good" which isn't particularly fair.
.

I agree with this. But for me people like her are a drain on society. Sympathies should be saved for those who live in communities like mine - whose lives are blighted by drug addicts. Pop onto the field near me, just make sure you avoid the scattered syringes. The justice system in this country is soft. These people just laugh at it(I have seen this myself also). Iron fisted justice is what is needed with some people.

 

[FIZIX Agency]

Then anyone could get high before a hearing to avoid it. Drugs are very easy to get in prison.

Well on the first hearing yes; if it continued then you'd call that in itself contempt of court surely?

Because if the cap fits. Some people need help, and some people dont want help.

And some don't realise they need help, or are early into a problem. Some might just be on drugs to fool around. The fact is we don't know the girls background and I don't like when people cast aspersions about people like that.

If we had background information to state she is as some so eloquently put it "a scroat" then fair enough. But we don't, we have a video of a young girl, high, in possession of powerful anti-depressants acting up in court.

I think a certain level of care should be taken before writing people off in such a way.

Calling someone a scroat because they are on drugs is very closed minded, especially when it's prescription medication. Additions to prescription meds often start from a prescription.

She is being labelled as such for her behaviour. I am sick of paying tax for a never ending conveyor belt of people like that.

Right

I agree with this. But for me people like her are a drain on society. Sympathies should be saved for those who live in communities like mine - whose lives are blighted by drug addicts. Pop onto the field near me, just make sure you avoid the scattered syringes. The justice system in this country is soft. These people just laugh at it(I have seen this myself also). Iron fisted justice is what is needed with some people.

Yep, attack the result, not the problem.

Communities tend to end up having problems like being blighted by drug addicts due to social problems that are not dealt with correctly by those with the ability and power to do something about it.

People with addictions tend to stay addicts because society doesn't do anything meaningful about it.

For example, a lot of people who are addicts have mental health problems, go down that route and look at how society views mental health problems and you quickly see why things get so bad.


There is normally a failure somewhere that leads to something else, then when that something else happens we have a tendency to cast off the individual rather than look at why it happened in the first place.

Or maybe I'm a leftist hand-wringer.

 

[Steve Sellers]

Well on the first hearing yes; if it continued then you'd call that in itself contempt of court surely?

The courts would grind to a halt if it worked on this basis. I cant remember the exact figure for the number of drug addicts per head of prison pop, but I know its very high(excuse the pun).

And some don't realise they need help, or are early into a problem. Some might just be on drugs to fool around. The fact is we don't know the girls background and I don't like when people cast aspersions about people like that.

We know enough. We know that she is in court and has been charged with an offence. Casting aspersions? Thats what the court system id about. The prosecutor casting aspersions!

If we had background information to state she is as some so eloquently put it "a scroat" then fair enough. But we don't, we have a video of a young girl, high, in possession of powerful anti-depressants acting up in court.

Well why dont you invite her round to your house, leave her along in it, hell let her look after your children....no...didnt think so. Liberal values are all very good, but it is so easy to say if you aren't in the gutter with the filth.

I think a certain level of care should be taken before writing people off in such a way.

I agree. I would make them repay their debt to society by serving in the armed forces.

Calling someone a scroat because they are on drugs is very closed minded, especially when it's prescription medication. Additions to prescription meds often start from a prescription.

I don't believe anyone is calling her a scroat for that reason. The drug addiction is merely a symptom of her scroat ways. Coincidentally, drug addicts by their very nature live a hectic lifestyle without discipline or order. Prison can be effective, the army would be far better.


Agree about the last sentence.But many get addicted because they are on painkillers for a long time and do the decent thing and come off them. Its called taking responsibility for oneself - instead of blaming society for taking and never putting back.

Communities tend to end up having problems like being blighted by drug addicts due to social problems that are not dealt with correctly by those with the ability and power to do something about it.

Absolute socialist pump. I grew up in a very poor area. Some of the people I grew up with became scum, some have achieved things. It's down to personal choice. It makes me cringe when I see some people complaining about their circumstances and blaming being poor for committing crime. Utter rubbish.

People with addictions tend to stay addicts because society doesn't do anything meaningful about it.

OMG!(to quote my little sister). PERSONAL CHOICE!!!!!

For example, a lot of people who are addicts have mental health problems, go down that route and look at how society views mental health problems and you quickly see why things get so bad.

Agreed.

Or maybe I'm a leftist hand-wringer.

That's up to you mate, freedom of speech and all. All I would say, is that the people I hear most complaining about social poverty being an excuse for crime etc, are not normally the ones blighted by it (eg the working classes), but rather middle class "champagne" socialists.

 

Seems the good judge is not everyones favourite legal bod.

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=42711

 

[Steve Sellers]

Seems the good judge is not everyones favourite legal bod.

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=42711

He's a good man, and a beautiful person! I think you need a lawyer Earlos me old son!

 

He's a good man, and a beautiful person! I think you need a lawyer Earlos me old son!

The very last person I would approach if I was in trouble would be a Lawyer.

Far to paranoid for my liking.

 

[Steve Sellers]

Thats a shame Earl, I would probably do you a free will just so I can hear your voice. I imagine you sound like Barry White.

 

[simon field]

.... Barry White.

Careful Steve, I think that may be Scottish rhyming slang

 

[Cylon]

Well why dont you invite her round to your house, leave her along in it, hell let her look after your children....no...didnt think so. Liberal values are all very good, but it is so easy to say if you aren't in the gutter with the filth

Interesting as it is to see the discussion develop, but based on the subject matter if push came to shove I would much rather have this young lady round too babysit than I would the Judge.

 

[Steve Sellers]

Interesting as it is to see the discussion develop, but based on the subject matter if push came to shove I would much rather have this young lady round too babysit than I would the Judge.

Yes course you would.

 

[cjd]

I see that the video has now been removed from YouTube.

Draw your own conclusions.

 

[Cylon]

Yes course you would.

Wow compare apples to oranges much

Thought this thread was about the ill-treatment of a young girl by a Judge who's poor performance lead to an outburst of contempt.

That said can she do Saturday's 8-1am as I have a masons do to go to.

 

[Cylon]

That said can she do Saturday's 8-1am as I have a masons do to go to.

Having just realised who the person is in the above photo I cannot help but feel the above comment is in poor taste, apologies if anyone is offended.

 

[Steve Sellers]

Having just realised who the person is in the above photo I cannot help but feel the above comment is in poor taste, apologies if anyone is offended.

Not offended but we all agree, the masons are always in bad taste!

 

[Cornish Steve]

Judges in the US have quite a bit of discretion. Sometimes you read of rather unusual punishments being dished out. For example, I remember one guy having to stand on a busy street corner for one hour a day for an entire month with a sign around his neck saying something like "I injured someone while driving drunk". Car drivers would honk their horns at him, shout at him, and the like. It was almost like being in the stocks. As long as punishment is not inhumane, I have some sympathy with this.

 

[Cornish Steve]

I see that the video has now been removed from YouTube.

Draw your own conclusions.

It's all over the Internet. Only one version was taken down by the original poster. There are no conclusions to draw.

 

[cjd]

I have some sympathy with this.

I would too, if it worked. But mostly it seems to be grandstanding, frustration and something akin to revenge.

 

[cjd]

It's all over the Internet. Only one version was taken down by the original poster. There are no conclusions to draw.

You're, right.

(first time for everything ;-))

 

It's all over the Internet. Only one version was taken down by the original poster. There are no conclusions to draw.

So why would the biggest video site take down something so popular.?