|
Post by duke on Apr 24, 2012 8:54:02 GMT -5
Marceaux Tells Judge She Is "Going Down"; He Goes To Jail Monday, April 23, 2012 Perennial candidate Basil Marceaux Sr. won't be able to campaign for the House District 27 seat for several days - except to fellow jail inmates. Criminal Court Judge Rebecca Stern on Monday morning sentenced him to serve 10 days in jail for contempt of court. She did so after the Soddy Daisy resident first told her, "You're out of order." Then, as he was leaving the podium, he said, "I run for everything. And when I get elected, you're going down." The judge then told bailiffs to take him into custody. He was before the judge on an appeal from City Court of a traffic violation conviction. He maintains that Criminal Court judges do not have jurisdiction to hear City Court appeals - only Circuit Court judges. Judge Stern said she is a Circuit Court judge as well. She said, "Mr. Marceaux, if you were an attorney, you would know that." He is representing himself in the case. Judge Stern asked attorneys in the courtroom to raise their hand if they believe that she is also a Circuit Court judge, and they did. Mr. Marceaux is running as a Republican candidate for House District 27 against incumbent Richard Floyd. Note: See State v. Wood, 91 S.W.3d 769, 773 (Tenn. Ct. App. 2002) (holding that the Davidson County Criminal Court lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal of contempt charges from a general sessions court because such proceedings are not "fully criminal") as cited in State v. Cabellero-Grajeda, No. M2004-02097-CCA-R3-CD (Tenn.Crim.App. 08/11/2005) chattanoogan.com/2012/4/23/224498/Marceaux-Tells-Judge-She-Is-Going.aspx So who is right, not just the most powerful?
|
|
|
Post by Sgt K USMC on Apr 24, 2012 10:05:06 GMT -5
The judge is right.
Contempt of court is a real thing. As much as I hate and loath Barry I would not speak or act in a manner that was contemptuous while in his office or during any official capacity hearing.
Would have no trouble telling him to get off my lawn if he showed up at the door and would refuse any offer to visit the White House…
It would be akin to my standing before a judge and telling them that they do not have the authority to preside over my case because the American Flag on display has gold trim, denoting a Naval Court of Law as opposed to a civilian one.
There are also official channels one can go through when one gets a bad judge, or feels the judge is acting in an inappropriate fashion.
Doesn't matter how much a judge may be in the wrong, the rules are the rules, break them at your own risk.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Apr 24, 2012 12:33:01 GMT -5
Yes. And I notice that the only rules where there should be consequences in your opinion is for non-government actors. If, as stated in the appeals court opinions, that by the way are superior to County Judge Stern, state that the Stern does not have jurisdiction, where are the consequences for the judge? None.
You simply refuse to support any concept that a government actor should be held accountable for violations of the rules of conduct. Only non-government nobodies should have consequences.
Wake up. The attitude you project here in your posts has a lot to do with the rampant corruption in American politics at all levels.
|
|
|
Post by Fredo on Apr 24, 2012 13:10:42 GMT -5
Funny. All of the attorneys present seemed to agree that she had proper standing to rule on this case. Maybe they're just in cahoots to railroad a pillar of the community like Basil.
|
|
|
Post by Sgt K USMC on Apr 24, 2012 19:10:45 GMT -5
Not what I said at all…
I said there are official channels one can go through if they feel the judge is acting in an inappropriate or improper fashion. The fact that this case is now in appeals shows this pretty clearly.
From a personal standpoint I believe that they should suffer stiff civil and criminal penalties when they do screw up.
But no matter how bad a judge may be, no matter how wrong they may be, no matter how negligent they may be.
It is not within the right of the citizen to violate the rules or etiquette of the court while standing before it.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Apr 25, 2012 12:28:36 GMT -5
Funny. All of the attorneys present seemed to agree that she had proper standing to rule on this case. Maybe they're just in cahoots to railroad a pillar of the community like Basil. Not funny at all. There is nothing funny about ignorance or stupidity. Since the hearing was business as usual, unless an attorney had attempted to challenge jurisdiction, the attorneys present simply did not know the law. Just recently I suggested to an attorney that the witnesses to a criminal trial should be sequestered including the cops who claimed to be victims. The attorney claimed that the 'victims' were a party to the proceedings and no party can be excluded at any time. I told the attorney that I had case law contrary to his belief despite that the fact that he had never seen or heard of victims being sequestered. This particular attorney was gracious enough to go to his law books in an attempt to prove me wrong. After reading up on the subject, the attorney stated that I was indeed correct. Another time a pro tem judge entered a ruling and I helped challenge the ruling as being without jurisdiction. The pro tem judge in city court had failed to get the consent of all parties in writing before hearing the case as required by law. In criminal court the judge ruled the pro tem did have jurisdiction. An notice of appeal was filed. The judge's clerk called with an official offer from the Criminal court judge. The judge would dismiss the lower court ruling if the defendant would withdraw the appeal. Why such an offer? As a matter of law that the criminal court judge had refused to acknowledge would have been a black mark on the judges record if the case went to appeal. The cross dressing judge in his black dress had violated the law. No shit Sherlock.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Apr 25, 2012 16:36:07 GMT -5
Heicklen Wins. Jury Nullification Charge Dismissed Simple Justice|SHG blog.simplejustice.us/2012/04/20/heicklen-wins-jury-nullification-charge-dismissed.aspx?ref=rssThree days ago, Julian Heicklen advised SDNY Judge Kimba Wood in a letter of two things: First, that his federal defender stand-by counsel, Sabrina Shroff and Steven Statsinger, were fired and no longer represented him. Second, that he dismissed his own case. Yesterday, Judge Wood agreed. Not so much with Heicklen's letter, which wasn't worded in such a way as to ingratiate him with the court, but that the charge must be dismissed. But the judge, Kimba M. Wood of Federal District Court, wrote that a person violated the jury tampering statute only when he or she knowingly tried to influence a juror's decision through a written communication “made in relation to a specific case pending before that juror.†Judge Wood added that she would not “stretch the interpretation†of the statute to cover speech that was “not meant to influence†a juror's actions in a specific case. This was a difficult case. Not necessarily because it raised such difficult issues of law, which makes one wonder what the heck U.S. Attorney Preet Bharara was thinking when he authorized this insanely foolish prosecution that couldn't possibly end well for him. That didn't necessarily mean it would end well for Julian either. Julian Heicklen did every thing in his power to lose this case. He did things others wouldn't even dream of to antagonize everyone involved, from the judge to the lawyers who served his interests, despite his refusal to cooperate and seizing every opportunity to make their job impossible. Talk about a difficult client. Given the circus-like atmosphere of this case, and Julian's conduct throughout, it either tested Judge Wood's patience or gave her chambers some great laughs. I suspect the latter. It's hard to stay angry at a fellow who opens his letters, "Dishonorable Judge Wood " and closes them, "Yours in disgust and hatred." Come on, this is good stuff. Despite all the shenanigans, the legal team never stopped doing its job, and Judge Wood made the right and reasonable decision. Julian Heicklen will be in front of 500 Pearl Street come next Monday handing out jury nullification leaflets. A bit after mid-day, he will break for a victory luncheon in honor of the lawyers he discharged three days ago, He's inviting restaurant suggestions and his fellow "tyranny fighters" to join him. Bring money to pay for lunch. As for the significance of this decision, Julian Heicklen said it best in his email to his tyranny-fighting friends: One small step for a shabby old man, but a giant leap for justice and our country. Whether this is true has yet to be seen, but you gotta admire Julian's sense of humor. I wonder if everyone else involved in this case will agree. Which judge would consider to be of greater stature? This judge or Stern?
|
|
|
Post by duke on Apr 25, 2012 17:01:39 GMT -5
Not what I said at all� I said there are official channels one can go through if they feel the judge is acting in an inappropriate or improper fashion. The fact that this case is now in appeals shows this pretty clearly. From a personal standpoint I believe that they should suffer stiff civil and criminal penalties when they do screw up. But no matter how bad a judge may be, no matter how wrong they may be, no matter how negligent they may be. It is not within the right of the citizen to violate the rules or etiquette of the court while standing before it. Overruling Judge Stern's summary contempt sentence is a mockery of justice. No Appeals court will rule on such a case before the 10 day sentence has run, much less over-rule Stern. Simply more punishment by process. A judge earns respect by being honest and fair, NOT by brute force and arrogance and the wearing of feelings on their sleeve. A very simple transfer of the the case to civil side of the circuit court would have been painless and avoided the confrontation.
|
|
|
Post by Sgt K USMC on Apr 25, 2012 17:15:45 GMT -5
No rule of etiquette has been broken in the second case.
There is a standard issue manual for how to act in front of a court, there are additions to said manual in each and every state county and city. The manual covers everything from how the judge will be dressed under their robes to just how many times a person is allowed to sneeze before being asked to leave the room.
It is the discretion of the judge (which is why they are called judges) to determine the limits when a perceived infraction takes place. Some are like Judge Judy, full of bluster and anger, condescension and lack of tolerance, some are like Harry Stone, (believe it or not Night Court was based on a real judge) Fun and games, patience and in general making sure that a stressful situation was made less so by not tossing his weight around.
I have stood before a lot of judges, (It's the price you pay when you have been divorced as many times as I have.) Both civil and criminal in quite a few different states and counties. Sometimes as a witness, sometimes because I had to be present with my prisoner, sometimes because I was the one in the hot seat…
Some are good, some are bad, some of them are downright dickish.
But regardless…
There are rules of etiquette that must be followed, there is a system in place to handle grievances, using anything besides these tools is a mistake.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Apr 25, 2012 18:32:33 GMT -5
I too am keenly aware of etiquette in court. I have not justified the litigant's words nor outburst. If the judge was wrong about jurisdiction, an outburst, or derogatory remark should be overlooked. So all of the replies have focused on the litigant getting what he should have gotten, with no consideration of the question of proper jurisdiction based on the appeals court opinions posted.
|
|
|
Post by Sgt K USMC on Apr 25, 2012 21:06:42 GMT -5
I too am keenly aware of etiquette in court. I have not justified the litigant's words nor outburst. If the judge was wrong about jurisdiction, an outburst, or derogatory remark should be overlooked. So all of the replies have focused on the litigant getting what he should have gotten, with no consideration of the question of proper jurisdiction based on the appeals court opinions posted. Nooooo… Two wrongs never make a right, four only works while driving. The court has the ultimate authority when you are standing in front of it, they are allowed to do what they do and with few exceptions can they be called on it when it is happening. The citizen has the right to appeal. The citizen does not have the right to 'Co-judge.' Lets say I am going to court, the judge is someone that recognizes me from this message board because of the Sgk K USMC tattoo… This person is a lib. Rather than recusing themselves they decide to use their authority to punish me for all the hardship I have caused them here, or because I have a different ideology than they do, decide that I will be treated in a fashion that the guy before me was not. Let's say that halfway through this I recognize the person… that they say something that only the aforementioned lib would only know, or they outright tell me that they are that particular poster… Since they are the judge I have to respect the authority of their office while present before it. No matter what they do, short of telling the bailiff to shoot me, I am pretty much helpless while I am subject to their control. This does not make the situation right, it just is the way it is. If I decide to stand up, tell the judge to F-Off and flip them a bird on the way out the door… I will suffer from predictable and avoidable consequences… because ultimately I would be the person that was in the wrong because I violated the rules and etiquette of their court. On appeal I would win… There is a system in place to address these things, that system does not run more smoothly when I decide to ignore it.
|
|
|
Post by CoffeeShooter on Apr 26, 2012 21:52:26 GMT -5
Fredo, he is a lot of things but hardly a pillar of the community. He's also the guy that was arrested at an airshow a few years back. Plus he's the guy that was on Jimmy Kimmel for some nonsensical stunt he pulled, I forget which one. I've had the misfortune of dealing with him from time to time and he is certifiably nuts. I wonder if they'll keep him at the county or put him in Silverdale? Bless his heart.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Apr 29, 2012 17:13:30 GMT -5
Sgt K: "On appeal I would win…"
Perhaps you should win such a lottery, but the odds are heavily stacked against a win. Often an abuse of discretion appeal is simply denied claiming that the local judge witnessed the trial and the testimony and the appeals court will not second guess the trial court.
Back to my original question, who was right about jurisdiction? NOT who has the most power. You keep telling me who has the most power.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Apr 29, 2012 17:17:03 GMT -5
CoffeeShooter: I tend to agree that Basil appears to me to be certifiable. So why county jail or Silverdale rather than Moccasin Bend?
|
|
|
Post by Sgt K USMC on Apr 29, 2012 19:54:18 GMT -5
Power AND Jurisdiction.
And I laid out exactly why both were in the hands of the judge.
When in a judges chambers YOU THE CITIZEN do not have the same authority as does the judge, this can be classified as power, but it is mandated by the jurisdiction in which that power can be exercised.
|
|
|
Post by duke on Apr 29, 2012 21:01:14 GMT -5
So the judge has jurisdiction if the judge says so. The statutes and the appeals courts be damned?
What with the shifting of the venue from open court to chambers?
The power in this case was were the deputies mindlessly obey a judge that does not know that her jurisdiction is limited to criminal cases.
|
|
|
Post by Sgt K USMC on Apr 29, 2012 22:10:04 GMT -5
That is the reason for the appeals court.
If the judge believes they have jurisdiction, if there is nobody there challenging that jurisdiction via the correct means then all you can do is ride it out and wait for appeals.
Had the guy decided to not have a fool for a lawyer he may have had a chance of making the challenge in the proper fashion while in the court, instead, he decided to take matters into his own hands in an improper fashion.
He is NOT a Co-Judge. His jurisdiction is NOT in that courtroom.
|
|
|
Post by bignana on Apr 30, 2012 18:23:02 GMT -5
|
|