How to survive the tyrant Judge (part 3 of 3)

Part 3, The judge. Who is this Tyrant?

We remember from Part 1 that the abused child likely sees the judge as a potential abuser. The child whose parent was self-centered and narcissistic, as a lawyer, will likely suspect the judge as having little concern for him or his client. The child who feels his parent abandoned him will see the judge as one who cannot be trusted. Yes, and the child who was loved and deeply protected may, indeed, as a lawyer, relate to the judge as the source of protection and favor. Any accurate understanding of the judge-lawyer experience requires us to become aware of how we saw the power-persons of our childhood. This judge–any judge–like any other person of power, has the capacity to help, even to love. Yet this same judge can, if challenged, descend upon us with a vengeance in accordance with the judge’s own psychic composition, all of which bring us to the consideration of the judge. Who are they?

So we walk into the courtroom dragging our baggage behind us and look up to His Honor, who drags into the same room his own baggage. Obviously these persons were once lawyers themselves, and before that, children who had experienced their own power-persons. These are human beings who are as vulnerable as we, and to the extent that we have begun to understand ourselves in relation to authority, so, too, we can understand them.

When judges ascend, they do not leave behind their beginnings. When they take on the black shroud their roots do not evaporate into the firmament. Indeed, judges, as we, will exercise power in ways reflecting their own struggle with authority. It is useful to see the judge not as this tyrant peering down at us with evil intent, but as this child not different than we, not this monster shouting his fearsome commands at us or the bully embarrassing us before jury, but the child before he was immersed in his own history. Could we but see the judge as human, as reacting to his history, might we not be so afraid?

At this seminar of Trial Lawyers College I have previously mentioned, the great Josh Karton – a teacher of far more than drama – was working with a pair of attendees. One played the role of the uncharitable judge, the other the lawyer who was attempting to win his point. The lawyer, as is his wont, spoke in the high tight tones of the arguing lawyer employing the empty words we use in the courtroom. Karton frequently interrupted imploring the student to use plain words, not, for example, “I hereby move the court for a continuance,” but, “Your Honor, I need to have this case put over for a week.” Not, “I am otherwise committed by a prior setting in another court,” but “Judge Jones has ordered me to trial on Tuesday.”

The lawyer playing the part of the judge was unmoved. “This is not my problem, counsel,” he replied. “You can take this up with Judge Jones.” But suddenly Karton changed the entire environment when he suggested that the student ask the judge for help. “I would appreciate it if…”

“No,” Karton said. “No. Ask him for help.”

“I would like you to…”

“No,” Karton interrupted again. “Are you afraid to use the word, ‘help?’”

“I need…”

“Use the word, ‘help.’”

“Could you help me,” the lawyer said at last.

The judge was silent for a moment, almost as if he couldn’t think of what to say. Finally he said, “See my clerk, counsel. Perhaps he can find a spot week after next.”

We discovered that the word ‘help,’ does, indeed, carry with it powerful urges. That word is consistent with the parent’s responsibility to the child. On the psychic plain, if the lawyer is child and the judge parent, an underlying impulse to help is at work. The need to be helped is endemic with the judge who was, himself, a child in need of help, and that need persists with the judge who is now the power-person with a parental duty to help. As judge, he likely told himself and his sponsors that he wanted to help his community by rendering justice. To be helpful is the confessed motivation for most judges to abandon private practice and don the robe. Further, without regard to the lawyer-judge relationship, the notion of being helpful is one deeply embedded in our society. We help, or believe we should, those who need help. By intention, if not action, we have become the good Samaritans from the first days of our teaching.

Something magical happens when the judge soars to that place of power, the bench, from which he stares down at us, or worse, refuses to look at us at all. We forget that yesterday he was as we, smallish inside, puffed up on the outside and standing before another judge projecting the preadolescent posture of his own child. But in a matter of a day he has abruptly changed into someone we do not know. How he has shed his history of humanness is a mystery we do not address. We see him in a different light. By representing power he becomes power. His power casts a new eerie light over him. He speaks in a different tone, and his lexicon seems foreign and stilted. In our sight, and in our ears he has transmogrified into that which has arisen and is untouchable.

At this workshop Karton sought to remind the participants that judges are but humans, that they were lawyers as we, and, yes, before then they were once but little children. He called upon a ex-marine, a former sergeant in the View Nam war to play the part of judge. He dressed this judge up in a pair of little panties and put a teddy bear in his arms. Then Karton called upon another participant to present his argument to the judge. There was spontaneous laughter from the audience. How silly, the judge, how ridiculous. That we should be intimidated by such a man, was unthinkable. But how was it that a tough Marine, by a few exterior accouterments of the child, was transformed in our vision from the fearsome jurist to the ridiculous child?

We, of course, know that although the judge may have a revised view of himself, his underlying self has not changed. Although he may be taken with his new power, nevertheless we know that at his core he is the same old Henry Honeycut. The principal change has been in our eyes. They play tricks on us and cannot be trusted.

In the debriefing that took place, the sergeant who had played the role of the judge was asked if he had felt humiliated. He, too, was the same person both before and after his role playing and the fact of his embarrassment was barely able to penetrate his tough exterior. “Yeah, maybe a little,” was all he would admit to.

But at lunch I sat across from a member of the faculty and as we talked about what we had witnessed he began to tear-up, his lips began to quiver and I realized he was crying. I asked him, “What’s the matter, man?” and he replied, “That judge (referring to the marine) was hurt.”

“Yes,” I said, “perhaps a little.”

“More than that,” he said. He is a very sensitive man. “More than that!” he said again weeping through the words. Then he burst out with it: “Who protects the judge?”

And the epiphany came exploding through to me! The judge, before him, the lawyer, and further back the abused child, had always sought protection. There is power in the legal profession, not the greater power of the judge, but power. The lawyer has more power in the course of human affairs than the plumber. Lawyers, police officers, probation officers and judges are in power professions. And who needs power? Most often those who seek it need it.

Given even marginally acceptable conduct, when the judge takes the bench his level of protection is also elevated. He does not enjoy perfect protection for he must consider the whim of the voters, the power of a hostile media and the pressures of his office, but once enthroned the security he achieves is greater by magnitudes than that of nearly every other member of the system. To the litigant in any given case the judge is the most powerful person in the universe. To the lawyer (who may once have been his adversary) he is untouchable. Who can successfully attack the judge? What lawyer? What litigant, what police officer—who?

But what about the bellicose lawyer who challenges the judge to “bring it on.” What about the lawyer who’s willing to attack the judge in ways suggesting mutiny, or even to assault him with a poorly disguised contempt? It’s not that the judge is in actual jeopardy. It’s not that his safety is at issue. He is still the judge. He has the power to order the sheriff to place the contemptible lawyer in the cross-bars hotel and to remain in jail until he has purged himself of such contempt. But that the judge has the power to protect himself, even from mere insult, does not mean he doesn’t feel threatened, and the question raised by our sensitive staff member, “Who protects the judge?” becomes an important key to understanding the attorney-judge relationship.

Let us consider the tough, intransigent, irascible old devil who will skin us like a trapped rabbit, the judge we all fear—the judicial bully. We see him with the young, childlike lawyer we have already met, the one with the cemented smile, the baby face and the voice to match. He will protect her. She requires shield and shelter. But put our mucho-macho man before the same judge and although in reality the judge is no more threatened by him than by the childlike lawyer, the judge will disembowel this lawyer. It isn’t that the judge arises to any danger, real or perceived. He reacts to the child within. He needs protection, and when our friend asks, “Who protects the judge?” we see that he protects himself, the child within, with the power of his position, the power he sought in the beginning for his protection. “Who protects the judge?” We do. We must if we are to effectively represent our client before him in the courtroom.

So there we are, judge and trial lawyer, mirrors of each other, sometimes both fearful of one another, and both taking such steps as may be necessary to survive a perceived danger—both persons echoing the trauma of times past. From the lawyer’s standpoint, his best defense is to understand himself or herself. We cannot educate His Honor about the roots of his need to judge. We cannot take him by the hand and lead him into the forest of his past and reintroduce him to those experiences that formed his needs. Those in power are rarely capable of recognizing the forces that led them to seek it.

But we have become enlightened. We have inspected those original places where the child in us is like the first rings that make up the towering tree. The tiny rings at the heart of the tree never disappear no matter how mighty the tree may grow. We begin to understand how the child in us is still so easily threatened, but so, too, is the judge’s child. We both seek protection. We observe the threatened child as lawyer, fearful, terrorized, sometimes, in defense, confronting and hostile, threatening, even raging. We see the lawyer both afraid and angry that the judge he stands before is the tyrant judge. But we have learned that the tyrant judge was born of similar beginnings, and that, to the same extent we need protection, so does the person we fear the most in the courtroom—His Honor.

The mirror is always at work.


20 responses to “How to survive the tyrant Judge (part 3 of 3)

  1. Thanks for the ever deeper insight. I remember as a law clerk watching as the male lawyers got so irritated by the first woman judge on the district court bench. She sounded like their mother lecturing them, and they did not like it. I saw her get irritated when they called her “sir.”
    I only knew that when I treated judges like judges, I think that mean, acted subservient, I did better with them. They never liked it if I was in “power mode” or treated them like equals. Now, I have a better understanding of that dynamic.
    I hope you will teach this seminar more often.
    Thank you again.

  2. When I was a brand new lawyer, I represented a criminal defendant before an arrogant judge who gave me a hard time not only in chambers but in front of the jury. He made sarcastic comments that would appear neutral or only mildly critical but hardly reversible on a cold record. The judge’s gestures and body language were awful and I feared I would lose the case for sure.

    It was bad enough that my client had just gotten out of prison for 14 armed robberies and that he was being tried for possession of half a dozen guns found at his home during a parole search. The tatooed swastika on his cheek didn’t help either.

    I asked for a conference in chambers and with the court reporter taking it all down, I detailed clinically each judicial misstep as if I were reading from an indictment. My motion for a mistrial was denied but this tactic which I thought necessary to protect the record on appeal had the effect of taming the judge for the rest of the trial. He treated me respectfully even collegially for the rest of the trial.

    What I took away from this is not to sell out your client by acting like a sycophant in front of his honor. I don’t think judges appreciate it anyway. Just as with the jury, you have to be real with the judge.

  3. Richard:

    I agree. I have done the same–in a professional way calling out a disrespectful judge. Respect runs both ways.

    The purpose of my article is not to issue complete rules for relating to the tyrant judge. The idea is to understand the participants–the judge as well as the lawyer–in order to provide some grasp of the dynamic between court and counsel. Too often neither party have the foggiest.

    Thanks for your comment.


  4. David, my apologies: My comment addressed to Richard was meant for you.


  5. “Tyrant” is defined as a cruel or unjust ruler or master and “tyrannical” as describing a person in power who is cruel or unjust. A “napolionic” complex is like a person who is small and over-compensates for their smallness by being demanding and all-powerful and “big” and a tyrant. Some lawyers and some “bosses” and some people in power can develop the characteristics of being “tyrannical.” They think it is “their way or the highway.” They are bullies. They push around the “little guy” because they can ! Even a ordinary, every day person at a counter can be viewed as “tyrannical” and can in the right circumstances act like a tyrant.
    Cruel and unjust decisions and people who sometimes act tyrannical are not the sole property of judges only.
    However, in some circumstances, there are remedies to some clerk acting like a tyrant. In the case of a judge who is acting like a tyrant, the options are much more limited. This article suggests recognizing the “inner” needs of the judge and the lawyer and attempting to fulfill those needs. A “tyrant” judge may be acting tryannical out of a “fear” of some sort and to reduce the judge’s “fears” will result in a less tryannical judge or a better relationship with the judge. So, the question is how do you reduce the tyrannical judge’s fears? First, try to find out or determine what are that particular judge’s greatest fears — no easy task. Then, decide upon a strategy of some sort —– somewhat complex —- I think. Ideally, a psychologist could analyze the judge and come up with an appropriate strategy, I think. I think it would require a lot of work to determine the inner fears and all of the factor’s influencing a judge. I guess understanding your own abilities to deal with power and what inner needs you have might be easier. What are your unconscious power relationships — what parental background — relationships to authority figures — unconscious child relationships to power? Interesting, self analysis to gain a new perspective on power relationships. In the end, can the lawyer over-come his or her “unconscious” power relationship background and reprogram themselves or by recognizing those influences decrease the “unconsiousness” bringing them to “consciousness” and thereby controlling them? Can the lawyer deal with the “unconscious” needs of the “tyrant” judge thereby effectively reducing those needs and gaining a more effective relationship with the judge on behalf of the client.
    Sometimes, it is just easier to find a lawyer who gets along good with the tyrant judge and let him or her take care of your case for you. It is sometimes possible to maneuver around some tyrants.
    Two or three or more “warriors,” a judge and lawyer (s), engaged in psychological warfare for superiority in the long run will damage the client’s cause and will not achieve “justice.” Avoiding a psychological “war” with a judge and others might be possible by recognizing the “unconscious” needs of all the parties.

  6. Paw Paw,

    It has been a while since I have visited your page. I apologize as I have been getting my affairs in order to leave the PD’s Office and hang my own shingle. This series of blogs and Mr. Graham’s post have spoken to my heart and put to words part of the reason why I am leaving the PD’s office. Why I am not dealing with a tyrannical judge, but rather have a napolionic Deputy PD in my mists.

    Ever since my return from the ranch, my DPD has developed a complex and has over-compensated for her lack of power over me by developing the same characteristics you and Mr. Graham speak of.
    If it were not for you and the TLC techniques, I think I would have reverted to my old ways and attempted to verbalize my dissent and take on these unjust forces head on.

    And like a cast brick smashing against granite stone, in the end, I would have been the one who lost and suffered the emotional crumble of defeat. However thanks to you and TLC, I used you taught us to try to understand what were the core feelings that have created this hostile environment.

    It is like you said, fear and lack of control is what drives her to act this way. Fear is a primal feeling that Carl Rogers speaks about in his book “On Becoming a Person” (Your recommended reading) This fear has caused her to react in ways to try to compensate for my new found freedoms. Unfortunately for them it has resulted in the release of unchecked power and abuse of her desire to establish apparent control over us APD’s.

    Mr. Graham is correct when he suggests that and I am some fellow TLC warriors tried to determine what my supervisors particular and greatest fears were. We did not require a psychologist to analyze this person but rather through the techniques taught at the Trial Lawyers College her inner fears and the factor’s influencing her judgment became apparent.

    I have spent this last week at a Death Penalty Seminar with Cindy Short and Vicki Slater and we discussed the understanding our own abilities and our inner powers so we can tap into our unconscious selves to help foster and develop the relationships that Mr. Graham comment about.
    I have also pondered these ideas while I have been working out at the gym and have uncovered that it is important not only to identify these feelings but to reprogram our auto responses when we find ourselves in fight or flight situations. Judges are not completely to blame when they respond out of fear, when we enter the court room, the environment is already adviserial and the moment tense. We must be willing to anticipate and accept their response when we apply our unorthodox yet compelling techniques. It is only natural if not normal for us to expect them to respond in this nature and when we anticipate that we are in a position to direct how these feelings play out.

    I know you know this Paw Paw and I forget some times that this blog is read by non-TLC’ers who are not familiar with these techniques.

    I need to make my final preparations for trial on Tuesday. I hope you are well and you need to stop by my blog and comment on my musings!!!



  7. I had a hearing scheduled in front of a judge who always treated me awful. I confided in a friend who grew up with this judge that the judge seemed to dislike me and to go out of way to flex his judicial power in a way that cut me off at the knees. My friend explained that the judge grew up with a very domineering mother and not surprisingly was married to a woman who was the same. Every night when the judge got off the bench, he had to go home and put on an apron do all the housework, cook supper, wash dishes and put the kids to bed while his TV addict of a wife did nothing but boss him around and complain about him. My friend suggested that the judge was afraid of strong assertive women and suggested that I keep that in mind. I suggested to my male co counsel that he should handle the hearing and that I should keep my mouth shut. We proceeded according to this plan. I sat through the hearing studying my manicure and assume a countenance of total disinterest. Imagine my surprise when after all arguments were concluded, the judge asked me what I thought. Well I don’t know exactly what the solution is Your Honor, that’s why we needed this hearing because we needed your help with this problem. But all I can say is I think my co counsel has done a good job of stating our position and I think he’s right but that of course is up to you. We won and the judge has been a good friend to me ever since and I make regular appearances in his court where I make the argument with no problem. We all carry a million heartaches and even ourmost innocent actions can reinjure another person though we remain wholly innocent and oblivious. If someone disliked you; don’t automatically assume it’s about you. It’s usually about them and what is going on in their life.

  8. It is election time and we have a whole bunch of judges wanting to be re-elected. You can see the stress of it all on their faces and the way they act.

    What will I do if I am not elected must be a question they have in the back of their minds. It will be rejection if I am not elected, just like when I wasn’t invited to that big party or when I got turned down by that school. I hated that feeling and this one will be worse. Some of those lawyers who don’t like me will make fun of my losing and as a lawyer again will make my life a living hell. I am really afraid but sure can’t tell anyone that.

    It would like my wife telling me that I am not good enough to be her husband after trying so hard to be a good one.

    Thank you Mr Spence for the insights you continue to share.

  9. Several times in the last few days I have appeared in front of various different judges who have dealt with my clients somewhat harshley. When these harsh acting judges are acting, I cannot help but to think about this blog and wonder — “what kind of harsh childhood or harsh factors are causing this judge to act this way.” In a way, it kind of explains things. Someone was treated unfairly in their past and now they are treating other people unfairly. Yet, that person is not consciously aware that they are unfair or they believe they are being fair. Fascinating. The victim becomes the abuser.
    Yours in the Defense of Fellow Human Beings,
    Glen R. Graham, Tulsa Criminal Defense Lawyer

  10. Amusing to we commoners on “How to survive etc: as we and many are finding we need a course on “How to survive corrupted Judges and corrupted lawyers. Over last few years what many of us have experienced is simply horrors beyond what we, mid class decent citizens, even thought existed in this USA.. Sans racial targeting it mimics MS Burning, and am old enough to know.
    So not a lot of sympath for “tyrant judges”.. when peoples beaten, shot, home/business torched, women alone terrorized and worse, if possible. Then the people deal with dirty lawyers and wide open corrupted “legal systems”. I doubt your darlings ever sat in garage with couple that had their pet burned to death, shot at in yard and then their home torched.. or sat a kitchen table with a mother whom had pistol at her side, as he husband a retired, decorated Police Sgt had told her,. when we (he and son) gone keep gun handy as we must move or they will kill us.. there is no law here…or a women that reported a murder was faked for drug dealer… and then beaten for telling law.. NOTE in THIS USA .. they and many other have truth :Cleansed” by legal and law systems so corrupted that Judge allowed for a Order signed off by lawyer he had ‘withdrawn” from case and supposedly signed off “over the phone” or man in writing ordered by Judge after he fired lawyer he found was dirty and embarrased the “system: when he proved.. it at Court. now going Pro Se.. and Judge ORDERED him. Hire a lawyer of I will jail you.. or DA and lawyer that tried to force man to sign up for reduced charge… although “Victim” had died four months before. Or women the was conned into using “X’s family lawyer” and decree so badly done she was then tossed out of business she was awarded by SAME lawyer, after divorce granted.. working for X on same business papers/trusts to toss her out.. ‘
    So darlings.. please no whines about “tyrants”.. until you come and tell the above and so many others. . “how to handle corrupted lawyers/Judges.. when they run the systems.. and operate openly dirty.. most would be stunned.. but then none that should. would,.. act.. yep.amusing to us commoners how tough you have it with “tyrants”. when there is no recourse for the commoners.. PS. HARD documents on all of it… and one man was even told by ST Cop.. taped “You best send all that data to a safe place as I cannot protect you etc” in ref to all sorts of doc.s etc that proved massive corruptions and worse. The man/wife were worried as they found note in torched mail box about “log homes burn even better”… their crime.. they had visited the lady whose pet burned.. home torched and then beaten days later. then arrested leaving hospital.. her “Crime'” she had petitioned from local to feds.. begging for protection from open corruption and lawlessness. Her solution.. fled the area as her lawyer (very dirty we found later) told her to “leave area or they may kill you”.. yep.. really tough about your “tyrants”.. where do we send the sympathy cards?

  11. Frank:

    I take it from your comments that you are distressed over the state of our judiciary. I have lived in it for nearly sixty years and every day I hear the kind of complaints you make.

    The system is broken, often corrupt in that the rights of ordinary people do not remain paramount but are subject to the power of government and money, usually corporate money.

    But what we complain about here is also true in our political system, our business world and is rampant among the citizenry itself. Still, there are many good and caring people in this country, and in all of the segments of our civilization. Mostly they go ignored.

    My article on the tyrant judge was written mostly for lawyers. How do you survive a tyrant judge when you are trying to represent a client who is at the mercy of such a judge? And why is the judge such a tyrant? We need more understanding and less raging, although I fully understand the latter. I have and do plenty of raging myself. Thank you for yours.


  12. I have three cases before the Ninth Circuit, one in Federal District court and two administrative cases – all pro se for my patients with an orphan illness fighting for their Medicare reimbursement against a corrupt Medicare Contractor and complicit DHHS. The federal judge has stated in his orders that he will always believe the “Officer of the Court”, even when the US attorney has outright lied to him twice in extremely relevant matters. This started in 2002 and we can never “exhaust” or get past sovereign immunity – which are used to obstruct justice by DHHS. Meanwhile, these patients have suffered terribly while the law and the facts are entirely on their side. What advice do you have for pro se litigants with a judge like this?
    Thank you
    Dorothy Calabrese MD

  13. Dorothy, the practice of law is pretty much a closed shop. Pro se parties occasionally get justice, but rarely. When a party appears pro se it puts the judge to task. He or she have to fill in the gaps left by the litigant — mostly out of innocent ignorance of the law and the procedures in the court. The judge then has to perform certain lawyer tasks as well as remain the judge.

    I find it hard enough to keep up with court rules and the moving target, which is the law. I have expert lawyers help me in my cases, and still we sometimes miss something. A pro se party is usually a nightmare to the judge because the judge can’t be both judge and lawyer for that party.

    The pro se party representing himself or herself is like someone suffering from appendicitis operating on himself. He might luck through it, but not likely.

    My advice: get a lawyer. If your clients’ cases are just and can be sustained under existing law you will be able to find a lawyer who will help. The problem here may not be the judge, the problem may be an unfortunate body of laws that prevent justice.


  14. I realize after reading all three of the “tyrant Judge” articles that they were written primarily for lawyers, but I feel compelled to ask this question anyway. You stated that your advice is to get a lawyer rather than go pro-se, which I can fully understand. However, what does one do when the lawyer appointed by the court to represent a criminal defendant has made it clear, either by words or actions, that he will not defend his/her client because to defend the client too strongly will affect his future ability to get more cases? The answer seems to be, more often than not, that the defendant is going to be convicted, even if the state had a very weak case from the beginning. Please correct me if I am mistaken, but that hardly sounds like justice; in fact, it is the polar opposite. And this is why those of us who don’t have the deep pockets required to hire effective lawyers who will fight to the best of their ability for their clients have lost whatever confidence they might have had in our current “justice system.” It is very hard to maintain confidence in a system that is very heavily stacked against citizens that don’t have money, and I don’t know if it can ever be restored. Just an opinion from a concerned non-lawyer, and I appreciate your giving me the opportunity to express it. 🙂

  15. I am dealing with a tyrant Judge and I am beginning to think he is dirty. A person keeps filing claims in court bogis and even with proof and pictures this person keeps winning the cases. Could it be he has a xwife working for the police department !What can a normal person do about something like this? I cant afford an attorney and I’m not educated enough to file all the court papers or ?

  16. Sigrid Laitin

    Dear Gerry:
    Boy have I got a story for you. Unfortunately, it will have to wait, but trust me, it is a doozie. In the meantime, keep on trucking. By the way, you look a little like George Washington in your blog picture.

  17. Would you be interested in helping me publicize tyrant judges. These judges even lie on orders to promote their values. Please review my website and tell me what you think. Also, if you know of any magazines that would like to cover the story, I would be very appreciative. Just speaking on the Internet is not enough because the media will address tyranny in family court.

    Yours Truly,

    Calvin Roach

    US Supreme Court Docket 08-1505

  18. I feel less than already. My lone effort to contribute didn’t cut it.
    Try, try again?
    What to do when the judge and opposing counsel gang up on the unsuspecting pro-se boob who expects, without reservation, to be treated with respect and. The notion that he would get his day in court, to be heard by a fair, impartial judge, was exactly that. The concept of the frightened child lurking within the stark raving judge is insightful, no question. A bit simplistic and naive, too, I think.
    Anyway, in the spirit of In Cold Blood when one plus one equals a third unrecognizable monster, these two, together, became a tyrannical Beast wreaking bloody havoc on Justice. Lies, omissions, bias and false accusations filled and polluted the air. Nothing remotely resembling fairness took place. No thing at all.

    • Doc
      These judges are there. They are there because they need power. We have many great judges, but, sadly, one of the reasons a person seeks the judgeship may be for power. Those who need power are dangerous.

      Sorry about your experience. You are not alone by any means.


  19. Gerry, The aforementioned is one aspect of the failure. Most distressing, the courts police themselves and their answers are final. I have an understanding of the importance of judicial independence. Admittedly, it is not as thorough as those of others with law degrees. I have a better understanding of human nature and this much I guarantee. Absolute power corrupts absolutely. Immunity is a two-edged sword. Sure, it has protective value. It also cuts to shreds litigants who believe in the courts’ integrity. What do the Canons say? They demand absolute, beyond appearances, purity.
    Instead, we have settled for an out-of-control, undemocratic, tyrannical governmental body with more power than the executive and legislative branches of government combined. This side of the sword is razor sharp, stronger than any other material on earth, and far more lethal than useful.
    Citizens are deprived of the benefit of their hard-earned tax dollars. This system of self-correction effectively removes any accountability from the people. It is taxation without representation. It is RAPE.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s