telegraph.co.uk— A US judge has been removed from the bench for jailing 46 people after none of them admitted responsibility for a ringing mobile phone in his courtroom.
Nov 29, 2007View in Crawl 4
No... it is unconstitutional to be falsely imprisoned, but it was not the judge himself who enforced the illegal sentence, therefore the judge cannot be personally convicted of false imprisonment.Instead, it was the legal establishment (of which the judge was merely an empowered host or representative) that actually decided upon and enforced the illegal sentence. Judges make wrong determinations all the time. It's not illegal. They can be overturned by higher judges at a later repeal, or by other judges at a later time. The original judge doesn't go to jail. What about the Supreme Court who originally ruled that Blacks could not be citizens? Today, this would be considered illegal discrimination.The same idea is the idea of a company. The owner and employees of the company are not "personally" held accountable for the misdeeds of the company, excepting for the cases where it can be shown that they actually are committing criminal offenses.Since making legal rulings are within the scope of a judge's scope of work, this incident could be considered a "mistake" of the legal system, not really a criminal action taken by an individual.
fr4nk2012Nov 29, 2007
f**k you Diana Ross.
myztryNov 30, 2007
He wasn't removed. He was promoted to the White house so Bush could get some unpopular documents signed off.
addiktionNov 30, 2007
I totally agree with you man, If your in such a high position and get paid the big bucks you SHOULD be able to handle the stress.
pt4117Nov 30, 2007
Didn't we already do that?
packetscanNov 30, 2007
judges do s**t like this daily.. maybe if the media paid more attention we'd find more bulls**t like this.
latrosicariusDec 1, 2007
No... it is unconstitutional to be falsely imprisoned, but it was not the judge himself who enforced the illegal sentence, therefore the judge cannot be personally convicted of false imprisonment.Instead, it was the legal establishment (of which the judge was merely an empowered host or representative) that actually decided upon and enforced the illegal sentence. Judges make wrong determinations all the time. It's not illegal. They can be overturned by higher judges at a later repeal, or by other judges at a later time. The original judge doesn't go to jail. What about the Supreme Court who originally ruled that Blacks could not be citizens? Today, this would be considered illegal discrimination.The same idea is the idea of a company. The owner and employees of the company are not "personally" held accountable for the misdeeds of the company, excepting for the cases where it can be shown that they actually are committing criminal offenses.Since making legal rulings are within the scope of a judge's scope of work, this incident could be considered a "mistake" of the legal system, not really a criminal action taken by an individual.
yuttDec 2, 2007
A digg member?