Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: DiogenesLamp
I think it is a courtesy for a Judge to explain his order, not a requirement.

Correct. But it would be nice to know on what legal authority the judge based his decision. Thus far, he refuses to answer.

I think if they had such an order from a Judge, they needed to comply with it.

I think that was what the police thought, too. But it still does not mean the judge had the authority to issue the order. It sounds more like small-town politics to me.

41 posted on 06/08/2015 2:15:46 PM PDT by gdani (No sacred cows)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies ]


To: gdani
Correct. But it would be nice to know on what legal authority the judge based his decision. Thus far, he refuses to answer.

On what legal authority a judge orders records relating to juvenile offenses destroyed? Are you serious?

I think that was what the police thought, too. But it still does not mean the judge had the authority to issue the order. It sounds more like small-town politics to me.

It sounds like routine law in Juvenile proceedings to me. Again, the state has an interest in protecting future adults from crimes they may have committed as juveniles. Every cop knows the procedure. Every Judge. Every Lawyer. Every clerk. They all know the state's intentions and they know the normal procedure, and they generally all follow it.

What do you suppose would happen to a cop if he released information regarding a juvenile before it had a chance to reach the judge?

As far as I know, it's a permanent standing order that you never do such a thing.

44 posted on 06/08/2015 2:26:05 PM PDT by DiogenesLamp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson