[Mad-Margaret]

Okaay. I've had a beer tonight, soooo I'm not following your questions.

Don't you remember in the first setting when the defense attorneys asked for a record to be made? They were asking for a court reporter to transcribe the proceedings. There was some indication that that's not usually done during these administrative hearings.

The defense attorneys are holding the court to its word. And yes, a ruling remains a ruling even after the judge is switched. (All these judges! Once a case is transferred to the circuit court up here, it stays with one judge. And we have a preliminary hearing -- you know, with neat stuff like probable cause. It's so different down there! They haven't even been arraigned yet.)

[SarahUSC]

It's incredible to think they haven't even been arraigned yet. If the wheels of justice turned any slower in NC they'd be turning in reverse.

[JLS]

And yes, a ruling remains a ruling even after the judge is switched.

This is my question, we know the above how? Sure it is logical. Sure it might be the way things are done in your state. But as you say, you don't play musical judges in your state either. NC is apparently different than every place else. So how do we know a rules stays in force after a judge changes. [He could certainly on a motion or on his own accord reverse this ruling could he?]

I guess the best evidence I see for the ruling staying in force is that the defense attorneys did not to renew the motion to have a record made first thing before this judge. These are very good attorneys so I guess they must know what they are doing.

[Jezebelle]

I absolutely remember it and yes, the ruling is binding on the court, not the individual judges that come along. He is supposed to follow Stephens' ruling on the permanent record of all open court proceedings. Defense counsel even made a bid for written transcripts of in camera stuff, but Stephens said no.