Sounds like Judge Mathis..he has accused President Bush of stealing elections and such..
Posted on 08/17/2005 6:59:59 PM PDT by Graybeard58
RALEIGH -- For the second time in two years, state trial court Judge Evelyn Hill's remarks from the bench have earned a defendant a new trial -- this time a convicted sex offender.
The state Court of Appeals on Tuesday ordered a retrial for Douglas Shane Wright, 31, of Burlington, convicted in October 2003 of two counts of taking indecent liberties with a child. He had been sentenced to four to five years in prison.
Since her elevation from Wake County prosecutor to elected judge five years ago, Hill has been reprimanded twice for misbehaving and had one other conviction overturned for making disparaging remarks at trial.
Defense lawyers have complained in other appeals about the Superior Court judge's rude, obnoxious, or intimidating behavior.
During Wright's trial, Hill berated his defense lawyer for his habit of saying "OK" while questioning witnesses; she threatened to fine him $100 each time he uttered the word.
"If you don't know when you're saying 'OK' at the end of a sentence, then learn to find out, because if a judge tells you to stop doing it, you stop doing it," Hill instructed the lawyer, Craig Thompson of Graham.
Hill also chastised Thompson for phrasing questions as statements and told him to move on to other questions.
She told him, "I am tired of your cavalier attitude and your feeling that whatever you want to do in a courtroom is OK."
She cut him off several times and warned him, "Stop trying to use your body language to interrupt me. It is rude, discourteous, uncivil and contemptuous."
How the panel ruled
Under state law, criminal defendants are entitled to a trial with "an impartial judge and an unprejudiced jury in an atmosphere of judicial calm."
"The trial judge's numerous negative comments to the defense counsel, both in and out of the presence of the jury, created a negative atmosphere at the trial to the prejudice of defendant," Judge James A. Wynn Jr. wrote for the majority, which consisted of him and Judge Rick Elmore.
Judge John M. Tyson, the third member of the appeals panel, disagreed on the grounds that Hill's conduct might have been inappropriate, but was harmless and didn't warrant a new trial. Tyson's dissent means the N.C. Attorney General's office can appeal the ruling to the N.C. Supreme Court.
The state's lawyers had not decided whether to do that late Tuesday. Alamance County District Attorney Rob Johnson, whose office prosecuted Wright, said he'll have to confer with the Attorney General's Office about whether to appeal the ruling, retry Wright, or drop the case.
In the meantime, Wright remains in prison.
Hill could not be reached Tuesday for comment. Her lawyer, Joseph Zeszotarski Jr. of Raleigh, declined Tuesday to comment on Hill's conduct in Wright's case because the matter is still active.
Thompson, Wright's trial lawyer, could not be reached.
Hill, 56, is Wake's first female Superior Court judge. She's more than halfway through an eight-year term. In two decades as an assistant district attorney, Hill was known as an outspoken advocate for crime victims and as the possessor of a sharp tongue.
As a Wake prosecutor, for example, she once had to apologize for suggesting in court that a domestic assault defendant leave his genitals at the courthouse as part of his pre-trial release bond. The state Supreme Court has censured her this year and in 2003 for improper comments she made on and off the bench in a total of four cases.
Under the state Code of Judicial Conduct, judges must "be patient, dignified and courteous to litigants, jurors, witnesses, lawyers and others" on the job.
Hill's conduct has led at least eight criminal defendants to appeal their convictions. In several cases, the appeals court has criticized Hill for her sarcastic and derogatory comments but let them slide.
Wright's case echoes the complaints of other defendants that Hill sometimes acts like a prosecutor in a black robe, instead of a neutral judge.
"Apparently, the trial judge's remarks to the defense counsel had the effect of setting a tone of fear at the trial," Wynn wrote in the majority ruling.
During the trial, Hill had this exchange with two alternate jurors:
Hill: "You all paid rapt attention. I noticed that. I certainly do appreciate that."
Alternate juror 2: "We were scared not to."
Hill: "That's good. Were you scared of me?"
Alternate juror 2: "Yes, your honor."
Hill: "Oh, that's good. I always wanted jurors to be scared."
The other alternate juror told Hill he wasn't afraid.
"Well," the judge replied, "you should be."
I have yet to have the pleasure of meeting just one judge who possesses any of those qualities. So far, every one I've ever encountered as a member of a jury or as a plaintiff has been the most obnoxious, arrogant, disrespectful pieces of **** I've ever seen on two legs.
When lawyers rule the world there will be nothing left to rule
When lawyers rule the world there will be nothing left to rule
When lawyers rule the world there will be nothing left to rule
Triple click?
Apparently lawyers don't like her ... She MUST be good!
If the devil is the living flesh of evil, then here is who I think he is. Far from appearing as a hideous demon, he is the average-looking person who walks into a room and shakes your hand with a smile. By the time he leaves, the standards of decency of everyone within that room have been lowered ever so slightly. --- A lawyer come to mind.
Sounds like Judge Mathis..he has accused President Bush of stealing elections and such..
Sure there will... Lesser lawyers.
That's why judges lord it over everyone else; especially other lawyers.
Either that, or more of a pompous ass than the average lawyer.
I'll put my money on the 'pompous ass' bet.
I see absolutely NOTHING wrong with the judge's handling of the defense attorney or the jurors.
She's not behaving like a good Southern lady; Bless her heart!
Some people get a little power, and their real selves come out. Scary!
Now that's tough.
So9
I am not so sure of her handling of jurors, though none seem to have actually filed complaints, but trial lawyers need to be reined with a rough hand to keep on point and moving.
So9
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.