Posted on 01/05/2007 1:16:42 PM PST by longtermmemmory
Amid confusion of a new Seminole County Courthouse, 11 citizens were directed to sit in the wrong courtroom to respond to traffic citations. Next door in an adjoining courtroom, an angry Judge John Sloop signed warrants for their arrest for failing to show. The citizens were handcuffed and chained by 15 officers who took them to jail, where they were strip-searched and sat locked up nine hours until 9 that Friday night.
On the following Monday, when Chief Judge James Perry asked why he didn’t solve the problem when two judges and a bailiff first alerted him to the mistake early Friday afternoon, Judge Sloop responded that he did not understand why it was a “big deal.”
“The arrest of 11 citizens and their continued confinement for nine hours is a very big deal,” the justices wrote in a per curium opinion December 7 in Case No. SC05-555 in Inquiry Concerning Judge John R. Sloop.
It was such a big deal that the court has removed 58-year-old Judge Sloop from office for “conduct unbecoming a member of the judiciary demonstrating a present unfitness to hold office.
“Judge Sloop’s indifference to the anxiety, humiliation, and hardship imposed upon these 11 citizens reflects a callous disregard for others that is among the most egregious examples we have seen of abuse of judicial authority and lack of proper judicial temperament,” the justices said in a 26-page order.
During oral arguments, Sloop had asked that he be allowed to remain on the bench until 2011, when he could finish his term, complete 20 years as a judge, and receive his retirement benefits. He promised he would not seek service as a senior judge. He said he is receiving treatment for anger management and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder, which he maintains contributed to his poor judgment. Sloop also argued that he has not had any angry outbursts since serving in the civil division.
But the justices said the court is more concerned about what’s best for the public, not what’s best for the judge.
“A determination that Judge Sloop is fit to remain in office for four years but unfit after that point would convey greater concern for the welfare of the judge than the welfare of the public. In striving to ensure a fair and impartial judiciary, we owe our allegiance to the people of Florida, not to individual judges.
“If Judge Sloop is fit to remain in office now, his misconduct to date would not render him unfit four years from now. Conversely, if that misconduct warrants mandatory early retirement in four years, it demonstrates unfitness to hold judicial office now.”
Efforts to address his hot temper and ADHD with counseling and medication “are too little, too late,” the court concluded.
While the December 3, 2004, episode involving the wrongly arrested and jailed citizens was the most disturbing, it was one of three separate incidents of violating the Code of Judicial Conduct in the current case, and marks the fourth time Judge Sloop has faced allegations of judicial misconduct in his 15 years on the bench.
In his first year as a judge in 1991, he was investigated by the Judicial Qualifications Commission for alleged misconduct in an eviction proceeding and for displaying a firearm in court, which ended in no findings of probable cause and a private admonishment.
In 2002, the JQC investigated Sloop for rude and abusive behavior. Again, there was no finding of probable cause, but the JQC warned him about his temper, as did other judges.
In the current case, Sloop admitted to two other counts: • In the case of State v. Ramos, Sloop declined to release a defendant pursuant to the clear mandate of Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.134, thereby requiring the defendant’s release pursuant to a writ of habeas corpus.
• In the case of State v. Mercano, Sloop was “rude, abrupt, and abusive” in his treatment of the defendant, “acting more like a prosecutor than a county court judge.”
“Regrettably, the previous JQC admonishments, feedback from the bench and bar, and other current charges serve merely as a backdrop for the misconduct alleged in count one in this case,” the court wrote.
Judge Sloop admitted the allegation about wrongly arresting the 11 citizens and failing to do anything about his mistake for hours. The JQC Investigative Panel sought his removal from the bench. Because Sloop contested that recommendation, a full hearing was held before the JQC Hearing Panel, which found that the three instances of misconduct violated Canons 1, 2A, and 3B(2), (4), and (8) of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
But the hearing panel was willing to give Sloop another chance, finding that he does have an ADHD disorder and that his treatment has been beneficial.
Among the panel’s recommended sanctions were a public reprimand, suspension from the bench for 90 days without pay, continued treatment and medication, the directive to issue letters of apology to the 11 people wrongly arrested as well as publish a full-page newspaper apology, and an agreement he would retire from the bench at the end of his current term in January 2011.
The justices rejected those recommendations, saying they are “unconvinced that Judge Sloop can both effectively manage his temper and remain an effective jurist.”
Quoting Canon 1 of the Florida Code of Judicial Conduct, the justices concluded: “We hope that our decision today will remind all judges of their solemn obligation to ‘personally observe’ high standards of conduct ‘so that the integrity and independence of the judiciary may be preserved.’
“Serving as a judge is a privilege and not a right. Finally, we take this opportunity to apologize on behalf of the justice system to the citizens of the state, to the citizens of Seminole County, and in particular to the 11 citizens harmed by Judge Sloop’s misconduct in failing to promptly ensure their release.”
I think it is very telling that the lawyer was pulled off the bench despite the pension issue and his willingness to forgo reelection and senior judge status post retirement. (BTW: FL has mandatory retirement for judges after age 70)
It is also worth noting this judge probably never had any opposition during elections.
Sadly this judge is not alone, he is only the one who was publicly exposed.
incoming freepmail
An obvious mistake with the people in the room next door and not one officer refused or questioned it. Just followed orders. Scary. I think there is more to this.
Although I never faced her (or any other judge) there was a Judge Maria Lopez here in Massachusetts who was viciously abusive to prosecutors.In one case,where she ruled that a transvestite accused of having kidnapped,tortured and raped a young boy was to be released on some minuscule amount of bail the prosecutor rose to object and she shouted at him to sit down or she'll find him in contempt.
"Judge Maria",BTW,now has her own syndicated show now.
Only in America!
Whew! Now he can run for congress. Maybe he already is in consult with Alcee Hastings.
Embarrassing but I think I voted for this dolt.
Wow! A refreshing outcome.
http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/2006/sc05-555.pdf is much more detailed.
An obvious mistake with the people in the room next door and not one officer refused or questioned it. Just followed orders. Scary. I think there is more to this.
The Nazis on trial couldn't use just following orders as a defence. It's time we serfs stand up and hold the government accountable.
Is it possible to sue for wrongful imprisionment?
consider how publicly bad this judge has to be to get to this point where even the FL SC has to stop him.
ALSO consider the FL Bar has such LIGHTWEIGHT recomended punishments!!!!
The recomnedations would have left him on the bench!
There are others out there, unfortunatly Judge Sloop is the example not the exception.
Yes, yes it is.
It will be interesting if the people sue AND if they are eligible to collect under the FL Bar's victim compensation fund.
Someone did question it.
Maybe he should have borrowed the penis pump judge's equipment to work off some of that anger.
but they left him the power to "not fix" it.
also this was not the only time he did this.
The fact is the judge put people in jail. If he had left it at yelling and scream at them (literally), even put them in cuffs, hear their cases at the very end of the docket, and THEN let them go; he would have gotten away with his ongoing abusive conduct.
This trial judge is very sadly not alone. The other judges tend to know the limits on how far they can be abusive without getting into public trouble.
"The victims who were stripped searched are suing Seminole County in Federal Court for violation of their civil rights."
“A determination that Judge Sloop is fit to remain in office for four years but unfit after that point would convey greater concern for the welfare of the judge than the welfare of the public."
“If Judge Sloop is fit to remain in office now, his misconduct to date would not render him unfit four years from now. Conversely, if that misconduct warrants mandatory early retirement in four years, it demonstrates unfitness to hold judicial office now.”
Yikes. Logical, rational analysis. These people would be unqualified for US Supreme Court nominations if a demonrat were president.
John Sloop Draws Criticism for His Courtroom Style and Demeanor By Rene Stutzman Sentinel Staff Writer May 15, 2005 Wesley Eugene Kendall, terminally ill with lung cancer, spent four of the last five weeks of his life behind bars or chained to a hospital bed on orders of Seminole County Judge John Sloop. His crime: He was too sick to perform community service. In December, Sloop locked up Kendall, who had gotten into a bar fight, even though two doctors said the 31-year-old man was ill. After another judge took over, Kendall was released but died a week later. "I am very angry over this," Kendall's 90-year-old grandmother, Christine Kotz, wrote Sloop. "Rather than help him, you punished him. You will answer to God for this." Sloop's handling of the Kendall case is just one example of the way he runs his courtroom. The longtime judge handles hundreds of cases a year, but sometimes he can be domineering, sarcastic and quick to humiliate, according to people who have come before him and a review of cases by the Orlando Sentinel. The newspaper looked at about 50 appeals cases since 2001 that were reversed or turned back to Seminole county judges with orders requiring more work. Twenty involved Sloop. In addition to treating some defendants harshly, Sloop at times would defy the law to do so. The judge has ordered people to wear electronic monitors when state law clearly said he could not. Appellate judges have reversed Sloop -- or ordered him to rework criminal cases -- more often than the other four Seminole county judges combined, or 17 times since 2001. Sloop would not comment for this article. His attorney, Marc Lubet, said he did not have enough information to discuss Sloop's appeals record or any of Sloop's other individual cases. "While a lot of people may not agree with the way Judge Sloop conducts his courtroom, there are many, many others who think he does a fine job," Lubet said last month. Indeed, Sloop has a reputation among courthouse colleagues and friends for helping people in need. One day, for example, Sloop pulled money from his pocket for a defendant who couldn't buy lunch because he had just spent his last dollar to catch a bus to the courthouse, according to the judge's longtime courtroom deputy, Olly Csisko. But Sloop's actions late last year may have put his career in jeopardy. Sloop, 56, is slated to go on trial before a special judicial panel for sending 11 people to jail simply because they were lost. On Dec. 3, he ordered the 11 arrested when they went to the wrong courtroom because of botched paperwork or bad directions from courthouse personnel. After sitting in the wrong room, the defendants finally discovered the error and immediately went to Sloop's courtroom. But Sloop had adjourned for the morning, was eating lunch and refused to see them, according to a Seminole County Sheriff's Office report. Three deputies approached him separately, trying to explain the mix-up, according to a report by the Seminole County Sheriff's Office. But Sloop said it was too late, that their mistake was not his problem. Meanwhile, the 11 spent several hours in jail. Seminole's chief judge removed Sloop from all criminal cases, allowing him to handle only small lawsuits. The Judicial Qualifications Commission, the state panel that disciplines judges, then filed charges again him. If it finds him unfit to be a judge, he could be thrown off the bench. Sloop admitted he had made a mistake and apologized publicly, calling it a 90-minute lapse in judgment. But once the JQC filed charges, he offered an unexpected defense: He was suffering from undiagnosed attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder. Sloop is now under treatment, including daily medication, and the problem is under control, his lawyer said.
I think the ADHD is utter BS for this lawyer. He was just using the "twinkie defense" to try and save the remains of his legal career since he has already been booted off the bench.
Remember just because he is pulled off the bench does not pull his law license. He is STILL a lawyer.
He is trying to stay a lawyer with the mental illness BS becuase it is harder to pull the license of a lawyer if the issue is one of mental illnes or substance abuse. (FL Bar has a special intervention program for such lawyers)
This Sloop is the type who as a child enjoyed pulling wings off of flys for no reason. It seems he treated those haples citizens with the impunity of Nero rather that the justice of the law.
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.