[AU72]

Sounds like a Judge who is ready for a forced retirement.

[marktwain]

So, she admits to having sex with the guy, its just that she was too drunk to consent? It doesn’t sound as if she said “no” either.

I suppose that a written and notarized contracts are now necessary for sex? After all, that is not so far off from what it used to be, when the only legitimate sex was with a marriage contract, or legally in a brothel.

[farlander]

Pamir Safi, eh ? Sure sounds like one of those ROP members. Now we can’t be offending them, now, can we ?

[CholeraJoe]

I testified in a couple of rape trials because I had examined the victims and collected the forensic evidence. In one, the defense attorney kept objecting to the terms "victim," "rape kit," "sexual assault protocol," and the like. Each time the judge overruled him. After the fifth time, the judge motioned him to approach the bench. Since I was on the stand at the time, I could hear clearly what the judge whispered to him.

"Mr. Barton, if you object once more, you will spend the next 3 days in the county jail." The attorney sat down and was quiet. Judges had balls in those days.

[Seruzawa]

Who is this PC nut?

[PAR35]

Sounds like the judge is working pretty hard for the defendant. A good reporter would start digging. A good DA should probably start subpoenaing financial records.

[FormerACLUmember]

I totally agree with the judge. The case and charges are highly dubious. Think of the Duke “rape” case.

The jails are full of innocent men imprisoned for rape. We know this since retrospective DNA testing is releasing scores of meneach year.

[jimfree]

Sounds a bit like the Kennedy Smith trial a few years ago. He was acquitted.

[Cicero]

This judge is a turkey.

It’s the nature of this kind of trial that the woman accuses the man of rape, the man says that she consented but was too drunk to remember, etc., etc., and the jury sorts it out and gives its verdict.

So, how on earth can the jury give a verdict if one side or the other isn’t allowed to state its case?

Like I said, this judge is a turkey. He needs to be put out to pasture (oh, no, that’s for cows; well, whatever).

[TheBattman]

Just another liberal judge defending one of his own...

The judge needs to be banned from the courthouse - permanently.

[Sherman Logan]

Since it is agreed that sex took place, the only issue is whether it was with consent.

This case turns entirely on who tells the better story or is more sympathetic to the jury. Probably the woman. Although I think a reasonable person would generally conclude that when there is no evidence, only two conflicting stories, there is more or less by definition reasonable doubt as to which person is telling the truth.

If men have any sense, they will realize that this could happen on any one-night stand. Perhaps they should reconsider one-night stands.

But then most men have no sense when dealing with this area.

[JamesP81]

Sounds like the ‘victim’ whipped up a lot publicity, making a fair trial impossible. Bad move on her part if she really was raped; she’s shot her own case in its collective foot if that’s true.

[gcruse]

State law allows judges to bar words or phrases that could prejudice or mislead a jury.


"Before making you a jury member, as defense attorney, I need to ask you a few questions.  Okay?"
"Okay."
"Do you have any relatives in law enforcement?"
"No."
"If both are under oath, would you be more likely to trust the testimony of a recently widowed woman or an Islamic illegally in this country?"
"Say, what's this guy charged with, anyway?"
"Your honor, I object.  This potential juror is hostile!"
"Bailiff, whack the juror."
"Ouch!  The widow!  I'd trust the widow!"
"Thank you.  Do you agree with using the death penalty for capital crimes?"
"No, I don't."
"How about for capital crimes augmented with fatalities over, say, a few tens of thousands?"
"Well, yes.  I think the death penalty would be the least we could do."
"What did you have for breakfast today?"
"Huh?"
"Your honor..."
"The prospective juror is ordered to answer the question."
"Scrambled eggs, toast, and bacon."
"Your honor, this prospective juror is a pork muncher and unfit for juror duty."
"You're dismissed.  At this rate we'll never get a jury seated.  Charges are dropped.  Oh, and death to America."

[SolidRedState]

When I first heard this story, prior to it being a mistrial, I thouhgt the judge was over stretching his authority.
However, I have since decided he probably is privvy to information the rest of us are not and decided the merits of the prosecution’s case were less than stellar. Therefore, to give the defendant a truly fair trial, it was necessary to do these things.

So until we hear more about other antics of this judge, which I have yet to hear any previous strangeness about him, I am inclined to give him the benefit of the doubt.

I know from personal experience that prosecutors will go to great lengths to bring a case against someone with scant evidence just to show the “victim” they are doing something. Remember, prosecutors are usually elected, judges are appointed.

[Scotsman will be Free]

Why does the “victim” have “lawyers”?

[HamiltonJay]

Safi is accused of raping Tory Bowen in 2004. He said they had consensual sex, but she said she was too drunk to agree to sex and that he knew it.

Now assuming he was drinking as well... how is this remotely rape? Regret in the morning is not rape.

[OESY]

The Judge should bar the word "judge" since it could prejudice or mislead
a jury into thinking he was using his PC-sized brain to conduct a fair trial.

.