,
Posted on 06/06/2018 10:15:07 AM PDT by NohSpinZone
Aaron Persky, the California judge who drew national attention in 2016 when he sentenced a Stanford student to just six months in jail for sexually assaulting an unconscious woman, was recalled on Tuesday, according to The Associated Press. He is the first judge recalled in California in more than 80 years.
Judge Persky, 56, had served on the Santa Clara County Superior Court since 2003, and he began his most recent six-year term in June 2016.
In March 2016, a jury found Brock Turner, then 20, guilty on all three felony charges against him: sexual penetration with a foreign object of an intoxicated person, sexual penetration with a foreign object of an unconscious person, and intent to commit rape. The charges stemmed from Mr. Turner’s actions the year before, when he sexually assaulted a woman near a dumpster after she had blacked out from drinking.
The maximum sentence was 14 years. Judge Persky sentenced Mr. Turner to six months, of which he served three before being released in September 2016. (Mr. Turner also received three years of probation and was required to register as a sex offender, and Stanford expelled him.)
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I am concerned about the precedent though for every high-profile legal decision turning into an activist campaign for recalls. I hope not but we'll see.
Liberal judges can be recalled.
There is no such power with federal judges.
“He is the first judge recalled in California in more than 80 years.”
That is not true! Californians recalled Chief Justice Rose Elizabeth Bird of the State Supreme Court in 1986, a Jerry the Fairy Brown appointee.
Read This:
“In 1985, Bird said in some interviews that opposition to her was based on sexism, bigotry, and right wing ideology led by then U.S. Attorney General Edwin Meese. She stated “These are bully boys. Meese is trying it on the Supreme Court.” In fact, Meese had never participated in any of the recall or judicial retention campaigns involving Bird or other members of the California Supreme Court. The statements raised further questions about her partisanship and personal temperament. Even many Democrats later conceded that the remarks backfired on her and other members of the court apppointed by Governor Brown.
Bird reviewed a total of 64 capital cases appealed to the court. In each instance she issued a decision overturning the death penalty that had been imposed at trial. She was joined in her decision to overturn by at least three other members of the court in 61 of those cases. This led Bird’s critics to claim that she was substituting her own opinions and ideas for the laws and precedents upon which judicial decisions are supposed to be made. She also ruled that the state Constitution required that the state provide free abortions for poor women. In 1982, a Bird ruled that the proposed California Proposition 8 (1982), known as The Victims’ Bill of Rights, not be allowed on the ballot. A 4-3 majority of the Court allowed it to be voted on. In 1984, Bird and a majority of the Court it granted the American Federation of Labor’s 1984 original petition to block a balanced budget amendment proposition from appearing on the ballot. In addition, the Bird court struck down California’s “use a gun, go to jail” law that made a prison term mandatory for any crime in which the use of a gun was involved. The anti-Bird campaign ran television commercials featuring the relatives of the victims of the murderers whose sentences Bird and her fellow justices Cruz Reynoso, Joseph Grodin, and Allen Broussard had voted to reverse. She was removed in the November 4, 1986 election by a margin of 67% to 33% after a high-profile campaign that cited her categorical opposition to the death penalty. In addition to Bird, Reynoso and Grodin were also voted off the seven-justice California state supreme court bench. Justice Stanley Mosk, who often joined Bird, Reynoso, and Grodin, was not challenged, nor were the other three justices.”
Liberal judges can be recalled.
There is no such power with federal judges.
**************************************
But they can be impeached by Congress. IMHO there are many current District Court judges who are guilty of usurpation of the President’s powers and could be impeached. Of course, Congress won’t do it.
Hi. I’m probably missing something in your post...
“There is no such power with federal judges.”
I know you know that federal judges can be impeached and removed from the bench.
???
5.56mm
,
“He is the first judge recalled in California in more than 80 years.”
My first thought also was also “Rose Bird”.
It seemed to me like a marginal case, where the woman was fingered while she was blackout drunk (in the sense of having no memory of the event) but conscious. The key factor here is that he stopped short of initiating genital intercourse when she progressed from blackout drunk (as in able to talk and move, but obviously not completely aware of her surroundings) to passed out altogether. In the current atmosphere, though, that’s probably enough to warrant a 20-year prison term.
I thought he was stopped by a couple of students who happened to be riding their bikes nearby?
There was MUCH more nuance to the consent case then has ever been admitted by the MSM and once the screaming started from the left about what a rapist Turner was any attempt to get the real story of what happened - whether it was two drunk kids who started making out and then one of them passed out - or if it really was the rape of an unconscious woman was going to be DOA. The original smear campaign and the smear of this judge were both attempts to remove ANY nuance or reality from the situation from the take back the night crowd.
All he had to do was do his damn job!
Actually, technically, the three jerry brown supreme court judges, rose bird, cruz reynosos and allen broussard were thrown out of office at a confirmation election. The campaign to remove all three was spearheded by the Dist Attorneys association. Although it was not a recall per se the effect was the same. It was the first time judges had been denied confirmation in the states history.
The judge hand slapped the guy when he should had kneed him in the groin!
Pelosi had to be walked through as to why trusting a guy removed as a Federal judge for taking bribes was not a good idea to let handle national security information.
And if the Congress that removed Hastings had done its job, it could have prevented him from running for Federal office in Hastings impeachment act.
Good. The message to the rest of the black-robed tyranny is that they can be held accountable just like Persky.
[I thought he was stopped by a couple of students who happened to be riding their bikes nearby?]
The guy was a champion athlete, they went to the same school, they were part of the same social milieu and the hookup culture isn’t some of kind of other-worldly thing. I’m not surprised the judge imposed a short sentence. The guy’s already branded a sex offender and a felon.
Here’s the New York Times on the sentence for groping:
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/19/us/politics/donald-trump-has-been-accused-of-groping-but-what-does-the-law-say.html
{What kind of punishment can stem from a groping conviction?
In New York, “forcible touching” is a Class A misdemeanor, meaning it carries a sentence of up to a year of incarceration or three years of probation, and a $1,000 fine. In Florida, battery is a first-degree misdemeanor, which carries a sentence of up to a year in jail, and a $1,000 fine.}
[There was MUCH more nuance to the consent case then has ever been admitted by the MSM and once the screaming started from the left about what a rapist Turner was any attempt to get the real story of what happened - whether it was two drunk kids who started making out and then one of them passed out]
Good, I am wondering if voters in California are waking up...
Good thoughts
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.