Judge who admitted marijuana use to return to bench

Traverse City - AP ^ | 12/16/02

[PaxMacian]

A Traverse City judge who admitted smoking marijuana at a Rolling Stones concert is scheduled to begin hearing cases Monday. District Judge Thomas Gilbert has been on voluntary leave since November sixth. He was in a 28 day alcohol rehabilitation program.

Gilbert will hear only civil cases such as small claims and landlord-tenant disputes in his first week back. After a two week vacation, he'll begin hearing criminal cases but not those involving drunken driving or marijuana.

Gilbert has called the incident at the October 12th concert in Detroit the stupidest thing he's ever done. Both the local bar association and the Antrim County Board of Commissioners have called for Gilbert's resignation.

[PaxMacian]

One felony possession charge or even a positive drug test would be cause for most anyone to be dismissed from their job permanently.

[PaxMacian]

*Wod_list

[TopQuark]

. He was in a 28 day alcohol rehabilitation program.

THis has nothing to do with drugs: he should be removed for violating the law that he is appointed to uphod and decide.

[GaConfed]

If that is the case, then most judges should be dismissed for rendering decisions totally at odds with the Constitution. As far as I'm concerned, that is a crime in and of itself.

[mhking]

Y'put yer weed in it!

---

"Hold muh beer 'n watch this!" PING....

If you want on or off this list, please let me know!

[Lysander]

the local bar association.... called for Gilbert's resignation.

Three groups are for maintaining the harms that current drug laws promote– The cops, the lawyers (and their personal lobby the professional politicians) and of course the high level drug dealers themselves. Anybody guess why?

[TopQuark]

As I said in on another thread: it is amazing that people on WoD threads cannot read:

So if a judge or governor refuse to enforce gun confiscation laws or abortion protections, they should be kicked out of office.

How is that related to what I said?

[Joe Hadenuf]

THis has nothing to do with drugs: he should be removed for violating the law that he is appointed to uphold and decide.

You bet, and much of the rest of those in government will need to get in line behind him.

[TopQuark]

If that is the case, then most judges should be dismissed for rendering decisions totally at odds with the Constitution. As far as I'm concerned, that is a crime in and of itself.

The problem with your statement is that is it is based on opinion and not a fact. Accoring to the COnstituion, it is for the courts to decide that the law is and, in particular, what's Constituional. It is a question of opinion.

In contrast, possession of an illegal drug is a behavior, not opinion. The two therefore have nothing in common.

[Sparta]

The powerful play by a different set of rules than all of us little people.

[joesnuffy]

One set of standards of crime and punishment for the elite and
another for the undermenchen

[motzman]

Becoming a judge does not confer immunity to human weakness and imperfection. Most likely, this "mistake" will help the judge determine the proper course of action to take while making reccomendations and sentencing others in similar circumstances. We generally prefer our judges to be older than most other officers of the court, so that the judge will have had varied life experiences with which he can draw upon while passing judgement.

To think that a man, judge or not, can live his life and not make mistakes and errors in judgement is to not be thinking at all. "Judgement" is a power gained from experience, both good and bad. Would you want to be judged by someone who thinks themselves infallible or has never had any "trouble" in his life? I know I wouldn't. Such a man would totally lack compassion, which is a very important part of being a judge.

What's next, a judge can't here traffic cases if he's ever had a parking ticket? A judge can't here bankruptcy cases because he does't have a 720+ FICO score on his credit report?

Let's use a little judgement here, people....(rimshot)

[AAABEST]

...what's Constituional. It is a question of opinion.

Absolute nonsense. The constitution is very clear in it's language as is the intent of those who established it (hint: they intended to create a free country).

For example, nobody reading the constitution with any degree of comprehension could call a person's business a "public accomodation". There is no right to "privacy". Regulating guns under "interstate commerce" is a bastardization.

"Shall not be infringed" means exactly what it says. Being secure in your effects doesn't have a WOT exemption. The 5th and 6th amendments don't have a disclaimer that says "except when you have a scumbag named Padilla".

[headsonpikes]

"Anybody guess why?"

And just why would anyone have to guess?

Is the sky some new color?

[TopQuark]

You use strong words for someone who lacks understanding of the law.

[ladylib]

Some people caught with marijuana go to jail for years and years. Our prisons are full of them, and this clown is now back on the bench. Oh well.

[motzman]

Some people caught with marijuana go to jail for years and years.

The vast majority don't.

[coloradan]

So if a judge or governor refuse to enforce gun confiscation laws or abortion protections, they should be kicked out of office.

Bad analogy. The question isn't which laws should he enforce and which he shouldn't. It's why is he immune from the same laws that he would jail other people for violating? A more appropriate analogy would be if he were to skate on charges of illegal gun possession, which would land us peasants in jail for violating. Pot possession is a federal felony.

[motzman]

Pot possession is a federal felony.

No it's not. Possession over a certain amount is, but this does not apply to the judge.