DEAR JUDGE ....PLEASE FOLLOW THE LAW

JUSTICE BUILDING BLOG: DEAR JUDGE ....PLEASE FOLLOW THE LAW

Dear Judge:

There are lots of things you can do by virtue of your job as a circuit court judge.You can (in no particular order of importance- and BTW the following is not directed at any particular judge...if the robe fits...)
Deny motions without reading them; have your JA refuse to put motions on calendar without lawyers first faxing them to you (although you don't read them); start court whenever you want; show up late; finish court whenever you want; make juries stay until midnight in a misguided effort to show everyone how hard you work; lecture lawyers from the bench about how you tried every case you had within sixty days of inception (in other words, lie); brag about how you are on the short list for an appointment to a higher court (ditto); and otherwise feel that you and only you stand between the rule of law and anarchy.

Here's what you must do: follow the law.

Which means here's what you can't do:
Have your bailiff close your courtroom to anyone at anytime without proper notice to the media and a hearing on an issue;
tell people how to dress when they come to court (wearing a shirt that says "fuck you" has been held to be an expression of free speech under the First Amendment - which is part of the Constitution, which is a legal document that defines the ....oh never mind it's a bit complicated.)

You also CANNOT take personal property of people, without following Florida's Forfeiture Statute (and it's not entirely clear a member of the judiciary can be a "seizing agency" under the statute. ).  Which means that in order to seize the personal property of an individual, there must be an allegation that the property was used to violate Florida's contraband laws; see, Fla. Stat. Ann. § 932.703 (West)

(1)(a) Any contraband article, vessel, motor vehicle, aircraft, other personal property, or real property used in violation of any provision of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act, or in, upon, or by means of which any violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act has taken or is taking place, may be seized and shall be forfeited subject to the provisions of the Florida ContrabandForfeiture Act.

Contraband is defined as, inter alia: 

5. Any personal property, including, but not limited to, any vessel, aircraft, item, object, tool, substance, device, weapon, machine, vehicle of any kind, money, securities, books, records, research, negotiable instruments, or currency, which was used or was attempted to be used as an instrumentality in the commission of, or in aiding or abetting in the commission of, any felony, whether or not comprising an element of the felony, or which is acquired by proceeds obtained as a result of a violation of the Florida Contraband Forfeiture Act.

Fla. Stat. Ann. § 932.701 (West)y 

So, oh wise robed one, pray tell what felony is the person who brings a cell phone into your courtroom, and listens to something on the cellphone with earphones, or takes a picture or video recording of court proceedings, committing? 

We will save you research (which is where you open a book and read a case and ....never mind, it's complicated)- THERE IS NO FELONY THAT ANYONE IS COMMITTING WHEN THEY LISTEN TO HEADPHONES IN YOUR COURTROOM OR VIDEO OR PHOTOGRAPH THE PROCEEDINGS. 

We often see a representative of the media taking footage of a proceeding. David Ovalle (Miami Herald/San Diego Chargers) has been known to whip out a camera and take a few shots. We don't see your bailiff wresting David to the ground or taking away his camera. There are no exceptions for the media (nor being a fan of a losing football team) that confers upon Mr. Ovalle an exception not available to us, our client, our client's girlfriend or aunt or friend. 

Sorry. We know this offends your sense of dignity. We know you believe yourself to be mostly all powerful. But you are not. We are a nation of rules and laws. We are a State of rules and laws. And to quote the last part of the standard jury instruction in criminal cases, "no one of us  has the right to violate those laws." 

So take the damn sign down. 

Now, no one is telling you that you don't have the right to remove individuals (not a class of people) from your courtroom for being disruptive or disturbing. Of course you can. People must be quiet so you can make the important decisions you make. And you have contempt powers for people who do not follow the lawful rules of the court. But if we choose to sit quietly in the back of your courtroom and video your wise decisions during arraignments, ("deny bond, set the case for trial"- truly awe inspiring stuff) while quietly listening to NWA on a pair of headsets, there really isn't a damn thing you can do about it. 

See you in court, where quite frankly our tastes run move to Gilbert and Sullivan (The Mikado and HMS Pinafore, not really Pirates) than NWA. And sorry, we're a bit cranky, but not having any coffee in the morning in court will do that to a blogger. 

Gender Biases In Child Support

Joe Cordell Discusses Gender Biases In Child Support

October 8, 2015

Cordell & Cordell Principal Partner Joe Cordell recently appeared on 700WLW AM-Cincinnati to discuss many of the flaws of the modern child-support system.

Mr. Cordell spoke at length about how the system is punitive and leaves many fathers who are unable to pay child support, rather than unwilling, in a difficult position. 

For example, a guy could find himself unemployed with no way to make his child support payments. But just because he is out of a job doesn’t mean those payments pause until he finds work.

The result is a modern-day debtors prison.

Mr. Cordell noted that when a mother doesn’t receive child support, she has a legion of state, federal and local officials as well as private groups to call on to help enforce her right to support. That isn’t the case when fathers are denied access to their children.“If a guy is unemployed, the court has the power to say, ‘Well look, we think that you should be employed and we think you can get a meaningful job so you should go to jail as a result of being behind in support,'” Mr. Cordell said.

“The guy has to assemble thousands of dollars from income that incidentally he doesn’t have because of the child support,” Mr. Cordell said. “He has to assemble his own funds to go into court and battle for over a year, perhaps, his denial of visitation. So many guys just walk away. It’s not practical for them to enforce their rights of visitation.”

Click below to listen to the full interview.

Audio Player

01:08

17:07

Use Up/Down Arrow keys to increase or decrease volume.

Share this

How the legal system often ignores the constitutional rights of parents

How the legal system often ignores the constitutional rights of parents

At Above the Law, Sam Wright notes that family law bureaucrats and judges routinely ignore the constitutional rights of parents in making decisions on…

WASHINGTONPOST.COM

In a recent post on the notorious Maryland case where authorities have repeatedly detained two children in order to force the Meitiv family to stop them from walking home alone, I noted that the parents have the Constitution and Supreme Court precedent on their side. At Above the Law, experienced public interest lawyer Sam Wright agrees that the parents have the Constitution on their side, but cautions that bureaucrats and lower court judges routinely ignore such petty issues as constitutional rights when it comes to enforcing the their conceptions of “the best interests of the child”:

Over at the Volokh Conspiracy, law professor Ilya Somin notes that the application of child welfare laws is subject to some (seemingly) robust constitutional constraints: there’s case law providing that the Fourteenth Amendment protects the rights of parents to raise their children as they see fit and that it also, in the words of Justice O’Connor’s plurality opinion in Troxel v. Granville, creates a “presumption that fit parents act in the best interests of their children.”

Invisible Victims of Domestic Violence

Male Victims of Domestic Violence

Often Unseen, Not Believed

October 29, 2015 by Robert Franklin, Esq, Member, National Board of Directors, National Parents Organization

This is a good article on an important topic – domestic violence (Yahoo, 10/26/15). It’s not without its flaws, but overall, it’s a good effort by author Jenna Birch to communicate some of the basics to a large audience. Domestic violence is important to family court issues because it’s often raised there as a tactic to gain an advantage in a child custody case. In the past, countless family lawyers have admitted the use of domestic violence allegations in family courts for precisely that reason.

Birch’s main point is that men and women equally are victims of domestic violence.

Yet in 2010, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention released data from its National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey — and one of the most shocking statistics wasn’t just the sheer total of victims of physical violence but also how those numbers broke down by gender.

According to the CDC’s statistics — estimates based on more than 18,000 telephone-survey responses in the United States — roughly 5,365,000 men had been victims of intimate partner physical violence in the previous 12 months, compared with 4,741,000 women. By the study’s definition, physical violence includes slapping, pushing, and shoving. 

More severe threats like being beaten, burned, choked, kicked, slammed with a heavy object, or hit with a fist were also tracked. Roughly 40 percent of the victims of severe physical violence were men. The CDC repeated the survey in 2011, the results of which were published in 2014, and found almost identical numbers — with the percentage of male severe physical violence victims slightly rising.

“Reports are also showing a decline of the number of women and an increase in the number of men reporting” abuse, says counselor and psychologist Karla Ivankovich, PhD, an adjunct professor of psychology at the University of Illinois, Springfield.

Of course we’ve known this since the late 1970s. Indeed, the very first broad-based, scientifically reliable survey done for the National Institute of Mental Health in 1976 revealed parity in victimization and perpetration by men and women. Since then, literally hundreds of studies have produced similar data.

Despite the science on DV, public policy took root in the false claims of extremists who insisted that virtually all perpetrators were men and virtually all victims were women. Amazingly, some 40 years later, that public policy is still stuck in that false past. Therefore, in the United States, there are still only two DV shelters for men, (one opened in Florida recently) compared with hundreds for women.

Progress! Finally, there is mention in the media of concerns about Family Courts. Way to go New Jersey. Way to go NJ4Kids/NJ4ParentalEquality.The rest of us can kick it up too. Be seen where your at.
Posted by Disgusted Dads on Thursday, October 15, 2015

The Invisible Victims

October 1, 2013 By Dr. Tara J. Palmatier 

October is domestic violence awareness month. In the true spirit of raising public awareness, Shrink4Men,AVoiceForMen and DAHMW (the Domestic Abuse Hotline for Men and Women) would like to shine a spotlight on a group of individuals who comprise approximately half the victims of domestic violence. A group who is afforded very few resources and are typically ignored and/or ridiculed when they speak out about their victimization — often by the very individuals seeking to raise public awareness about the insidious social malady of domestic violence.

Who is this invisible and marginalized group of domestic violence victims pushed to the periphery of public awareness?

Men.

[*If you are already aware about the difficulties male victims of domestic violence face, please scroll to the end of this article to find out how you can help.]

Men are turned away from most domestic violence shelters. Men do not meet eligibility to receive aid from most domestic violence support organizations by virtue of being men, which is nothing short of overt discrimination, sexism and bigotry.

To the best of our knowledge, there are no court advocacy programs for male victims of domestic violence. Men (and their children) are not eligible for state and federal stipends for safe housing from their female abusers. There are no free or subsidized counseling programs nor are there free legal services/legal aid for male victims of domestic violence.

In the United States, there is only one shelter for male victims of domestic violence (the Valley Oasis Shelter in Antelope, CA) out of the approximately 1,800 shelters available to women and their children nationwide. Canada also used to have a domestic violence shelter for men that was run by the late Earl Silverman.