In
my March post, “The 13th Juror,” I discussed how a judge addicted to
pain pills was removed from the bench because of his criminal activities in
obtaining the pills. A special judge was appointed to decide if defendants in a
2007 carjacking-torture-murder case should get new trials. After the three male
defendants were convicted, two of them were given life sentences. The ring
leader received a death sentence. At the time the original judge was removed
from the case, the female defendant had been found guilty of facilitation but
had not been sentenced. The original judge I called P. The special Judge, whom
I called G, without holding hearings, granted all four defendants new trials.
I’ve
been following the latest developments in the case through the Knoxville News Sentinel because my daughter could
still be on the witness list.
In
his decision, Judge G concluded that Judge P’s addiction and criminal
activities deprived the defendants of “constitutionally sound trials”. He also
decided that he could not act as the 13th juror because of credibility
issues with Judge P and the witnesses. The prosecutor appealed the decision to
grant new trials to the three male defendants, but did not appeal the decision
on the female because of Judge P’s erratic behavior during her trial.
The
Tennessee Supreme Court concluded that Judge G was wrong in granting new trials
and directed him to address the issue of whether the credibility of the witnesses
was crucial in the state’s case. The Court stated that if Judge G concluded the witnesses’ credibility was key and
could not evaluate their candor from the transcript alone, he must grant new
trials. The Court further ruled that the defense must show
proof of error before new trials may be granted. Despite the Supreme Court’s decision, Judge G again
ordered new trials for the three male defendants without holding hearings.
The
prosecutor filed a motion with Judge G requesting that he recuse himself. Judge
G refused to recuse (On my, I’m channeling Johnny Cochran!). He even threaten
the DA with contempt of court, and told the DA’s special counsel he should
report himself to the state board that polices lawyers.
Failure to follow the Supreme Court’s directive is bad
enough but what is most disturbing is Judge G’s off the record actions in an attempt
to prevent public scrutiny. According to the Knoxville News Sentinel, he
removed documents from the court records and ordered prosecutors not to refer
to them in public. He corresponded with prosecutors through emails instead of
issuing orders that would become part of the court record. He held meetings
with lawyers in chambers instead of holding hearings. In his motion asking
Judge G to recuse himself, the prosecutor cited emails in which the judge said little
birdies were putting thoughts in his head.
Anyone should
know, but especially a judge, that trying to keep judicial proceedings secret
from the press in a high profile case is like trying to hide meat from a hungry
pack of dogs. The press will smell something wrong in a New York minute (by the
way, what is a New York minute?). Judge G allowed absurdity to trump common
sense.
On
Thursday, June 21, 2012, Judge G scheduled a hearing on the prosecution’s
recusal motion for October 8, which will allow the DA to put his objections
into the official record. Maybe, just maybe, common sense will begin to trump
absurdity in this case.
The Blue Bird of Common Sense |