QuizLaw

« You Say Potato, I Say You Knocked the Shit out of Me | Main | The Daily Memo - 6/21/06 »

“Good morning, may it please the court, go F yourself”

Well, I’m a little speechless on this one. An Ohio man was on trial for allegedly raping a girl six years ago, when she was just ten-years-old. According to the prosecutor, the judge hearing the case made a comment, last year, that she thought the accusing girl had credibility problems. So last Monday, concerned that the judge was “rendering opinions from the bench before trial,” the prosecutor asked the judge to recuse herself. She said no.

So far, I’m ok with this. Even if the judge did make those comments, it doesn’t mean she couldn’t hold a fair hearing. We don’t even know what the context of the comments were or what they were in regard to (for example, since the girl was ten at the time and it’s now six years later, it would be entirely unreasonable to at least be curious about her ability to make an accurate identification of the rapist). And the whole issue of judge recusal is a rather sticky matter when there’s no clear-cut evidence one way or the other. But it’s what happens next that makes things wonky.

The trial was set to begin that afternoon at 1 p.m. Following the recusal hearing in the morning, the prosecutor began working on an appeal, feeling so strongly that the judge should not be on the case. According to him, phone calls were placed with the judge’s office to let her know that he was going to be running late for the trial’s start as a result of working on the appeal. The judge, meanwhile, claims that she received no notification about where he was was. So at 1:45 p.m. she threw out the child rape case. Our friendly Judge Gallagher says she took this action because of the prosecutor’s “unprofessional actions.” She says she was treated “like a punk” and if the prosecutor doesn’t show up, “too bad.” And, of course, she denies that it was any type of retribution for the recusal request or a result of her questions about the girl’s credibility.

I was late to court on a few occasions thanks to the never-ending joy that is L.A. traffic, and I knew to call the judges’ clerk and give them a heads up. And I never got any guff for it. Surely working on a recusal appeal minutes before trial is as valid an excuse as stoppage on the 405? But even if he didn’t call or offer her the professional courtesy that, yes, he should have, she certainly didn’t have to throw the damn case out. Has she never heard of sanctions? Hit him with a fine, hold him in contempt, etc. But letting a potential child rapist walk because, when you get down to it, the prosecutor was trying to ensure a fair trial? This judge is the one that needs to get tossed!

Posted by Seth on June 21, 2006 | Comments (1)