Absurd Sentence for the Penis Pump Judge

I can't help it.

I know it's a harsh sentence, but you have to admit he screwed himself.

Yes, indeed, that sentence seems to make something big out of such a little thing.

Lack of gravitas? Self policing by his peer group?

As a jury junkie I support this sentence fully. I've served four times and I'm always impressed by the proceedings and how competent and fair administration means so much to the accused and the outcome.

I'm batting 4:0 on selection.

If I was charged with something I'd like to think the judge had my case on his mind at least during courtroom time.

What sentences have been handed down for judges who were drunk or high while on the job? Or trading stocks with their Blackberries?

Now if he drove drunk, open bottle in the car, speeding, at night followed by an abusive anti-Semitic rant and threatening some cops that's good for a probation+fine.

Justice.

Did the penis pump work? Because if it didn't and he got 4 years in prison for using it, well, that totally... um... I really don't want to make the obvious pun.

Wow!

That sucks.

I think four years is a little stiff.

I'm sure he'll find the penal system to be quite hard.

But will it stand up on appeal?

I disagree to some extent. Four consecutive one year sentences is harsh. But this guy is a real pervert--during the trial, there were many accounts of indecent exposure, not just a couple. And masturbating during a trial while witnesses is testifying goes way, way beyond anything a well-adjusted person would do.

But what is really offensive is that this person sits in judgment of others and he used that power and prestige to intimidate others. Moreover, this guy denies all culpability and refuses to undergo psychosexual testing.

He has a real problem and his actions deserved to be punished with more than probation

What a waste of tax-payer money.. Same goes for non-violent drug offenders as well.

As an aside, I sometimes hear libertarians advocate a completely privatized prison system nation-wide. Just imagine what its industry lobbyists would lobby for...

David-

Oh, I agree that the guy's got a problem. But prison isn't gonna fix that problem, and what he did didn't really doesn't victimize anyone. It's highly distasteful, and it's unfair to those who appeared in his court, but he didn't hurt anyone. He's been thoroughly humiliated and his career is destroyed. I think that's enough punishment.

The people being tried in his court weren't just treated unfairly, they were actively harmed by his behavior. Even if no one realized it at the time.

Caledonian's comment is directly on point. Each trial on which he sat should be thrown out. The defendants have been treated unfairly, state monies have been wasted, and the public left even more cynical than necessary about the justice system. The man did great harm to the system and to potentially hundreds of individuals.

Unless there is some evidence that he was negligent during one of those trials - that he ignored testimony in making a ruling, for example, or that he committed some sort of malfeasance in regard to a particular trial - it's hard to make that sort of specific charge.

I think, as a deterrent, they ought to mandate that all judges' robes shall only come down to midriff... and their desks shall be made of clear Plexi.

Really, this is sad, and such overkill. Four years! People guilty of negligent homicide have gotten less, I would wager.

Unless there is some evidence that he was negligent during one of those trials - that he ignored testimony in making a ruling, for example, or that he committed some sort of malfeasance in regard to a particular trial - it's hard to make that sort of specific charge.

[raises eyebrow]

People on trial have a right to a full and complete hearing. That includes a judge who's paying attention during testimony. Masturbating and paying attention to complex witness-lawyer discussions are pretty much mutually incompatible.

I don't care much what the legal system views as sufficient evidence for a 'charge'. The reality is that this judge harmed a significant number of people who were denied a properly-functioning legal system because of his inappropriate actions. I have no sympathy for him.

I agree that people were harmed by his actions and cases he presided over should be reviewed - the people did not get fair trials.

That having been said, this guy is obviously mentally ill. He should be sent to a psychiatric facility, not prison. Not that our current mental health system is much better than prison... (I speak from experience)

I beg to differ with the notion that too many people were harmed here. The role of judge during the typical trial is little more than maintaining proper order and flow. The only decisions he is making are on relatively straightforward objections; in most cases, one side or the other concede these before the judge is required to rule in any case.

Of course, if he were trying cases without a jury, this would be an entirely different matter. I don't know the facts here, so I stand corrected if he were the Finder of Fact as well as judge.

The role of judge during the typical trial is little more than maintaining proper order and flow.

The role of the judge is also to represent the justice of the system, the solemnity of the undertaking and the majesty of the people's will, as embodied in the court. Those roles serve to maintain the standing of the court as being above the sphere of normal human commerce and activity.

He pretty much blew off all of those roles altogether.

The entire system of justice suffers generally for it.

Would he have incurred the same penalty if he had been, for example, filing his fingernails during a trial? Playing Sudoku? Using a hand strengthener? I somehow doubt it.

Filing fingernails or using a hand strengthener don't monopolize the attention as genital manipulation does. I grant that Sudoku would likely be highly distracting, and I grant that the judge would be unlikely to have received such a punishment if he were solving number puzzles.

He *should*, I assert, but he likely *wouldn't*.

What if he had had a chamber pot there and had taken a crap during the trial?

I bet he still wouldn't have gotten as stiff a sentence.

Now, if he had been shooting up... THEN he might have gotten a harsher sentence.

I have been a trial lawyer for 17 years now, including as an Assistant District Attorney for five. People who believe the sentence was too harsh don't quite comprehend the near absolute power a judge has over people who come before him or her. I have seen incompetent judges, bright but malicious judges, judges with agendas, judges concerned with re-election etcetera, etcetera, make decisions, that caused a great deal of suffering by the arbitrary excercise of power.

Appeals are often not an option not the least of which because judges understand how to suppress opposition to bad rulings by denying access to the attorneys to "make a record", by abusing only the powerless, by manipulating their rulings and the record to make them appear fair in hindsight. Further, judicial ethics boards are notoriously lax, and who wants to hear an embittered, losing litigant's complaint anyway?

Believe me, this guy has harmed many people and not only those who were exposed to the conduct in question. He was a judge with no judgment. Think about that.

As I said, I think what he did was extremely unprofessional. Removal from the bench is reasonable and warranted. But four years in prison is outrageous. People who commit violent crimes get less time than that in many cases. This man is no threat to anyone, he does not deserve to be in prison.