White judge rejects plea deal for 'blackie'

[BT]

The Judges point was that he had sensed a pattern of favorable plea deals that applied more to blacks than to other races. Whether that is true or not should be researched. If true, then the judges attempt to force plea arrangements to be more race neutral could be applauded, instead of being derided.

The assumption that he is a t core a racist based on this incident is premature.

It would be interesting to see an analysis of his sentencing to see whether he favored one race over another.

[Kramer]

The Judges point was that he had sensed a pattern of favorable plea deals that applied more to blacks than to other races. Whether that is true or not should be researched. If true, then the judges attempt to force plea arrangements to be more race neutral could be applauded, instead of being derided.

The assumption that he is a t core a racist based on this incident is premature.

It would be interesting to see an analysis of his sentencing to see whether he favored one race over another.

Question: Are saying for us to treat this black judge different than white judges would be treated if this situation were reversed? Because we all know that if this were reversed the white judge would be called a racist (by Community Activists like Al, Jesse & Obama) in a BLACK case like like this. If this is what you are saying then that is racist in an equal world. Which is all I ask for is we are all treated, judged, and looked at the same. Not make excuses for races.

[BT]

The implication is that this White Judge is a racist. More probably because of his injudicious use of the word "blackie" than the basis for his rejection of the plea. We still don't know if historical data would back up his claims.

And if the situation were reversed I'm sure if a black judge said crackers were getting a better break than persons of color, there would be a cry for sanctions, or more likely an examination of the historical record to see if the charges were true.

On the face of it either judges objections would not be problematic. The way they voiced those objections would be.

[sirs]

The Judges point was that he had sensed a pattern of favorable plea deals that applied more to blacks than to other races. Whether that is true or not should be researched.

Irrelevent.  Justice is to be blind to race, gender, and so forth.  Law is law, and a judge is to judge based on the law at hand.  Only in a matter of transparant incopotence and/or gross infairness, should a pre-arranged plea between both parties be thrown out.  It's not the judges' place to "make a statement"

But you're right in that the judge's use of a derrogatory, significantly points to the inappropriate racial nature of his judgement

[Kramer]

The implication is that this White Judge is a racist. More probably because of his injudicious use of the word "blackie" than the basis for his rejection of the plea. We still don't know if historical data would back up his claims.

And if the situation were reversed I'm sure if a black judge said crackers were getting a better break than persons of color, there would be a cry for sanctions, or more likely an examination of the historical record to see if the charges were true.

On the face of it either judges objections would not be problematic. The way they voiced those objections would be.

In cases like these with white people facts never matter, it's just how and what was said (and usually taken totally out of context). I have seen case after case, time after time, when a white persons comments are made out to be racist by hypocritical Community Organizers.

It has happened to thousands of white people, and Conservatives in particular. To name a few Rush Limbaugh,
Trent Lott and Jimmy the Greek.

Yet Jesse Jackson, Obama, Rev Wright, Al Sharpton, Whoopi Goldberg, Eric Holder and the list goes on and on and on get away with REAL RACISM.

[BT]

Law is law, and a judge is to judge based on the law at hand.  Only in a matter of transparant incopotence and/or gross infairness, should a pre-arranged plea between both parties be thrown out.

Nonsense. A plea arrangement is not binding until it is accepted by the judge.

[sirs]

The Judge must accept the plea unless there is some gross unfairness or injustice being pulled.  It's not the job of a Judge to "make a statement"

[sirs]

And if the situation were reversed I'm sure if a black judge said crackers were getting a better break than persons of color, there would be a cry for sanctions, or more likely an examination of the historical record to see if the charges were true.

They were.  

I merely flip flopped the colors to see how little or not so little attention this would get.  I appreciate all for their assistance in helping to highlight this issue.  Especially note the non-cry for any sanctions or historical record examinations

[BT]

I see, so your original post was dishonest.

[sirs]

Yea, that has to be it, given the link I provided             Weak deflection, btw

[BT]

The Judge must accept the plea unless there is some gross unfairness or injustice being pulled.  It's not the job of a Judge to "make a statement"

Since when?

[BT]

Yea, that has to be it, given the link I provided             Weak deflection, btw

Do you think changing the text of an article is honest? Half the time i just mouse over links to see where the news came from. I don't always follow the link unless i am looking for links inside the original article.

[sirs]

The Judge must accept the plea unless there is some gross unfairness or injustice being pulled.  It's not the job of a Judge to "make a statement"

Since when?

Since Judges are supposed to judge the law as is.  Show me anywhere, where the function of a Judges is to ignore law to "make a statement"

Yea, that has to be it, given the link I provided             Weak deflection, btw

Do you think changing the text of an article is honest?

Absolutely, when one is trying to make a point.  You kindly helped in doing so, when you opined precisely the opposite of what did happen.  If I wanted to act dishonestly I wouldn't have provided a link....on purpose.  If I wanted to act dishonestly I would have altered the events, and again kept the link off.  I merely flipped colors, to watch how this judge gets condemned vs defended

Half the time i just mouse over links to see where the news came from. I don't always follow the link unless i am looking for links inside the original article.

And...........?

[BT]

Since Judges are supposed to judge the law as is.  Show me anywhere, where the function of a Judges is to ignore law to "make a statement"

First show me where prosecutors get to determine that a felony assault should be downgraded to a misdemeanor.

But the real answer to your question is that judges preside over the trial, including the entering of pleas.

[BT]

Quote from: BT on October 08, 2010, 10:58:04 PM
Half the time i just mouse over links to see where the news came from. I don't always follow the link unless i am looking for links inside the original article.

And...........?

And your practice of changing the text to articles is new behavior as far as i know. I guess i will have to start checking your links, as the trustworthiness of your postings is now suspect.