7 ms·

Genuinely, why does it matter? Why should the judge waste any attention on things like that, things that have zero significance to the matter at hand?

by tobr 5y ago

mmmBacon 5y ago
It does matter. These are serious matters and judges need respect for the court and the proceedings.
- tobr 5y ago
  The judge is the one who is obstructing the proceedings by needlessly scolding the defendant and bringing attention to an embarrassing mistake.
  - jjulius 5y ago
    Mistakes like this happen frequently whether the proceedings take place over Zoom, or in person in a courthouse. As multiple comments have pointed out, it's about showing a basic level of respect and awareness of your situation. This would be akin to accidentally showing up to a courtroom in a suit and forgetting that there's a decorative penis pin on your jacket because the last time you wore it you were at some sort of party. You clearly didn't care enough about your situation to dot your i's and cross your t's, and it suggests to the judge that you think this is a farce, mistake or not.
    - tobr 5y ago
      Sorry, but I still don’t see how it’s relevant. What’s the problem with having a decorative penis pin on your jacket? If that’s the way you like to dress, enjoy yourself! Why should we accept that a judge is letting themselves be so provoked by these insignificant things? That doesn’t sound to me like a person who is able to impartially evaluate the case based on the law.
      - jjulius 5y ago
        Five responses to your question have all said it shows a lack of respect for the judicial system and the situation one is in, and you are essentially spitting in the face of the judge. I truly don't know how to make it any clearer to you than that. But I must ask again; would you show up to any kind of disciplinary hearing for yourself with "Buttfucker 3000" showing on your name badge?
        clipradiowallet 5y ago
        Perhaps for the exact reason you are implying - lack of respect for the judge and/or process. People don't go to court because they "respect" the judicial process or the judge - they go because they are compelled by force or threats of force/imprisonment. That said... it seems foolish to disrespect the judge, not because he/she deserves respect, but because they can abuse their power and punish you over slights to their ego. It's the same reason you don't run your mouth at a cop during a traffic stop - they would likely wield their small authority over you in a way that you found unpleasant.
        tobr 5y ago
        You really don’t have to ask, because what I personally would it wouldn’t do in various situations has nothing to do with what’s an appropriate response for someone who’s job it is to impartially evaluate evidence. Even if the defendant literally did spit in the face of the judge, a good judge should not react in a way that would give anyone reason to think they let that affect their ruling.
        tester756 5y ago
        >Even if the defendant literally did spit in the face of the judge, a good judge should not react in a way that would give anyone reason to think they let that affect their ruling. uhh, depends on the case?
        kempbellt 5y ago
        Can't help but agree. There is no way to know that the defendant's Zoom screen-name was set intentionally, or even with his knowledge. Prior to showing up on the screen the judge was already leaking bias - "Then we'll bring this...fool in". While I am inclined to "assume" that it was done intentionally, assumptions is not what the judicial system is about. "Your name isn't Buttfucker 3000, you yol-hole" along with the initial remark are both incredibly unprofessional (and worrying) things to hear from a person who's literal job is to pass unbiased judgement. Name calling from a judge, really? Yes, the dude was probably being an ass, but it doesn't matter. The judge judged the guy without concrete evidence and displayed a ton of personal distaste and bias against the defendant over the following minutes. He should asked the defendant to fix his screen name and moved on. This is not the kind of behavior you want to see in a judge who presides over cases of any real meaning.
    - kempbellt 5y ago
      It's very easy to click a link and join a Zoom meeting without knowing what your screen name is set to ahead of time. HN is an echo chamber of tech-savvy people (myself included), but for anyone who's job isn't to work on a computer for 8 hours a day, this type of mistake can happen completely without intent. In regards to the "decorative penis pin" scenario. Benefit-of-the-doubt is a basic principle of the judicial system. It is completely feasible to do something like this unintentionally. A good judge should ask the pin be removed, and move on. If the defendant refuses to remove it, handle that situation appropriately. In this same video, the judge asked someone to remove their hat. The hat was removed, and everyone moved on. This is how professionals do their jobs.
jjulius 5y ago
If you knew you were in trouble at work, would you show up to your disciplinary hearing/meeting/whathaveyou with "Buttfucker 3000" written over your name on your badge in plain sight? The same thing generally applies to the courtroom - it's showing a lack of respect for, and understanding of, the situation one is in. Were a judge to think they may want to give an individual a lenient sentence, they may change their mind were they to find out that that individual is basically saying, "Fuck you and fuck all of this, I don't care."
- quantumBerry 5y ago
  The charge was for drug paraphernalia. There should be no respect at all of a tyrant enforcing such laws.
  - jjulius 5y ago
    I don't disagree with you in regards to the need to greatly reform how we handle and prosecute (or don't prosecute) drug-related crimes, but having said that, what is the judge to do? Ignore a law and sentencing guidelines entirely?
    - Sargos 5y ago
      If they had any morals yes. The fact that they sentence people to be held in cages for victimless crimes means they don't deserve the respect they needlessly demand from others.
      - quantumBerry 5y ago
        It's pretty clear HN isn't in support of even the notion that enforcement of victimless drug laws is tyrannical. This is a terrifying but accurate view of our current society.
        deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
gpm 5y ago
Consider that the only power a judge has is to say things, and write things. The legal system only works if enough people respect it and do things just because the judge said to do the thing. Our society only works if the legal system keeps working. Insisting that people respect the court is a large part of why this works. Even if maybe in some particular instance you could get away with not insisting on that, that's a dangerous experiment to run.
- quantumBerry 5y ago
  Our society would keep on working just fine if everyone disrespected judges who assist in the process of trying someone for the completely victimless crime of owning a syringe. I very much hope that part of the legal system collapses from lack of respect, if not by other means.
- gameshot911 5y ago
  I'd say the only important power is the ability to enforce their decisions. Respect makes things smoother, but is not necessary. And power alone will naturally command respect from most people.
- denton-scratch 5y ago
  s/legal/social/ The legal system is just a buttress for social norms and conventions; and if the latter break down, there's not much hope for the former. Of course, there are many legal issues that genuinely need lawyers and courts - for example, where there is real disagreement as to the meaning of a legal text such as a contract. But on the whole, the role of courts and lawyers is to tidy-up around the edges; if society only worked because of courts and lawyers, then it wouldn't really be working at all.
  - gpm 5y ago
    I'd describe the legal system as necessary, but not sufficient. The social system(s) the same.
rurp 5y ago
Do you think that all courtroom rules of decorum are wasteful or just Zoom screen names? Like, if someone showed up to an in-person hearing wearing assless chaps and a beer straw hat, would that be fine? I'm not big on formality in general but I think that there are times when it makes sense to expect people to present themselves with a basic level of respect.
- h2odragon 5y ago
  The run the air conditioning in those courtrooms at Arctic levels. the person in the assless chaps would freeze to the seats. So far as I've seen hats aren't allowed either. I'd be willing to claim it as a religious necessity.
psychlops 5y ago
It doesn't matter. And you can see the judge simply had him correct the mistake and proceedings moved on. It has nothing to do with respect, judges do not need to rely on soft power like that. But might impact everyone in the process and lead to a negative outcome.
Bud 5y ago
Is it that hard to figure out? Choosing a name like that, on purpose, obviously connotes a certain innate disrespect for the judicial process. That kind of obvious, blatant disrespect would not be tolerated in a traditional court proceeding. And it shouldn't be tolerated in an online proceeding, either.

Genuinely, why does it matter? Why should the judge waste any attention on things like that, things that have zero significance to the matter at hand?

by tobr 5y ago

Genuinely, why does it matter? Why should the judge waste any attention on things like that, things that have zero significance to the matter at hand?

mmmBacon 5y ago

It does matter. These are serious matters and judges need respect for the court and the proceedings.

tobr 5y ago
The judge is the one who is obstructing the proceedings by needlessly scolding the defendant and bringing attention to an embarrassing mistake.
- jjulius 5y ago
  Mistakes like this happen frequently whether the proceedings take place over Zoom, or in person in a courthouse. As multiple comments have pointed out, it's about showing a basic level of respect and awareness of your situation. This would be akin to accidentally showing up to a courtroom in a suit and forgetting that there's a decorative penis pin on your jacket because the last time you wore it you were at some sort of party. You clearly didn't care enough about your situation to dot your i's and cross your t's, and it suggests to the judge that you think this is a farce, mistake or not.
  - tobr 5y ago
    Sorry, but I still don’t see how it’s relevant. What’s the problem with having a decorative penis pin on your jacket? If that’s the way you like to dress, enjoy yourself! Why should we accept that a judge is letting themselves be so provoked by these insignificant things? That doesn’t sound to me like a person who is able to impartially evaluate the case based on the law.
    - jjulius 5y ago
      Five responses to your question have all said it shows a lack of respect for the judicial system and the situation one is in, and you are essentially spitting in the face of the judge. I truly don't know how to make it any clearer to you than that. But I must ask again; would you show up to any kind of disciplinary hearing for yourself with "Buttfucker 3000" showing on your name badge?
      - clipradiowallet 5y ago
        Perhaps for the exact reason you are implying - lack of respect for the judge and/or process. People don't go to court because they "respect" the judicial process or the judge - they go because they are compelled by force or threats of force/imprisonment. That said... it seems foolish to disrespect the judge, not because he/she deserves respect, but because they can abuse their power and punish you over slights to their ego. It's the same reason you don't run your mouth at a cop during a traffic stop - they would likely wield their small authority over you in a way that you found unpleasant.
      - tobr 5y ago
        You really don’t have to ask, because what I personally would it wouldn’t do in various situations has nothing to do with what’s an appropriate response for someone who’s job it is to impartially evaluate evidence. Even if the defendant literally did spit in the face of the judge, a good judge should not react in a way that would give anyone reason to think they let that affect their ruling.
        tester756 5y ago
        >Even if the defendant literally did spit in the face of the judge, a good judge should not react in a way that would give anyone reason to think they let that affect their ruling. uhh, depends on the case?
        kempbellt 5y ago
        Can't help but agree. There is no way to know that the defendant's Zoom screen-name was set intentionally, or even with his knowledge. Prior to showing up on the screen the judge was already leaking bias - "Then we'll bring this...fool in". While I am inclined to "assume" that it was done intentionally, assumptions is not what the judicial system is about. "Your name isn't Buttfucker 3000, you yol-hole" along with the initial remark are both incredibly unprofessional (and worrying) things to hear from a person who's literal job is to pass unbiased judgement. Name calling from a judge, really? Yes, the dude was probably being an ass, but it doesn't matter. The judge judged the guy without concrete evidence and displayed a ton of personal distaste and bias against the defendant over the following minutes. He should asked the defendant to fix his screen name and moved on. This is not the kind of behavior you want to see in a judge who presides over cases of any real meaning.
  - kempbellt 5y ago
    It's very easy to click a link and join a Zoom meeting without knowing what your screen name is set to ahead of time. HN is an echo chamber of tech-savvy people (myself included), but for anyone who's job isn't to work on a computer for 8 hours a day, this type of mistake can happen completely without intent. In regards to the "decorative penis pin" scenario. Benefit-of-the-doubt is a basic principle of the judicial system. It is completely feasible to do something like this unintentionally. A good judge should ask the pin be removed, and move on. If the defendant refuses to remove it, handle that situation appropriately. In this same video, the judge asked someone to remove their hat. The hat was removed, and everyone moved on. This is how professionals do their jobs.

jjulius 5y ago

If you knew you were in trouble at work, would you show up to your disciplinary hearing/meeting/whathaveyou with "Buttfucker 3000" written over your name on your badge in plain sight? The same thing generally applies to the courtroom - it's showing a lack of respect for, and understanding of, the situation one is in. Were a judge to think they may want to give an individual a lenient sentence, they may change their mind were they to find out that that individual is basically saying, "Fuck you and fuck all of this, I don't care."

quantumBerry 5y ago
The charge was for drug paraphernalia. There should be no respect at all of a tyrant enforcing such laws.
- jjulius 5y ago
  I don't disagree with you in regards to the need to greatly reform how we handle and prosecute (or don't prosecute) drug-related crimes, but having said that, what is the judge to do? Ignore a law and sentencing guidelines entirely?
  - Sargos 5y ago
    If they had any morals yes. The fact that they sentence people to be held in cages for victimless crimes means they don't deserve the respect they needlessly demand from others.
    - quantumBerry 5y ago
      It's pretty clear HN isn't in support of even the notion that enforcement of victimless drug laws is tyrannical. This is a terrifying but accurate view of our current society.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]

gpm 5y ago

Consider that the only power a judge has is to say things, and write things. The legal system only works if enough people respect it and do things just because the judge said to do the thing. Our society only works if the legal system keeps working. Insisting that people respect the court is a large part of why this works. Even if maybe in some particular instance you could get away with not insisting on that, that's a dangerous experiment to run.

quantumBerry 5y ago
Our society would keep on working just fine if everyone disrespected judges who assist in the process of trying someone for the completely victimless crime of owning a syringe. I very much hope that part of the legal system collapses from lack of respect, if not by other means.
gameshot911 5y ago
I'd say the only important power is the ability to enforce their decisions. Respect makes things smoother, but is not necessary. And power alone will naturally command respect from most people.
denton-scratch 5y ago
s/legal/social/ The legal system is just a buttress for social norms and conventions; and if the latter break down, there's not much hope for the former. Of course, there are many legal issues that genuinely need lawyers and courts - for example, where there is real disagreement as to the meaning of a legal text such as a contract. But on the whole, the role of courts and lawyers is to tidy-up around the edges; if society only worked because of courts and lawyers, then it wouldn't really be working at all.
- gpm 5y ago
  I'd describe the legal system as necessary, but not sufficient. The social system(s) the same.

rurp 5y ago

Do you think that all courtroom rules of decorum are wasteful or just Zoom screen names? Like, if someone showed up to an in-person hearing wearing assless chaps and a beer straw hat, would that be fine? I'm not big on formality in general but I think that there are times when it makes sense to expect people to present themselves with a basic level of respect.

h2odragon 5y ago
The run the air conditioning in those courtrooms at Arctic levels. the person in the assless chaps would freeze to the seats. So far as I've seen hats aren't allowed either. I'd be willing to claim it as a religious necessity.

psychlops 5y ago

It doesn't matter. And you can see the judge simply had him correct the mistake and proceedings moved on. It has nothing to do with respect, judges do not need to rely on soft power like that. But might impact everyone in the process and lead to a negative outcome.

Bud 5y ago

Is it that hard to figure out? Choosing a name like that, on purpose, obviously connotes a certain innate disrespect for the judicial process. That kind of obvious, blatant disrespect would not be tolerated in a traditional court proceeding. And it shouldn't be tolerated in an online proceeding, either.