5 ms·

What I don't understand (from watching the video from outside the house) is why the cop helped the judge enter the house after the owner of the house pointed ou

by dekhn 3y ago

What I don't understand (from watching the video from outside the house) is why the cop helped the judge enter the house after the owner of the house pointed out she didn't have a warrant, and didn't prevent the ex from taking thiings from the house. I would have expected- naively, of course- that once it was pointed out that the judge was trespassing, didn't have a warrant, and wasn't allowed to do this, the cop would have stopped her.

JumpCrisscross 3y ago
> why the cop helped the judge enter the house after the owner of the house pointed out she didn't have a warrant I can understand a non-lawyer deferring to the lawyer (and judge) in their midst. If I were with my (non-judge) lawyer and they started doing something surprising, my first instinct wouldn't be to restrain them.
- JoeAltmaier 3y ago
  Especially since judges write warrants. It was a technicality from that point of view?
  - sandworm101 3y ago
    No. A basic idea of any warrant is that you need two people to do something. If judges can write, sign and execute warrants, then we are into Judge Dred territory. There is also a general principal that lawyers and judges should not turn themselves into witnesses. This judge just made herself a witness should any siezed material need be debated in court. Judges dont attend lineups or medical tests, nor should they attened searches.
    - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
      All very true. But speaking just to the issue being asked here, why didn't anybody respond to a search being warrantless, the presence of the judge may have muddied that for the reason I suggested. Everything else was fucked up, as you say.
- dekhn 3y ago
  Not restrain the judge. Again, I'm naive here- but I still would have expected the cop to say "Hey judge, can we talk for a second? If I underestand correctly, judges cannot perform law enforcement duty, and more importantly, there is no warrant permitting you to enter. How about we go back to the office and discuss this more widely with the police chief, as I don't feel comfortable possibly abetting you breaking the law. If it turns out it's OK, we can return later to obtain the items." My guess is the cop was simply ignorant of the law and more than happy to help the judge, ignorantly. But I'm curious if we was sanctioned or if ther was any consequence to him at all.
pjc50 3y ago
lol All these people think hierarchy first, text second; if the judge is ordering it, that's sufficient for it to be legal. Especially in a small town.
- 77pt77 3y ago
  Well, they are right. De facto it's exactly like that.
- Crunchified 3y ago
  Exactly. After all, who do the police go to in order to obtain a search warrant? A judge, of course! To the police (and bailiffs, too, I would think), the judiciary is the source of all their powers.
dragonwriter 3y ago
From the description in the article, the cop was a bailiff—a law enforcement officer working for the court to enforce the orders of the judge.
- dekhn 3y ago
  Yes, but -- again, naively, this is not my area of expertise- I still would have expected a bailiff, when presented with a reasonable argument that the judge would be doing something illegal, to not escort the judge into the house unquestioningly. Already I think bailiffs are normally mostly limited to courthouse?
  - dragonwriter 3y ago
    > Yes, but -- again, naively, this is not my area of expertise- I still would have expected a bailiff, when presented with a reasonable argument that the judge would be doing something illegal, to not escort the judge into the house unquestioningly. Bailiffs' jobs are literally to provide immediate enforcement of the judges determinations of what is lawful. The normal expectation is that any legal arguments will be presented to and resolved (conclusively, for purposes of the bailiff, as any appeal will be after the execution of any orders) by the judge. > Already I think bailiffs are normally mostly limited to courthouse? Judges mostly work in the courthouse, but bailiffs aren't generally, that I know of, limited to it so much as that being normally where they are needed by virtue of where court work tends to happen.
  - 3c6bYDXLMj 3y ago
    [flagged]
qingcharles 3y ago
LOL. No officer wants to fight a contempt charge from an angry judge. A judge ordered me arrested without issuing a warrant and it cost me three years. Only yesterday did I try a FOIA to get a copy of the non-existent warrant, here was the reply: "Please be advised that we conducted a diligent search based on the information you provided. However, no records were found in response to your request."
- justinclift 3y ago
  Wow. What's your next step? Are you able to get compensation, or have the judge officially censured or something?
  - qingcharles 3y ago
    No, judicial absolute immunity protects him in this case from civil suit.
- giantg2 3y ago
  How did it take 3 years?
  - danielheath 3y ago
    Have you ever dealt with a court? 3 months to get a court date, and the other party can find all manner of grounds to have the case put off until later on the day (so you need another 3 months).
    - giantg2 3y ago
      Yes, I have dealt with courts. How exactly did they even get a court date without any documentation?
      - qingcharles 3y ago
        There was an indictment. I was going to court regularly for the case, there just wasn't any warrant for my arrest or any bond set because I had never failed to attend a court appearance.
__derek__ 3y ago
Yes, that's a naive view of American law enforcement.
giantg2 3y ago
"is why the cop helped the judge enter the house after the owner of the house pointed out she didn't have a warrant," Because judges can ruin cops lives too. There's virtually no oversight of judges. They granted themselves such secrecy that even if their disciplinary files have exculpatory evidence, you're not allowed to subpoena it. And the discipline is usually only related to egregious acts of misconduct. Stuff like incompetence or bending the rules or being inconsistent is basically ignored. Plenty of videos online of judges being let out of reaffic stops and such while being assholes about it too.

by dekhn 3y ago

JumpCrisscross 3y ago

> why the cop helped the judge enter the house after the owner of the house pointed out she didn't have a warrant I can understand a non-lawyer deferring to the lawyer (and judge) in their midst. If I were with my (non-judge) lawyer and they started doing something surprising, my first instinct wouldn't be to restrain them.

JoeAltmaier 3y ago
Especially since judges write warrants. It was a technicality from that point of view?
- sandworm101 3y ago
  No. A basic idea of any warrant is that you need two people to do something. If judges can write, sign and execute warrants, then we are into Judge Dred territory. There is also a general principal that lawyers and judges should not turn themselves into witnesses. This judge just made herself a witness should any siezed material need be debated in court. Judges dont attend lineups or medical tests, nor should they attened searches.
  - JoeAltmaier 3y ago
    All very true. But speaking just to the issue being asked here, why didn't anybody respond to a search being warrantless, the presence of the judge may have muddied that for the reason I suggested. Everything else was fucked up, as you say.
dekhn 3y ago
Not restrain the judge. Again, I'm naive here- but I still would have expected the cop to say "Hey judge, can we talk for a second? If I underestand correctly, judges cannot perform law enforcement duty, and more importantly, there is no warrant permitting you to enter. How about we go back to the office and discuss this more widely with the police chief, as I don't feel comfortable possibly abetting you breaking the law. If it turns out it's OK, we can return later to obtain the items." My guess is the cop was simply ignorant of the law and more than happy to help the judge, ignorantly. But I'm curious if we was sanctioned or if ther was any consequence to him at all.

pjc50 3y ago

lol All these people think hierarchy first, text second; if the judge is ordering it, that's sufficient for it to be legal. Especially in a small town.

77pt77 3y ago
Well, they are right. De facto it's exactly like that.
Crunchified 3y ago
Exactly. After all, who do the police go to in order to obtain a search warrant? A judge, of course! To the police (and bailiffs, too, I would think), the judiciary is the source of all their powers.

dragonwriter 3y ago

From the description in the article, the cop was a bailiff—a law enforcement officer working for the court to enforce the orders of the judge.

dekhn 3y ago
Yes, but -- again, naively, this is not my area of expertise- I still would have expected a bailiff, when presented with a reasonable argument that the judge would be doing something illegal, to not escort the judge into the house unquestioningly. Already I think bailiffs are normally mostly limited to courthouse?
- dragonwriter 3y ago
  > Yes, but -- again, naively, this is not my area of expertise- I still would have expected a bailiff, when presented with a reasonable argument that the judge would be doing something illegal, to not escort the judge into the house unquestioningly. Bailiffs' jobs are literally to provide immediate enforcement of the judges determinations of what is lawful. The normal expectation is that any legal arguments will be presented to and resolved (conclusively, for purposes of the bailiff, as any appeal will be after the execution of any orders) by the judge. > Already I think bailiffs are normally mostly limited to courthouse? Judges mostly work in the courthouse, but bailiffs aren't generally, that I know of, limited to it so much as that being normally where they are needed by virtue of where court work tends to happen.
- 3c6bYDXLMj 3y ago
  [flagged]

qingcharles 3y ago

LOL. No officer wants to fight a contempt charge from an angry judge. A judge ordered me arrested without issuing a warrant and it cost me three years. Only yesterday did I try a FOIA to get a copy of the non-existent warrant, here was the reply: "Please be advised that we conducted a diligent search based on the information you provided. However, no records were found in response to your request."

justinclift 3y ago
Wow. What's your next step? Are you able to get compensation, or have the judge officially censured or something?
- qingcharles 3y ago
  No, judicial absolute immunity protects him in this case from civil suit.
giantg2 3y ago
How did it take 3 years?
- danielheath 3y ago
  Have you ever dealt with a court? 3 months to get a court date, and the other party can find all manner of grounds to have the case put off until later on the day (so you need another 3 months).
  - giantg2 3y ago
    Yes, I have dealt with courts. How exactly did they even get a court date without any documentation?
    - qingcharles 3y ago
      There was an indictment. I was going to court regularly for the case, there just wasn't any warrant for my arrest or any bond set because I had never failed to attend a court appearance.

__derek__ 3y ago

Yes, that's a naive view of American law enforcement.

giantg2 3y ago

"is why the cop helped the judge enter the house after the owner of the house pointed out she didn't have a warrant," Because judges can ruin cops lives too. There's virtually no oversight of judges. They granted themselves such secrecy that even if their disciplinary files have exculpatory evidence, you're not allowed to subpoena it. And the discipline is usually only related to egregious acts of misconduct. Stuff like incompetence or bending the rules or being inconsistent is basically ignored. Plenty of videos online of judges being let out of reaffic stops and such while being assholes about it too.