You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login

Reply #26: Hmm judge of color A kicks out anyone not color A [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
DadOf2LittleAngels Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Mar-29-08 05:14 PM
Response to Reply #21
26. Hmm judge of color A kicks out anyone not color A
Edited on Sat Mar-29-08 05:21 PM by DadOf2LittleAngels
Seems pretty cut and dry that it *is* the same thing..

If he wanted to give a speech that whites might find offensive with that I take *no* issue... But we gave up segreted courtrooms in this nation and they should stay gone..
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
  -Judge Orders Whites Out Of Atlanta Court Mugu  Mar-29-08 04:15 PM   #0 
  - I don't see anything wrong in the judge's actions  slackmaster   Mar-29-08 04:18 PM   #1 
  - Hmm kicking people out of a public courtroom because of their race  DadOf2LittleAngels   Mar-29-08 04:20 PM   #4 
  - As long as he didn't base a judicial decision on race and it was just temporary  slackmaster   Mar-29-08 04:23 PM   #5 
  - He's already established that he's motivated by race. His decisions are now suspect.  mondo joe   Mar-29-08 04:32 PM   #14 
  - Judges have a lot of leeway to do things most people couldn't, and get away with it  slackmaster   Mar-29-08 04:41 PM   #16 
  - They have no right but to decide the law  treestar   Mar-29-08 05:30 PM   #27 
  - but...  selador   Mar-29-08 07:51 PM   #46 
  - Yeah, right. Inappropriate. Racism. That's the ticket. n/t  Hannah Bell   Mar-29-08 06:30 PM   #40 
  - So?  Better Believe It   Mar-30-08 08:06 PM   #95 
     - Why are you conflating private citizens with a judge in office acting on behalf of government?  mondo joe   Mar-30-08 08:12 PM   #96 
  - Horse Crap...  DadOf2LittleAngels   Mar-29-08 05:10 PM   #23 
     - I have no doubt that much of DU would be gathering torches and pitchforks if that happened  slackmaster   Mar-30-08 10:36 AM   #76 
  - He kicked them out because of their profession  Warpy   Mar-29-08 04:55 PM   #18 
  - No he kicked them out because they were *white* lawyers  DadOf2LittleAngels   Mar-29-08 05:11 PM   #24 
  - Watch that weasel word  Warpy   Mar-29-08 07:07 PM   #43 
  - Baloney, they had a right to counsel  treestar   Mar-29-08 05:32 PM   #28 
     - EXACTLY: they had a right to counsel  Elspeth   Mar-30-08 04:04 AM   #72 
        - What happened while the lawyers were out?  wpelb   Mar-30-08 01:25 PM   #82 
  - i'll give him that  selador   Mar-29-08 07:50 PM   #45 
  - You have got to be kidding. What would you say if a judge kicked  lizzy   Mar-29-08 04:23 PM   #6 
     - You mean for a brief time, so he could rant and rave at some white defendants?  slackmaster   Mar-29-08 04:28 PM   #8 
     - Pardon me if I don't believe you.  lizzy   Mar-29-08 04:30 PM   #11 
        - Take it up with the Moderators if you think I am not telling the truth  slackmaster   Mar-29-08 04:31 PM   #12 
           - Deleted message  Name removed   Mar-29-08 05:13 PM   #25 
           - They DO NOT! They must follow the rules of court.  treestar   Mar-29-08 05:33 PM   #29 
              - Yes, judges do have to follow the law and rules of the court. So please explain...  slackmaster   Mar-30-08 10:37 AM   #77 
     - It's not the same thing.  Marr   Mar-29-08 05:07 PM   #21 
        - Hmm judge of color A kicks out anyone not color A  DadOf2LittleAngels   Mar-29-08 05:14 PM   #26 
  - Gee, nice of him to give shit to all those defendants.  JBoy   Mar-29-08 04:19 PM   #2 
  - There could also be an issue about a judge speaking to defendants  Mugu   Mar-29-08 04:29 PM   #9 
  - I agree with you about that Mugu  slackmaster   Mar-29-08 04:48 PM   #17 
     - I believe that his heart is/was pure,  Mugu   Mar-29-08 05:01 PM   #19 
  - Nothing he did qualifies as extrajudicial punishment  slackmaster   Mar-29-08 04:29 PM   #10 
     - No, they aren't  treestar   Mar-29-08 05:34 PM   #30 
        - You seem to have a very strange notion of what judges are and do.  chixydix   Mar-29-08 06:18 PM   #38 
        - So you think they are tyrants? No, they have to follow the law  treestar   Mar-29-08 07:55 PM   #50 
           - Would you care to comment on the Lawrence vs. Texas (sodomy) decision?  chixydix   Mar-29-08 08:22 PM   #60 
              - A judge can easily be found to be in error about the law, by a  treestar   Mar-29-08 08:31 PM   #67 
        - oh yes they are  selador   Mar-29-08 07:53 PM   #48 
           - They may BE dicks, but the law does not ALLOW them to be  treestar   Mar-29-08 07:57 PM   #51 
              - yes it does  selador   Mar-29-08 08:07 PM   #54 
                 - A judge's function is to rule on questions of the law  treestar   Mar-29-08 08:11 PM   #55 
                    - nice dodge  selador   Mar-29-08 08:18 PM   #58 
                    - The law says they rule on questions of law  treestar   Mar-29-08 08:28 PM   #64 
                       - again  selador   Mar-29-08 11:07 PM   #70 
                          - The Constitution says the defendants have a right to counsel  Elspeth   Mar-30-08 04:06 AM   #73 
                             - Let's all review the Sixth Amendment together  slackmaster   Mar-30-08 10:41 AM   #78 
                                - It's pretty much implied. If the judge and jury represent the institutional arbiters of guilt  Elspeth   Mar-30-08 01:17 PM   #80 
                                   - Defendants and suspects have a right to counsel when they are being questioned  slackmaster   Mar-30-08 05:34 PM   #92 
                                      - There is always the possibility of defendants harming their ability to defend themselves  Elspeth   Mar-31-08 12:49 AM   #98 
                                         - They can also harm their ability to defend themselves when they are sitting in jail  slackmaster   Mar-31-08 09:55 AM   #99 
                                            - Not necessarily. They don't deal with any officials without their lawyers.  Elspeth   Mar-31-08 07:33 PM   #101 
                    - How sad you younger kids never took Civics 101.  chixydix   Mar-29-08 08:24 PM   #61 
                       - You must not know the first thing about the law  treestar   Mar-29-08 08:29 PM   #66 
                          - actually both  selador   Mar-29-08 11:12 PM   #71 
  - No excuse for this madness...  DadOf2LittleAngels   Mar-29-08 04:19 PM   #3 
  - I think his intentions were honorable, but...  cynatnite   Mar-29-08 04:26 PM   #7 
  - I don't believe for a moment that his intentions were anything but honorable.  Mugu   Mar-29-08 04:31 PM   #13 
  - I think the judge did a good thing, and I would love to hear his speech.  napi21   Mar-29-08 04:40 PM   #15 
  - The article says that there were still some lawyers present.  murielm99   Mar-29-08 05:06 PM   #20 
  - He is wasting taxpayer time  treestar   Mar-29-08 05:35 PM   #31 
     - Uh, having opinions is what we pay judges to do.  chixydix   Mar-29-08 05:52 PM   #32 
        - Opinions regarding THE LAW, not just his ordinary  treestar   Mar-29-08 06:07 PM   #33 
           - Perhaps you can cite what law he broke...? Or not.  chixydix   Mar-29-08 06:17 PM   #37 
              - Easy. In the procedural law, there is no occasion to kick all the  treestar   Mar-29-08 07:42 PM   #44 
                 - you take it too far  selador   Mar-29-08 07:54 PM   #49 
                    - Just because they often do it does not make it their place  treestar   Mar-29-08 07:59 PM   #52 
                       - i didn't say it was their "place". i said they were PERMITTED to  selador   Mar-29-08 08:06 PM   #53 
                          - They are not permitted  treestar   Mar-29-08 08:13 PM   #57 
                             - exactly. just as i suspected.  selador   Mar-29-08 08:20 PM   #59 
                                - You and your colleagues are simply too weak to protest  treestar   Mar-29-08 08:27 PM   #63 
                                   - backpedaling noted  selador   Mar-29-08 11:06 PM   #69 
  - He needs to be on the Supreme Court.  chixydix   Mar-29-08 05:07 PM   #22 
  - Did he conduct any business while whites were excluded?  lumberjack_jeff   Mar-29-08 06:09 PM   #34 
  - Which it couldn't be. A white judge, a 300-year history of race-based  Hannah Bell   Mar-29-08 06:35 PM   #41 
  - Going to wonder how much longer he will be on the bench with that kind of attitude and behavior  MaryCeleste   Mar-29-08 06:15 PM   #35 
  - it`s his court room  madrchsod   Mar-29-08 06:16 PM   #36 
  - My thinking exactly  wain   Mar-29-08 07:03 PM   #42 
  - It is the State's courtroom!  treestar   Mar-29-08 07:53 PM   #47 
  - well he`s a rather interesting guy  madrchsod   Mar-29-08 06:29 PM   #39 
  - He's also a former Atlanta City Council president  deadmessengers   Mar-29-08 08:12 PM   #56 
  - Sounds like he was just  graycem   Mar-29-08 08:27 PM   #62 
  - "The law to the letter, M. Valjean! Good, bad, or indifferent."  nathan hale   Mar-29-08 08:29 PM   #65 
  - "some point time I excused some of the lawyers, most of them white, "  uppityperson   Mar-29-08 08:47 PM   #68 
  - good on him.  ulysses   Mar-30-08 06:42 AM   #74 
  - I have always wanted to say to a judge, who in the hell are you to judge anyone!  B Calm   Mar-30-08 06:53 AM   #75 
  - Or "Judge not, lest ye be judged!"  slackmaster   Mar-30-08 10:42 AM   #79 
  - Reverse racism! squawk! Revese racism! squawk!  BlooInBloo   Mar-30-08 01:20 PM   #81 
  - There's no such thing as "reverse racism". There's just racism.  Donald Ian Rankin   Mar-30-08 06:35 PM   #93 
  - Thank You!  Better Believe It   Mar-30-08 08:16 PM   #97 
  - Anything you say to me, Your Honor, should be in the presence of my lawyer.  Orsino   Mar-30-08 01:47 PM   #83 
  - You hit the nose on the head there.  readmoreoften   Apr-01-08 01:46 AM   #105 
  - What an idiot  Dreamer Tatum   Mar-30-08 01:53 PM   #84 
  - what court business was conducted w/out the lawyers?  ulysses   Mar-30-08 01:56 PM   #85 
     - That's exactly what I'd like to know  Dreamer Tatum   Mar-30-08 02:00 PM   #86 
     - he wasn't alone with them.  ulysses   Mar-30-08 02:22 PM   #87 
        - I'm not sure any law was violated, since he didn't talk to anyone  Turner Ashby   Mar-30-08 02:44 PM   #88 
           - I appreciate him  ulysses   Mar-30-08 02:56 PM   #89 
     - No Lawyers????  Unrepentant Fenian   Mar-30-08 04:09 PM   #90 
  - seems to me that all he did was talk to the defendants without their attorneys  zonmoy   Mar-30-08 04:13 PM   #91 
  - Yeah, that's not his job. NT  baby_mouse   Apr-01-08 02:02 AM   #106 
  - Racist shitbag of a judge.  Ordr   Mar-30-08 08:03 PM   #94 
  - The apologists and justifiers  BoneDaddy   Mar-31-08 10:22 AM   #100 
  - I don't see this as such a big deal.  nomorenomore08   Apr-01-08 12:59 AM   #102 
  - What's next, all black courts and all white courts?  bamalib   Apr-01-08 01:19 AM   #103 
  - Hope no light-skinned black folks got manhandled out of the room.  readmoreoften   Apr-01-08 01:45 AM   #104 

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC