Judge caught posting sexist racist remarks on Message Board (1 Viewer)

[bosoxs45]

link

better link

He brings a record already marked by a past discipline by the state Ethics Commission for expenditure of campaign money on personal expenses. He was also written up by the Conway Log Cabin Democrat for flashing a badge at a state trooper during a speeding stop. And he’s had a variety of financial mishaps — tax liens and a mortgage in arrears. We’ve focused on him more recently for a remarkable write-down of a unanimous jury verdict in a nursing home malpractice case. He said he was shocked by the $5 million verdict for pain and suffering of a woman left untreated by the nursing home and reduced the award to $1 million. He’s received a third of the money he’s raised for his campaign so far from nursing homes, with help from UCA lobbyist Gilbert Baker, who contends he’s working on his own time as a bundler of money for conservative judicial candidates and Republican legislative candidates.

 

[fatness]

He certainly has lots of opinions on women

http://www.bluehogreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014-03-02-20-22-46.png

http://www.bluehogreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014-03-02-15-52-46.png

http://www.bluehogreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2014-03-02-22-32-41.png

 

[SacramentoBob]

So...

I didn't see anything particularly damning about the first post. Some of the later stuff, sure. But I don't see how "Yep." qualifies as "veiled racism".

 

[NCCommish]

Real winner there

 

[fatness]

Though the formal allegations against Maggio are confidential, JDDC Executive Director David Sachar said on Monday that it did involve misuse of confidential information and “impropriety or the appearance of impropriety.”

Canon 1 of the Arkansas Code of Judicial Conduct requires judges to “uphold and promote the independence, integrity, and impartiality of the judiciary, [and] avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety.” Canon 3 requires judges to “conduct [their] personal and extrajudicial activities to minimize the risk of conflict with the obligations of judicial office.”

The Code of Judicial Conduct also contains official commentary to guide its application. Before speaking or writing about a social or political issue, the official comment to Rule 3.1 states, “judges should consider the impact of their statements. Comments may suggest that the judge lacks impartiality [or] … may create the impression that a judge has or manifests bias or prejudice toward individuals with contrary social or political views.”

“Public comments may require the judge to disqualify himself or herself when litigation involving those issues comes before the judge.”

http://thecabin.net/news/local/2014-03-05/how-investigation-process-works-maggio-case

 

[IvanKaramazov]

better link

The stuff in there that allegedly makes him sexist is pretty weak. All of those posts could appear in this forum and would attract a few responses.

Some of the other stuff is definitely racist. But the author is reaching really hard elsewhere.

 

[NCCommish]

better link

The stuff in there that allegedly makes him sexist is pretty weak. All of those posts could appear in this forum and would attract a few responses.

Some of the other stuff is definitely racist. But the author is reaching really hard elsewhere.

He's a judge that makes a difference and puts them into a different context than you or I saying those things.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

better link

The stuff in there that allegedly makes him sexist is pretty weak. All of those posts could appear in this forum and would attract a few responses.

Some of the other stuff is definitely racist. But the author is reaching really hard elsewhere.

He's a judge that makes a difference and puts them into a different context than you or I saying those things.

Nah, I don't think judges need to be humorless.

 

[SacramentoBob]

better link

The stuff in there that allegedly makes him sexist is pretty weak. All of those posts could appear in this forum and would attract a few responses.

Some of the other stuff is definitely racist. But the author is reaching really hard elsewhere.

Yeah a lot of FFA material there.

 

[NCCommish]

better link

The stuff in there that allegedly makes him sexist is pretty weak. All of those posts could appear in this forum and would attract a few responses.

Some of the other stuff is definitely racist. But the author is reaching really hard elsewhere.

He's a judge that makes a difference and puts them into a different context than you or I saying those things.

Nah, I don't think judges need to be humorless.

Yeah when their humor includes things like I don't give alimony because women should know better that isn't really funny coming from someone in a position of power to make those decisions. Kind of comes with the job.

 

[Rove!]

Some of that stuff is hilarious...esp the the digs on Arkansas...

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Yeah when their humor includes things like I don't give alimony because women should know better that isn't really funny coming from someone in a position of power to make those decisions. Kind of comes with the job.

I don't think that particular post was really a joke. I think he was explaining his view on awarding alimony. I have no problem with that at all. Like you said, a judge has the power to make those sorts of decisions. As a citizen, I'd like to know how he thinks about those issues.

Edit: I assume you're talking about this one:

The interesting thing I hear all the time at divorce time: he works all the time. He doesn't take care of my needs. That is why he needs to pay me $)).

I usually say. You married the alpha male make for a reason. Because he was a leader. Somebody has to keep the circus afloat. I don't order alimony except in really really really rare cases.

There's nothing wrong with that IMO except for the mixed metaphor (circuses don't float).

 

[Insein]

For all we know Eminence could be a judge.

 

[Plorfu]

Yeah when their humor includes things like I don't give alimony because women should know better that isn't really funny coming from someone in a position of power to make those decisions. Kind of comes with the job.

I don't think that particular post was really a joke. I think he was explaining his view on awarding alimony. I have no problem with that at all. Like you said, a judge has the power to make those sorts of decisions. As a citizen, I'd like to know how he thinks about those issues.

Edit: I assume you're talking about this one:

The interesting thing I hear all the time at divorce time: he works all the time. He doesn't take care of my needs. That is why he needs to pay me $)).

I usually say. You married the alpha male make for a reason. Because he was a leader. Somebody has to keep the circus afloat. I don't order alimony except in really really really rare cases.

There's nothing wrong with that IMO except for the mixed metaphor (circuses don't float).

http://media-cache-ec0.pinimg.com/736x/ad/1a/53/ad1a537de8f637ca23c9fd6ed81cfcf5.jpg

 

[Clifford]

This is why I don't give someone credit just because they are a judge. Schooling doesn't affect character flaws.

 

[Rove!]

I think this is a slippery slope. suppose somebody from the FFA wanted to be a judge or run for office...somebody could go into the "unpopular opinions" thread and make them try to defend and be judged on an unpopular opinion. People make off-color jokes and say things that may be inappropriate or incorrect all of the time. It's part of being human - flaws and all. If people are going to start stalking people based on things they post online, then that would have a chilling affect. So, in a sense, I find these bloggers and online "detectives " more disturbing than anything GeauxJudge has posted.

 

[Clifford]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

 

[Rove!]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

because you'll never know when you'll be painted in a bad light by a bunch of holier-than-thou, self-righteous, vindictive busybodies....

 

[igbomb]

I think this is a slippery slope. suppose somebody from the FFA wanted to be a judge or run for office...somebody could go into the "unpopular opinions" thread and make them try to defend and be judged on an unpopular opinion. People make off-color jokes and say things that may be inappropriate or incorrect all of the time. It's part of being human - flaws and all. If people are going to start stalking people based on things they post online, then that would have a chilling affect. So, in a sense, I find these bloggers and online "detectives " more disturbing than anything GeauxJudge has posted.

If you publish an opinion online, you open yourself up to be judged by it. I think that's pretty well understood going in.

It's not a slippery slope at all.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

Good Posting Judge?

Judge Smails?

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

The disclosure of potentially confidential information is a serious issue, but I think there is actually an interesting argument about those Judicial Ethics Rules that state that a Judge shouldn't act in such a way that might makes someone question his or her impartiality.

If Judge Maggio is a sexist or a racist, or if he doesn't care about the law, isn't it better that we know about these things? Particularly if he's an elected judge? The guy could well be a slimeball, but it's just a weird rule that says that judges can be slimeballs, but they shouldn't give the public appearance of being a slimeball.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

The disclosure of potentially confidential information is a serious issue, but I think there is actually an interesting argument about those Judicial Ethics Rules that state that a Judge shouldn't act in such a way that might makes someone question his or her impartiality.

If Judge Maggio is a sexist or a racist, or if he doesn't care about the law, isn't it better that we know about these things? Particularly if he's an elected judge? The guy could well be a slimeball, but it's just a weird rule that says that judges can be slimeballs, but they shouldn't give the public appearance of being a slimeball.

Any thoughts on this? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/nyregion/judge-resigns-when-told-he-cant-also-be-a-comic.html?_r=0

A New Jersey municipal judge who is also an established stand-up comedian and actor resigned on Thursday after the State Supreme Court ruled he cannot moonlight as an entertainer.
The judge, Vince A. Sicari, said he tendered his resignation after the court released a unanimous opinion that said his acting and comedy career was “incompatible” with judicial conduct codes and essentially gave him the choice of doing one or the other.

 

[jwp]

I've thought about a scenario like this before. Someone will hack into google or a corrupt google employee will do it. They will have every email, search, message board post, etc. for someone important and they will blackmail them.

 

[Rove!]

I've thought about a scenario like this before. Someone will hack into google or a corrupt google employee will do it. They will have every email, search, message board post, etc. for someone important and they will blackmail them.

whose to say it hasn't happened before?

we know that somebody hacked into Sarah Palin's email. Newt Gingrich had his cell phone converstions recored and published by polictical activists who just happened to catch it on a scanner. Obama, Mccain and hillary had their State Dept files breached by a contractor firm.

There may be others that we just don't know about...

 

[Clifford]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

because you'll never know when you'll be painted in a bad light by a bunch of holier-than-thou, self-righteous, vindictive busybodies....

Exactly. Comes with the territory and a good reason to never get involved in politics.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

The disclosure of potentially confidential information is a serious issue, but I think there is actually an interesting argument about those Judicial Ethics Rules that state that a Judge shouldn't act in such a way that might makes someone question his or her impartiality.

If Judge Maggio is a sexist or a racist, or if he doesn't care about the law, isn't it better that we know about these things? Particularly if he's an elected judge? The guy could well be a slimeball, but it's just a weird rule that says that judges can be slimeballs, but they shouldn't give the public appearance of being a slimeball.

Any thoughts on this? http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/20/nyregion/judge-resigns-when-told-he-cant-also-be-a-comic.html?_r=0

A New Jersey municipal judge who is also an established stand-up comedian and actor resigned on Thursday after the State Supreme Court ruled he cannot moonlight as an entertainer.
The judge, Vince A. Sicari, said he tendered his resignation after the court released a unanimous opinion that said his acting and comedy career was “incompatible” with judicial conduct codes and essentially gave him the choice of doing one or the other.

I suppose I'd find out by reading the link, but I'd want to know if the basis for the ethics opinion was the appearance of impropriety or whether it was conflict of interest. I think there's something to be said for the idea that judges shouldn't have other professions that generate income. Now, such a rule may be too broad, because a judge can always recuse himself if a case would put him in a situation where one of the parties was a nightclub that he performs at or something, but a broad, prophylactic rule makes a certain amount of sense.

I think most "appearance of impropriety" ethics rules are unjustified, as they infringe free speech for what I consider to be a pretty dubious purpose. Sunshine is the best disinfectant, and I'm not really into rules that encourage judges to either lie or pretend like they don't have opinions. It's similar to what happens when we have a SCOTUS confirmation and the nominee tells Congress that he or she had no pre-conceived notions on abortion cases with a straight face. It's complete and utter BS.

 

[Rove!]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

because you'll never know when you'll be painted in a bad light by a bunch of holier-than-thou, self-righteous, vindictive busybodies....

Exactly. Comes with the territory and a good reason to never get involved in politics.

a system designed to scare away the best and the brightest...nice

 

[Clifford]

Someone recently said they hoped my son would get involved in politics. I told them to never wish so horrible a fate on my son.

Politics is simply a popularity contest for narcissists who need constant approval from everyone. I think the best use of elections would be precursors to the winners getting shipped to an island somewhere that has constant newsfeeds about the people on the island.

Douglas Adams nailed it: anyone who wants to be in power shouldn't be, and we'd be better off with a random lottery than elections.

 

[igbomb]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

because you'll never know when you'll be painted in a bad light by a bunch of holier-than-thou, self-righteous, vindictive busybodies....

Exactly. Comes with the territory and a good reason to never get involved in politics.

a system designed to scare away the best and the brightest...nice

Wait. Are you arguing that folks with opinions or conduct that most people would find offensive if a light were shined on them are our best and brightest?

 

[Joe Summer]

He brings a record already marked by a past discipline by the state Ethics Commission for expenditure of campaign money on personal expenses. He was also written up by the Conway Log Cabin Democrat for flashing a badge at a state trooper during a speeding stop.

A gay newspaper?

 

[SacramentoBob]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

because you'll never know when you'll be painted in a bad light by a bunch of holier-than-thou, self-righteous, vindictive busybodies....

Exactly. Comes with the territory and a good reason to never get involved in politics.

a system designed to scare away the best and the brightest...nice

Wait. Are you arguing that folks with opinions or conduct that most people would find offensive if a light were shined on them are our best and brightest?

I wouldn't want to be scrutinized for every single post I've ever made on the internet.

 

[Rove!]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

because you'll never know when you'll be painted in a bad light by a bunch of holier-than-thou, self-righteous, vindictive busybodies....

Exactly. Comes with the territory and a good reason to never get involved in politics.

a system designed to scare away the best and the brightest...nice

Wait. Are you arguing that folks with opinions or conduct that most people would find offensive if a light were shined on them are our best and brightest?

no, it's like what Ramsay said about how Supreme Court nominees, today have to lie about not having an opinion and to not have a paper trail. Smarter people will come to their own conclusions and play devil's advocate more. They will have an intellectual curiosity.

 

[igbomb]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

because you'll never know when you'll be painted in a bad light by a bunch of holier-than-thou, self-righteous, vindictive busybodies....

Exactly. Comes with the territory and a good reason to never get involved in politics.

a system designed to scare away the best and the brightest...nice

Wait. Are you arguing that folks with opinions or conduct that most people would find offensive if a light were shined on them are our best and brightest?

no, it's like what Ramsay said about how Supreme Court nominees, today have to lie about not having an opinion and to not have a paper trail. Smarter people will come to their own conclusions and play devil's advocate more. They will have an intellectual curiosity.

Except he's not getting heat for strong opinions.

He's running for an elected office in Arkansas. He is posting anti-Arkansas posts on a message board.

In addition, he is sexist and possibly racist.

But it's the system's fault this guy is catching hell?

 

[Rove!]

Judges are public officials and need to behave as such if they want to limit damage to themselves.

because you'll never know when you'll be painted in a bad light by a bunch of holier-than-thou, self-righteous, vindictive busybodies....

Exactly. Comes with the territory and a good reason to never get involved in politics.

a system designed to scare away the best and the brightest...nice

Wait. Are you arguing that folks with opinions or conduct that most people would find offensive if a light were shined on them are our best and brightest?

no, it's like what Ramsay said about how Supreme Court nominees, today have to lie about not having an opinion and to not have a paper trail. Smarter people will come to their own conclusions and play devil's advocate more. They will have an intellectual curiosity.

Except he's not getting heat for strong opinions.

He's running for an elected office in Arkansas. He is posting anti-Arkansas posts on a message board.

In addition, he is sexist and possibly racist.

But it's the system's fault this guy is catching hell?

The bottom line is that creepy people are playing detective with random musings on an internet message board, cherry-picked and painted for maximum effect....not defending this guy, but deploring the process by which he was 'outed.' A process that could be repeated and used to "disqualify" well-qualified people and scare other quality people from participating.

 

[Ramsay Hunt Experience]

I'm not sure there's a huge expectation of privacy when you post as "GeauxJudge" and drop nuggets about what's going on in your courtroom. I would be one thing if there was some IP tracking or something like that. This is more akin to "busting" John Roberts based upon posts by a reddit user with the screen name of "Chief Justice John Roberts (Confirmed)"

 

[Rove!]

I'm not sure there's a huge expectation of privacy when you post as "GeauxJudge" and drop nuggets about what's going on in your courtroom. I would be one thing if there was some IP tracking or something like that. This is more akin to "busting" John Roberts based upon posts by a reddit user with the screen name of "Chief Justice John Roberts (Confirmed)"

that's a pretty big reach...there are thousands of judges , but only one Chief Justice...

 

[Black Box]

I'm not sure there's a huge expectation of privacy when you post as "GeauxJudge" and drop nuggets about what's going on in your courtroom. I would be one thing if there was some IP tracking or something like that. This is more akin to "busting" John Roberts based upon posts by a reddit user with the screen name of "Chief Justice John Roberts (Confirmed)"

Not really. He was doxed, plain and simple... even if he made it somewhat easy by posting some personal information online.

But someone else still had to connect the dots by combing through his posting history.

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I'm not sure there's a huge expectation of privacy when you post as "GeauxJudge" and drop nuggets about what's going on in your courtroom. I would be one thing if there was some IP tracking or something like that. This is more akin to "busting" John Roberts based upon posts by a reddit user with the screen name of "Chief Justice John Roberts (Confirmed)"

That could be any mayor!

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

This is a topic that affects a lot of message boards. I've had to talk with our very own Judge Smails about it, and to a lesser extent, Good Posting Judge.

 

[Leroy Hoard]

This is a topic that affects a lot of message boards. I've had to talk with our very own Judge Smails about it, and to a lesser extent, Good Posting Judge.

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

 

[Long Ball Larry]

This is a topic that affects a lot of message boards. I've had to talk with our very own Judge Smails about it, and to a lesser extent, Good Posting Judge.

hey!

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=704602&p=16597405

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

This is a topic that affects a lot of message boards. I've had to talk with our very own Judge Smails about it, and to a lesser extent, Good Posting Judge.

hey!

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=704602&p=16597405

Dang it.

 

[Ramblin Wreck]

at rodeo sex