- Quickdraw McLaw
- 17 Comments
- 251 Views
Are you all enjoying the holidays? We’ve got a little reading material for you on this last Monday in 2019: the Order Continuing Commission Investigations. Issued last week on the 24th, it appears the Commission is opting to hold off on deciding to suspend Judges Melanie Andress-Tobiasson and Amy Chelini to conduct further investigations. You can read the Baltimore Post-Examiner’s attempt at deciphering what is going on here, but the Order cites NRS 1.4675(7) as requiring the Commission to bring formal charges within 60 days if they issue a suspension. With this order, the Commission buys itself more time to conduct further investigations and to try to get documents from Clark County that the county is not providing. Take a look at the Order and then tell us whether you think they punctuated sub-judicial standard profanity correctly to convey the meaning they intended. Also, tell us whether any of these delays have anything to do with the upcoming judicial candidate filing period for the 2020 judicial election (January 6th through the 17th).
Wow. The Commission is really on a high horse here. Footnotes 18 and 19 are really taking a shot at the conduct of the judiciary quoting part of a comment to a code rule that says, "a judge should expect to be the subject of public scrutiny that might be viewed as burdensome if applied to other citizens and must acceot the strictures imposed by the Code…"
The idea that "not one Las Vegas Justice Court judge who testified on behalf of Respondents could bring themselves to admit that routine utterances of sub-judicial standard profanity inside the Las Vegas Justice Center, during working hours and toward and around employees, and the waring of clothing inside and around the Las Vegas Justice Court containing vulgar statements, were inappropriate or a violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct" shows a real dichotomy about what is deemed acceptable by [at least some of] the judges and what the Commission deems appropriate. I think the Commission is wasting their time here–by taking this route they are going to end up arguing about principles of free speech and are unlikely to win that battle in the court of public opinion.
As for the punctuation, without rewriting the whole sentence I think it needs to be sub-judicial-standard profanity. Without the second hyphen, I read it as standard profanity that is sub-judicial when I think they mean to convey it is profanity that is below the judicial standard.
Funny how they commission ignores the unethical behavior of certain judges. Then constantly going after other judges in their hit list.
Maybe you're right. But that doesn't make Andress-Tobiasson and Chelini less disgusting, assuming this crap is true.
The best judges are the judges that humbly approach the job as a public service – think Jim Crockett. They are few and far between.
More common are judges who were not good lawyers and use the position for its perceived prestige (Miley). There are also those who really have no other option (Potter).
There are very few shining stars on the bench. Even fewer have integrity. Almost all the judges in Clark County – Muni, Justice, Family, and District – are losers.
Jim Crockett humbly approaches the job as a public servant? You cannot be serious in using humble, service and Crockett in the same sentence.
I clerked at Family Court and believe me or do not, almost every one had been a total failure in practice. Most were intolerable bores. A couple were nice and studious and committed to becoming a better Judge. If you remember Terrance Marren (sp) he was committed. Also, despite what happened to him; Steve Jones was very nice to the clerks. I'm dating myself but shitheads were Del Vecchio, Potter, and Pomrenze.
Very much miss Judge O'Malley (Sanchez) from Family Court. She does settlement and is a true gem: prepared, knowledgeable and kind (to everyone). Judge Foresburg appears to have many of her good qualities as does Judge Gibson. Some need to go and other are going.
8:51 again – I agree 100% on Judge O'Malley – great – was the best down there
sub-judicial standard profanity
This begs thee question: if there is such a thing as "sub-judicial standard profanity", there must also be "judicial standard profanity". And to segue further, what is "standard" profanity as opposed to non-standard profanity.
8:51. Do you mean that Del Vecchio, Potter and Pomrenze are simply bad judges, or that they were shitty to the clerks, or both?
8:51 here – Potter and Pomrenze were condescending to clerks, Del Vecchio was friendly enough but seemed creepy around the female clerks – On the Bench, Potter had temper problems, Del Vecchio kind of made up the law, and Pomrenze did study and try to prepare but she rarely changed her mind and appeared to see it as weakness to reconsider
Pomrenze is tyrannical and dangerous on the bench. Read the Joe Houston contempt decision from the Nevada Supreme Court to se a judge seriously out of control.
A decision from 13 years ago as evidence of present temperament?
No appearing in front of her repeatedly and no signs of repentance or changes of temperament as evidence of present temperament. I dealt with her when she was in private practice. She was difficult but not the complete monster that she became on the bench.
Black robe syndrome strikes again, I guess.
Court Administration is a terrible enemy to have if you're a judge, and especially if you're a master or commissioner. This sentence tells you the WHY of the whole thing:
" (iv) Justice Court administrators and supervisors being routinely addressed as “MotherFu**ers” and “Fu**king Bitches” by Respondents"
Court Administration IS THE LAW (Judge Dredd voice)
Thank is scary, but court admin runs the show. They make judges shut their pants.
That