Posted on

 March 2, 2018 in 

[Edited to add: I have been asked whether this is fictional. The dialogue is not. The first judge’s comments can be found here and here. The interaction between the second judge and the mentally ill defendant is from this appellate opinion.]

INT JUDGE’S CHAMBERS.

We see a JUDGE, sitting comfortably behind his desk, talking to a REPORTER, who is taking diligent notes.

JUDGE: Over the 36 years I’ve been on the bench, the defendants’ attitudes have changed. Most no longer have any respect for the rule of law.The young black men – and it’s primarily young black men rather than young black women – charged with felony offenses, they’re not getting good advice from their parents.

REPORTER: Oh?

CUT TO INT COURTROOM.

We see a different JUDGE talking to a DEFENDANT while a DEPUTY and the Defendant’s LAWYER stand watching. The DEFENDANT is in street clothes.

CLOSE ON the “shock belt” around the DEFENDANT’s leg.

DEFENDANT: The defendant has a right to object to procedures whereby a party asserts a piece of evidence or other matters –

JUDGE 2: Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris. I am —

THE DEFENDANT: That’s the law.

JUDGE 2: Mr. Morris, I am giving you one warning. You will not make any additional outbursts like that, because two things will happen. Number one, I will either remove you from the courtroom or I will use the shock belt on you.

THE DEFENDANT: All right, sir.

JUDGE 2: Now, are you going to follow the rules?

THE DEFENDANT: Sir, I’ve asked you to recuse yourself.

JUDGE 2: Are you going to follow the rules?

THE DEFENDANT: I have a lawsuit pending against you.

THE DEFENDANT: I have a history of mental illness. You’re wrong for doing this.

JUDGE 2: Are you going to behave?

THE DEFENDANT: You’re torturing an MHMR client. I have agoraphobia. I’m under medication.

JUDGE 2: Hit him. (Deputy pushes a button, activating the shock belt.)

JUDGE 2: Are you going to behave?

THE DEFENDANT: I’m an MHMR client.

JUDGE 2: Are you going to behave?

THE DEFENDANT: I have a history of mental illness.

JUDGE 2: Hit him again.

THE DEFENDANT: I have a history of mental illness. You’re wrong for doing this.

JUDGE 2: Are you going to behave?

THE DEFENDANT: You’re torturing an MHMR client. I have agoraphobia. I’m under medication.

JUDGE 2: Are you going —

THE DEFENDANT: I take 17 pills a day for my disability, my MHMR disability. You have no right to do this.

JUDGE 2: Are you going to behave?

THE DEFENDANT: I have the right —

JUDGE 2: You have no right to disrespect the Court.

THE DEFENDANT: I have the right. Nobody is —

JUDGE 2: I’m going to give you the option to do one of two things. You can either behave in the courtroom —

THE DEFENDANT: I don’t have an attorney. I’m firing this man. I’ve told him to get off my case. And the defendant has a right to refuse counsel. I have the right to represent myself in this case, and I shall.

JUDGE 2: All right. Let’s talk about that. Counsel may be seated. How far did you go in school?

THE DEFENDANT: Sir, that’s beside the point. There’s serious allegations that I have in the United States District Court against this man. No one wants to be represented by someone they have a lawsuit against. No one wants a judge to preside over their case who the lawsuit is against. No one wants to be tortured because they’re an MHMR defendant prevented from saying anything in the Court in front of the jury pertaining to any such cases such as the grand jury –

JUDGE 2: Mr. Morris, are you going to answer my question?

THE DEFENDANT: I’ve asked you, I’ve filed a motion asking —

JUDGE 2: Would you hit him again. (Deputy complies)

THE DEFENDANT: — to recuse yourself from the Bench off my case.

JUDGE 2: Are you going to answer my questions?

THE DEFENDANT: You refuse to —

JUDGE 2: Are you going to answer my questions? Yes or no. I need an answer.

THE DEFENDANT: I’m an MHMR client.

JUDGE 2: Put him up.

THE DEFENDANT: No, sir.

THE BAILIFF: Sir, you do not want to do this.

(Defendant leaves courtroom).

CUT TO INT FIRST JUDGE’S CHAMBERS

JUDGE: Who do they get advice from? Rag-tag organizations like Black Lives Matter, which tell you, ‘Resist police,’ which is the worst thing in the world you could tell a young black man … They teach contempt for the police, for the whole justice system.

FADE OUT.

 

 

THE END.

 

Share This Post, Choose Your Platform!

9 Comments

  1. Larry McDougal March 2, 2018 at 9:27 pm - Reply

    Far too many Judges/Justices only ran for/accepted those positions because they were horrible lawyers. If you cannot make it as an attorney, become a judge.

    • Mark Bennett March 2, 2018 at 9:31 pm - Reply

      And then they think that their having won an election entitles them to respect.

  2. Lane March 2, 2018 at 10:20 pm - Reply

    I know lawyers on probated suspensions running for judicial office. I had no idea that was allowed.

    If anyone teaches contempt for the system, it is the system. Having contempt for the system is a synonym for “paying attention.”

  3. Robert Fickman March 3, 2018 at 9:01 am - Reply

    The system teaches contempt for the system.

  4. David March 9, 2018 at 10:28 am - Reply

    Yet…. blatant and documented violations (due process or otherwise) go unchallenged by the “good guys” everyday. The pro se parties such as this man and myself whom are aware of these violations and fight back cant seem to find an attorney to advocate for them rather than go along to get along. I can provide a “forged” document which was created by or at minimum under the direct supervision and knowledge of a current judicial candidate… no one cares. I can show everyone hundreds of void orders (per Texas 1st COA Opinion in my pro se appellate win) which remain in effect today despite their being void. No on cares to see them.so…. I fight alone… but I fight. Totalitarianism requires the imposition of an illegal because “I said so” process while subservience requires nothing.

    • Mark Bennett March 9, 2018 at 1:13 pm - Reply

      C’mon, man. You can’t just leave us hanging. Give us a link to the opinion!

      • David March 12, 2018 at 7:54 pm - Reply

        C’mon, man. You can’t just leave us hanging. Moderate the comment where I ” Give us a link to the opinion”

        • Mark Bennett March 12, 2018 at 8:18 pm - Reply

          Sorry: Don’t know why it’d gotten stuck in the queue.

  5. David March 9, 2018 at 1:30 pm - Reply

    https://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=01-14-00845-CV&coa=coa01
    This is a reverse and remand of a denial of bill of review of a protective order.
    COA says… order is void/violates due process… grant bill of review.
    Read the appellant brief for the many more “violations” complained and See the appendixes to compare the “forged” JIMS report and date stamped return then please do comment/share…. class action?

    See also second appeal because the trial court refused to vacate its void order.
    https://www.search.txcourts.gov/Case.aspx?cn=01-17-00250-CV&coa=coa01

Leave A Comment

Recent Blog Posts

Categories

Archive