Here’s
an interesting story from the ABA Journal. An Internet user who goes by the
handle “Lawmiss” is commenting on online news articles about the high-profile
trial of alleged serial killer Anthony Sowell.
Apparently, the user who registered with various websites under this name used the judge’s personal email address. The Judge’s 23-year-old daughter has come out and claimed that she made some or all of the posts, and that the judge did not.
Judges, like everyone, are entitled to their own personal opinions. If a judge wants to go online on her own time and debate the finer points of, well, anything, she is perfectly entitled to do so. However, with judicial officers, a line has to be drawn somewhere. It’s universally considered extremely uncouth for judges to express a personal opinion concerning a case they’re overseeing.
The reasons for this should be obvious – it creates the appearance that the judge is personally biased toward one side of a case over the other. Now, being a human being, judges are going to form personal opinions about things. It just happens. And this human attribute doesn’t magically switch off when the judge takes on the duty of a neutral arbiter. Most judges, however, are pretty good at divorcing whatever personal biases they may have from their legal and factual judgment of the case at hand. It’s probable that this judge is also just as fair and impartial as the next one.
However, it is very important for courts, to ensure that they retain their legitimacy and the public trust, to avoid even the appearance of impropriety or bias, even if it’s not actually there.
In this case, the judge arguing about the case over which she’s presiding clearly creates the appearance of bias, even though it’s totally possible that she isn’t biased.
Understandably, the attorney for the defense isn’t exactly thrilled by these developments, and plans to address the issue with unspecified court filings, possibly asking the judge to recuse herself from the case.
Really, this seems like the best course of action. Even if the judge is able to show her total lack of bias while in court, this story has likely shaken the confidence of everyone following the case that this judge will be impartial. As long as there’s no evidence that the defendant has actually been prejudiced by the judge’s alleged actions, she shouldn’t necessarily be disciplined for this. After all, this judge wouldn’t be the first person to miscalculate the consequences of posting “anonymously” on the Internet.
My opinion that this judge should consider withdrawing from the case says nothing of her professional abilities. I’m sure she’s a perfectly competent judge. It should also not be read as sympathy for the defendant – the crimes he’s accused of are absolutely horrendous, and the evidence against him is pretty solid. If he’s convicted, I hope he goes away forever.
However, one of the most cherished principles of our legal system is that we are all (and that means all) presumed innocent until proven guilty. The defendant in this case, like everyone else, is entitled to a fair trial. And if it is shown that the judge’s actions deprived him of that right, the situation must be remedied.
Comments