tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post6461044506156400884..comments2024-01-25T14:51:13.377-05:00Comments on Gamso - For the Defense: Because I'm the Judge, That's WhyJeff Gamsohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09869425697771419546noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-77266379705496673292011-11-26T20:50:36.912-05:002011-11-26T20:50:36.912-05:00Deleting the spam link, which will cause no offens...Deleting the spam link, which will cause no offense on the really unlikely chance the unnamed commenter really wanted to express gratitude.<br /><br />I successfully used your site as a resource for a school research project. Valuable information. Lucky me I found your website by accidentJeff Gamsohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09869425697771419546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-84929588642945003062011-07-24T12:55:53.224-04:002011-07-24T12:55:53.224-04:00The EJI report really doesn't lend itself to a...The EJI report really doesn't lend itself to a direct distinction between how appointed and elected judges behave in giving overrides. Florida elects, and it's judges are far more like Delaware's than like Alabama's. For what it's worth, study after study says (and Alabama per EJI follows this pattern) that as a judge's reelection draws near, her sentencing becomes more draconian.<br /><br />I think it matters whether judges are elected or appointed (appointed's better) but the differences aren't all that great. After all, most appointed judges are politically connected and few elected judges are truly of the people and not the party. Far more important tends to be party affiliation, but even that can be overstated.Jeff Gamsohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09869425697771419546noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5945843206427351559.post-21796254842153113672011-07-24T10:12:22.125-04:002011-07-24T10:12:22.125-04:00I kept thinking you were going to make a connectio...I kept thinking you were going to make a connection between judges being elected and judges being appointed and the way they rule in such things, especially with that Delaware Alabama Florida stuff. Did I miss it? That question interests me because I don't really think election v. appointment makes very much difference, but that's more of an anecdotal observation than anything else.<br /><br />And yes, the Mark Gardner rule. You might be right, but I wonder whether the deep sickness in the judiciary has had any remedy other than the occasional truthful if vituperative appraisal from the lawyer in a position to know what they did. <br /><br />They walk all over defendants and defense counsel because they pay no price for it, but they surely pay a price if they walk all over prosecutors and police. <br /><br />Police and prosecutors have power, and there's nothing anyone can do about that, so it's never going to be the case that they cannot make a judge pay for crossing them. <br /><br />Therefore - see? I can reason a little - the only window for improvement is that defense lawyers have to think of a way to make judges pay a price for crossing THEM. <br /><br />Judges are low character people, or they wouldn't be judges. Right and wrong mean little or nothing to them, but career pressure means a lot. Defense lawyers must think of a way to threaten judges' careers that is at least tangible enough to have an impact. <br /><br />It's primitive. But they bring it on themselves.John Reganhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14174895768769300686noreply@blogger.com