Comments on: BCA Supreme Endorsement is ‘Painful Decision’

By: Zorro

Zorro — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 11:26:45 +0000

“I remember longing to stand beside [Atticus Fitch], to stand for what he stood for, and to fight the good fight.”

Atticus Fitch is a fictional character. He is promoted by the Bar Association as the “ideal” of what a lawyer should be.

In reality if Atticus were to walk with us today, he would probably be scorned by that same organization.

Rudy Baylor the young lawyer in “The Firm” came up against the slick lawyer,Leo Drummond, from the Great Benefit Insurance Company. Rudy asked him, ” Do you remember when you first sold out?”

Don’t you wish you could ask some of the Justices that same question?

” Do you remember when you first sold out?”

By: John Killian

John Killian — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 05:14:00 +0000

Zorro is my hero!

By: Scorpius

Scorpius — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 03:56:13 +0000

To answer Zorro in #30,

That theory is bogus. True, judicial candidates may have a “finance committee,” but any candidate can (and probably does) keep daily tabs on the incoming dough. At the very least, once the reports are filed in the SOS office and uploaded to the website, anybody (INCLUDING judicial candidates) can review contributions.

There is no perfect system for judicial selection. I believe that elections are the best we have available.

In so far as campaigns are executed, we should insist/require that candidates provide the most detailed information regarding their contributions in the swiftest manner that modern technology can facilitate. Then immediately displaying that info for public consumption helps the system work better.

Judges are all fallible human beings, despite what they think and tell you.

By: LOL

LOL — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:45:46 +0000

Tribune, I’m looking forward to the filing of your JIC complaint against the Chief Justice for failing to recuse in the Exxon Mobil decision after publicly criticizing the company during her race against Nabers in ‘06 – while the case was still pending before the Court.

By: walt moffett

walt moffett — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:33:05 +0000

Alabama Tribune, one trusts that if Shaw is elected, complaints will be filed with the JIC and until then you will support his opposition.

This race could be a change from the usual snore fest most judicial races are.

By: Zorro

Zorro — Wed, 02 Jul 2008 01:17:34 +0000

Apparently you are a lawyer or have read some legal sites and can site some Judicial Cannons.

Bottom line, you will do what we do. You will keep anonymous.

Complain on anonymous chat sites where no one can find out who you are.

Why? We all know why! Don’t want to make waves. Don’t want the Bar Association to review your membership.

You will do what is safe for you and your family. Grumble on some chat sites and run for your life.

By: Alabama tribune

Alabama tribune — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:49:20 +0000

Zorro,

Go read Canon 2C again. How can it be argued that Judge Shaw has not created an impression that he will favor the BCA by his actions when the BCA itself (reasonably) believes that his promise to only consort with them and theirs means shows partiality?

By: Zorro

Zorro — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 23:47:03 +0000

All candidates for Judge, except probate Judge, must form a financial committee.

In theory, no candidate for Judge knows who contributes the campaign.

In theory, this keeps politics out of the Courtroom.

By: Alabama tribune

Alabama tribune — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:44:28 +0000

Mr. Moffett,

The problem with your solution is that it is unethical for judges to put lawyers in that position. That is the whole point of the conflict of interest canons. We do not want judges who are going to have to recuse themselves from every civil case involving a busniess that comes before the court. Hence it is illegal for Judge Shaw or any other judge to engage in conduct that would necessitate such a recusal.

By: links for 2008-07-01 | Daily Dixie

links for 2008-07-01 | Daily Dixie — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:35:07 +0000

[...] Doc’s Political Parlor: BCA Supreme Endorsement is ‘Painful Decision’ [...]

By: walt moffett

walt moffett — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:25:46 +0000

reader, whats wrong with moving for recusal, other than ticking off the judge. Seems to me, any attorney looking out for the best interest of his client, would seek recusal if he suspects the judge will not be impartial.

Sorry for posting as Zorro in #20, seems a buglet or three somewhere in firefox or the wetware.

By: Zorro

Zorro — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 22:23:07 +0000

What do the Alabama State Supreme Court and a Contortionist have in common?

They both assume strange positions for money!

By: reader

reader — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:54:35 +0000

and zorro, my point was that Judges could rightfully refuse contributions from ALL lawyers and impartially hear their cases, just not CERTAIN lawyers based on the kind of law they practice.

AND, they can refuse whatever contributions they like. That seems a guaranteed right based on the First Amendment’s freedoms of speech and assembly. They simply must abide by the ethical implications of their refusals.

By: reader

reader — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:48:19 +0000

Zorro,
My only point is that a Judge cannot pledge to refuse a donation and then SIT ON A CASE involving the party refused while claiming to maintain partiality. They can make whatever pledges they like while running, but those pledges they make ought to affect the cases they may ethically hear as impartial arbiters.

By: Scorpius

Scorpius — Tue, 01 Jul 2008 21:09:09 +0000

Was that any more offensive or sickening than seeing a white lady NY carpetbagger running for president go into a black church in Selma, Alabama and mimic “black-speak” intonations to the rapturous applause of the assembled black congregation???

Talk about Barfatorium!