May I suggest that you parse my text a bit more closely, counselor? I said:
"..too many judges have only the parochial experience of law, and therefore represent an incestuous sort of legal inbreeding…"
There are many individuals who hold a JD, who have life experiences beyond that of the court. They may be in business, or have taken a second degree; that sort of thing. This type of individual is conversant with law, but not a gladiator in the arena, who daily rubs shoulders with the small cadre of insiders, that constitute the bulk of practicing lawyers in a town of our size. As such, allegiances and favors and biases from that interaction would tend not to affect their decisions.
Your assumption that those who argue against such groupthink, implies that I personally feel the bench should be politicized, is not indicated in my text, nor is it even logical, given the actual wording of the position as stated.
Again, in careful parsing of my comment, you will find another phrase:
"..I am not sure which of these views that I am most persuaded by…"
Which indicates that I am merely providing an alternate point of view, to be considered in contrast to the opinion expressed by the author of this viewpoint article.
Methinks, as thou protesteth so much about my observation, that you may indeed BE a member of that good old boys' club, which outsiders might want to be concerned about.
And if your lack of logical skills is any indication of the calibre of that group, then it would seem that such concerns are indeed warranted...
Couldn't agree more with this. The law should be the law, and interpreting the law shouldn't involve political leanings or interests.
A Judge is as a Judge does. This judicial race should not be about who is a Republican or who is a Democrat. It’s supposed to be a “non-partisan” race. If members of the Executive Committee of either party chooses to reject the grotesque, self-serving and corruptive special interest influences currently being exerted upon ALL Courts in general and the Probate Court in particular, I welcome their endorsement and much needed support. This judicial election should not be about political parties or individuals running to be OFFICIOUS; it’s about whether or not the candidate will be JUDICIOUS after he or she is elected.
After all, the indispensable characteristics of a good Judge are independence from extra-judicial influences, competence in and fidelity to the law, thoughtful deliberation, ethical values, unequivocal fairness to all and compassion and dedication to fulfilling the vital purpose of the trust placed in him or her by the public. We must come together NOW and work together for the common good of all.
Peace be with you all, Elect Richard Parks, Probate Court Judge
err, I meant executive and LEGISLATIVE branches, certainly NOT judicial ^^^above
@OakTree, Bringing "other perspectives to the game" should be reserved for electing those you deem worthy of serving in the executive and judicial branches of government, namely the mayors and county commissioners / Memphis city council. Judges are supposed to impartially apply law to fact. This requires an immense understanding of the law and an extreme diligence in preparation, not diversity of "perspective" (loose word meaning you think the bench should be politicized). Judges are NOT supposed to apply law to fact according to their world view (which seems like what you are advocating). Also, we don't need any more unprepared, lazy judges. Look at the results of bar polls and it pretty well tells you which judges are good and which ones waste everybody's life in the form of incompetence which costs money to everybody involved.
It is unfortunate that there are too many unqualified people running for judicial races this year. Judge Beasley is right on target. I would add that every judicial candidate should be asked, "How you ever been disciplined?" The public should also know about past arrests and bankruptcy filings from those who seek the bench. The average person is not concerned about who sits on the bench because they don't understand how important these positions are. Lawyers who practice in the courts know who the good and bad judges are. There are numerous opportunities to hear the folks running for judicial positions. I urge Shelby County voters to be informed and vote.
While I certainly understand Judge Beasley's point of view, there is a competing perspective, that holds that too many judges have only the parochial experience of law, and therefore represent an incestuous sort of legal inbreeding. This view, emphasizes the idea that individuals of broad experience from beyond that shallow pool, would actually better serve the electorate, by bringing other perspectives to the game. I am not sure which of these views that I am most persuaded by; however, I do know that my own personal knowledge of the individuals who have been, and others who now hope to be, judges, lends credence to the concern that it can become an old boys' club, if not policed by other members of the community at large.
I also think that it's unfortunate that the NBA'S letter has marred this process. Not very many of the candidates are even affiliated with the NBA. Otherwise, I agree with many points in this article.
Judge Beasley's article was a great read and I believe he is a wonderful judge, but to truly know someone's motives for running you would have to talk to them. In my conversations with many of them, they are truly dissatisfied with the services of some of these judges.
Wrong, Nightcrawler. There's a reason that the opt-out is beneficial to the city AND the employees. Do you really want 65-year-old cops and firemen running around, chasing perps and climbing ladders? If they had to wait for SS to retire, that's what you'd have.
Quote: "And remember, these employees don't get Social Security, so their pension is it when it comes to supporting themselves in their old age."
Upside Down: A federal government that allows unionized public employees to opt out of paying into the misused and underfunded Social Security reserves, but would arrest and imprison privately employed individuals in a heartbeat if they refused to pay into it and invested into something else more lucrative in the long term.
What the public unions are telling us non-public employees and retirees is that "our" FDR Progressive pyramid scam we know as Social Security just flat-out sucks.
Welcome to P.T. Barnam's big tent...
I don't want my property tax increased by 34% which is the figure that was given. But I think what the city council did knowing full well the city employees don't get social security is appalling (I did not initially know that). If our city leaders can't reach a compromise that gives something to everyone in balancing our city's budget then they aren't qualified for their office.
Fantastically entertaining interview with Bruce, but I was a little bummed that the elephant in the room wasn't addressed: The Chris Davis "Peter Pan" debacle.
There is - in all actuality - only one witch. And that is my ex-wife.
Funny but a "witch" can be man or woman, just as a "warlock" can be the same... a warlock is not a term for a male witch that is a misconception developed by hollywood... a "warlock" is an "oath breaker" I am a man and i am proud to be a witch
Speaking as a former Memphian, I didn't leave the city because of property tax rates. I left because my neighborhood was unsafe. So the rationale against raising taxes and for cutting benefits to public safety employees is unsound, to my thinking.
You know when you've written a half-assed column that' not even close to being cute and all you have done is open up your bitter old mouth? When the only comment you get is from another old, half-assed, uncute guy that's got nothing better to do.
You're quite right Bruce. Hopefully our city leadership will act responsibly and find a solution that is acceptable to both sets of interests.
In the last few judicial elections you have had several qualified African-American attorneys saturate races. There was a conversation to limit the number of candidates in any single race, which was only reasonable.
However, we have had Judges and District Attorneys who had never practiced in criminal court or handled a trial. No Judge had experience until their first day on the bench.
I have met him many times at Huey's in collierville and started a conversation with hello Mr. Howard and he looked at me like I was gonna bring on a flood of crazy fans (he relaxed quickly after realizing it wasn't a World Cup year and it was Tennessee) he smiled and was super nice and remembered me a week later when he came in again. Tipped great and when I asked him how often he gets noticed he replyed only for six months every four years. I imagine that is going to change. Glad I got to talk to the greatest wall since the Berlin had a hulk baby with China. Great man
By Toby Sells
download this issue
click here to see more »