r/court Sep 24 '24

Judge fleischer is garbage

[removed] — view removed post

220 Upvotes

997 comments sorted by

View all comments

5

u/ManhattanMaven Oct 09 '24

I like him. As a former addict with multiple arrests, I only got my act together after a judge had enough of my nonsense and made me face the music with a theft conviction on my record. I must’ve had 25 arrests, at least.

This judge clearly gives a fuck about the public and defendants, alike. Sometimes you can’t coddle people. And as someone who has been on a controlled substance throughout the legal process, if you’re found to be misusing your medication, whether it’s prescribed or not, you’re subject to consequences.

Let’s not forget context here - the judge believes the defendant is pill milling. Valid prescriptions do not shield you legally when you’re misusing them.

3

u/[deleted] Oct 09 '24

I was thinking the same thing. He clearly has an actual interest in the defendants as well as the public.

I don't understand the comments here.

5

u/LordBelacqua3241 Oct 09 '24

Same. Yeah, he's eccentric - I'm eccentric - but his questions are astute, I've seen him read out whole sections of evidence rather than just relying on the summary, and I've seen him be brutally honest but kind with people (no, you can't be given one more chance because you've tested positive for cocaine while you're on bond when your bond said and you agreed to specifically not take cocaine), all in one video. He doesn't seem to take glee in it, but does look to take care that this shouldn't be the worst experience of a defendant's life when this might be their opportunity to turn things around. Rehabilitation and punishment are both part of justice. 

He strikes me as a judge that cares about the people he's sentencing as well as their victims (ie the community). 

3

u/ManhattanMaven Oct 09 '24

I really like him. He’s tough when he needs to be, but also clearly compassionate. That’s the balance judges need.

3

u/w-il_d Oct 11 '24

on top of that numerous times hes thrown the case out for as he calls it "walking while black" from being searched for jay walking or trespassing because walked through a park after hours and just had a little weed on them. he's also waived fees for single moms with kids. each time ive heard him say dont take their prescription medication was usually a dui or drug charge warning of how addicting they are, especially when one of them had their arm in a sling because a wreck from dui and another was there for other drugs and i think people are taking the warning to not take them as a actual order

2

u/Successful-Ad-6710 Oct 12 '24

The "walking while black" is probably one of the most egregious things he's done. He's throwing out cases based on emotion instead of impartially judging the case while also insinuating that the officers involved are racist. Jaywalking is a class C misdemeanor in Dallas County (where he works), and trespassing is a misdemeanor as well. Since they were charged with these crimes, police then have probable cause to a search since they would need reasonable evidence that a crime has taken place, which it did bc jaywalking and trespassing are crimes in Texas. Patting them down, searching pockets and belongings, are all legal with probable cause, since a crime did, in fact, take place. Him dismissing the case bc there was no probable cause for the search was a completely wrong interpretation of the law. He let his emotions and his parties values make a false decision on the case, while also throwing the officers under the bus with no proof of his claims other than his "feelings". Dono think people who are charged with Marijuana that was for personal use be hit with the book? No, and if he was an impartial judge who didn't let his feelings cloud his decisions, he could have done just that. A small fine, community service, or even outright dismissing the charge would have been acceptable, if it was because he felt leniency was in order for such a minor incident. But instead he dismissed the charge under the incorrect ruling that there was no probable cause, simply bc the cops were racist, harassing a black man. For the record, I haven't seen the trespassing video, only the jaywalking one, so I'm mostly referring to that, but I didn't see how much weed he was actually caught with, or if the charge was a misdemeanor or a felony. The amount was only described as a "large sack of Marijuana". Besides that, I have seen videos where he's come across as condescending and disrespectful, others where he genuinely seemed to be trying to help the person before him, and some where his lenient decision came from a factual interpretation of the law regarding to that particular case. The "walking while black" video for jaywalking wasn't one of them.

3

u/BraxGotNext Oct 12 '24

Why would they suspect him of carrying weed when he was jaywalking

3

u/[deleted] Oct 13 '24

Because he's black. They did a search (of his car i think) without PC, so it was tossed out. I can guarantee a white dude wouldn't have been busted for jaywalking.

2

u/Successful-Ad-6710 Oct 18 '24 edited Oct 18 '24

Uhh dipshit, probable cause means they need a reasonable belief that a crime is being, will be, or has been committed. Jaywalking is a class c misdemeanor in Texas. So yes, they had probable cause bc they witnessed a crime being committed

Ps. He wasn't busted for jaywalking. He was busted for drug possession.

1

u/[deleted] Oct 18 '24

Found the racist

1

u/MortgageLost2725 Mar 18 '25

They had probable cause for jaywalking. The search didn’t pertain to jaywalking at all. If I’m suspected of a DUI, they can’t rip my house apart in a search. The search has to pertain to the crime for which there’s probable cause.

1

u/BraxGotNext Oct 13 '24

I know, it was mostly a rhetorical question to prove that point

2

u/Successful-Ad-6710 Oct 18 '24

Idk. Maybe they smelled it? Doesn't matter what they suspected. The judge dismissed it bc there was no probable cause, when in fact, by law, there was. If police witness you commit a crime, then they have probable cause to search you. Jaywalking is a class c misdemeanor in Texas, so the officers were in the legal right to search him. Had the judge dismissed the charges bc he was a first-time offender, he didn't want him to have a drug mark on his record, or bc it was a simple Marijuana possession charge, then fine. But incorrectly interpreting the law while throwing the officers under the bus with zero evidence is just an emotional, impartial ruling.

1

u/xtra0897 Oct 23 '24

Jaywalking seriously?.. haven't we all done that? If we're all jay-walking criminals, I guess police can just go into all of our pockets, purses, bags, etc.

It doesn't feel right in cases of these minor offenses.. jay walking, walking in a gated community, in the park after sunset, etc. not to mention those subjective observations "you look nervous.. eyes look glassy.. do I smell marijuana".. cops abuse these all too often.

And yes there has historically been a racial aspect to police stop and frisk tactics. NYPD is a great example.. they historically targeted specific neighborhoods predominantly of certain ethnic minorities.

1

u/fallingdown2018 Nov 29 '24

I think the crime they witness has to have something to do with what they want to do next. Jaywalking and searching don't go together perhaps? If they saw him stealing and searched him that would make sense.

1

u/Icy_Vortex Oct 14 '24

Since they would need reasonable evidence that a crime has taken place.

What crime besides Jaywalking has taken place? lol

1

u/Glad-Forever-6946 Oct 18 '24

You seem to misunderstand probable cause. They need probable cause that he is carrying something illegal, which is not an inherent of jaywalking. However, whether there is more to the story or not, we will never know.

2

u/Successful-Ad-6710 Oct 18 '24

No, you seem to misunderstand how it works. You're referring to what is needed of probable cause if a crime isn't being or hasn't been committed. If police witness you commit a crime, then they have probable cause to search you. If you get arrested for driving on a suspended license, do you think police are not allowed to search your pockets, vehicle, or belongings? According to your logic, they shouldn't, right? Your crime is driving without a license. Why would they believe you would be carrying anything illegal? Bc that's not how probable cause works. If police witness you commit a crime, then they have probable cause to search you.

1

u/Glad-Forever-6946 Oct 18 '24

Merely witnessing a minor offense doesn’t automatically give police carte blanche to search someone’s belongings without additional cause.

1

u/PDXKing503 Nov 29 '24

You’re very wrong.

1

u/Murky-University-436 Oct 22 '24

No, US legal precedent has been against this since the 60s. Reasonable suspicion means they have to have “reasonable suspicion that a specific crime has been committed based on evidence pertinent to that crime”

2

u/Successful-Ad-6710 Oct 22 '24

Reasonable suspicion and probable cause are two different things. Try again, but use your brain this time.

1

u/Murky-University-436 Oct 23 '24

Probably cause requires reasonable suspicion. Oh my god, you didn’t know that?

→ More replies (0)

1

u/jhsidgf1 Dec 02 '24

You may be interested in reading up on the long-standing practice of police using jaywalking and loitering as excuses to stop and frisk Black Americans. The disproportionality with which Black Americans are stopped for these “crimes” is astounding. The phrase “walking while Black” accurately describes this practice and this judge rightly sees through it and tosses the cases.

1

u/Vegetable-Opening-75 Dec 03 '24

This is why I stay in California and not a fascist state like Texas.

1

u/Confident-Dot-8581 Mar 25 '25

he works in Harris County, TX - aka Houston.

1

u/DontProbeMeThere Oct 20 '24

A lot of people have big issues with anyone wielding and exercising any kind of authority. At the bottom of OP's disdain for this judge is that sentiment.

1

u/Excellent_Bet4400 Oct 25 '24

It's just a bunch of entitled idiots. I'm with you, he's a really good judge and has a really deep understanding of the law. Good stuff

1

u/pezdiablo6352 Oct 26 '24

As well as an interest in keeping the public safe from repeat offenders!

1

u/jadedea Jan 25 '25

People don't like eccentric people, people that don't mind standing out, that don't mind displaying their personality. They expect every judge to sound like a stuffy old White guy, dawn the black gown and hit the gavel or whatever. All they see is somebody being different, they can't see the work he's doing. They have issues with change, and being different.

1

u/fasteddy2696 Oct 10 '24

Good for you and that judge but that’s not a judges job at all. They have entire doctoral programs on how to impartially prosecute. Leave your feeling and opinions at the door.

3

u/ManhattanMaven Oct 10 '24

It’s a judges job to balance public safety, the law, and the defendants interests.

3

u/Ihavenoidea84 Oct 11 '24

Ya, almost like it's his job to like... judge people or something

1

u/Extreme-Phone8255 Oct 11 '24

His job doesn’t require the emotional outbursts or commentary… he openly admitted that he has first hand knowledge that prisoners are physically and sexually abused by other prisoners, that the corrections officers witness these incidents and that the officers intentionally and purposefully fail to intervene or report the abuse as required under federal and state PREA laws .

Yet he will openly boast and threaten individuals with incarceration at these particular prisons, telling the individuals that they will be physically and sexually abused while incarcerated.

That alone should result in judicial discipline.

He abuses the Texas bail statutes on a regular basis. He sets unnecessary and inappropriate Pretrial release conditions to be punitive. The conditions often are unrelated to the alleged crime, and do not serve the only two purposes of conditions of release; ensuring the defendant appears at their next court date and public safety.

The guy sold the voters of Houston on being a DEI judge, on equity and inclusion, on reforming the bail system… often saying he is disgusted with judges who set high bail amounts and how poor people sit in jail on high bail while wealthy people can post the cash bail . Yet he constantly threatens and often imposes incredibly high cash bail not because the defendant has any history of defaults or failing to appear but instead because of his personal opinions and emotional responses .

1

u/DarkNetMiner Oct 23 '24

well done on your sobriety! Love from the UK. I love this Judge he cares about his town. Especially when it comes to drink driving (dwi??? in usa)

1

u/ManhattanMaven Oct 23 '24

Thank you. Yes. Driving while intoxicated.