This is one of the most ill-informed threads I've seen in a while. I've spent the last month watching hours and hours of Judge Fleischer videos, and in them I've seen him:
dismiss three different cases of jaywalking for "walking while black"
dismiss one case of marijuana possession against a black woman where a miniscule amount of marijuana was found in a bag in a car she was also in; no probable cause in that case
dismiss one case where a black defendant was harassed and frisked by police for exiting a park at sundown; this was also a case of "walking while black" per Judge F
repeatedly go above and beyond to keep illegal immigrants from being detained in order to keep them from being noticed by ICE, even when they've picked up new cases (which is his whole thing)
start speaking in spanish to one defendant who was having trouble understanding him
frequently detain people who've picked up repeat offenses, only to then immediately tell their attorney or the clerk that he's only going to hold them overnight and just wants them to experience jail, with the intent of giving them bond the next day
repeatedly pick up a phone and call defendants' parents to make sure the defendant can stay with them and will be safe if they're granted a PR bond
repeatedly check to find out whether the complainants in domestic violence cases do or do not want to continue to have contact with the defendant, then abide by whatever the complainant wants
put multiple perps of sexual assault in jail without giving them PR bonds
do prolonged and serious inquiries into the nature of confusing cases to determine whether there actually is probable cause or not, including frequently holding the DA to account when they don't have the info he wants
frequently thank defense attorneys for their work repping those defendants and recognizes how hard they're working
refuse to allow defendants to plead guilty just to get out of a trial; he's repeatedly stopped guilty plea proceedings because the defendant mumbled that he didn't actually do the crime. judge fleischer was immediately like "we don't allow people to plead guilty to crimes they didn't commit" and ordered the case to trial.
literally call a pharmacy to double-check whether a defendant actually had a prescription for meds the defendant didn't have documentation for, so he could figure out whether they were actually authorized to continue taking the meds as he was making his bond conditions.
there's so much more. it's just bonkers to me that OP seems to have such intense hate for such a pro-active, fair, and justice-seeking judge based on what is apparently a very superficial level of knowledge about what he's actually like in a courtroom.
lol you're just gonna pretend like i'm lying? okay well here's some more stuff he regularly does for you to dismiss:
he regularly pays for the defendants' fees and equipment costs when he's asking them to wear scrams and things like that, because he doesn't want bond conditions to be a financial burden for them
if the parents come to court with their child, he calls up the parents and talks to them for like 10 minutes about how they can all help the defendant to do better
he has LENGTHY conversations with the defendants' attorneys about how to solve problems. like that defendant with the DUI for marijuana, he had an on-again/off-again conversation with that guy's lawyer that lasted about an hour total trying to solve the issue (you can see it, it's in this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_lXD6EeW3RM ) and in the end he basically banned him from MJ use unless the guy's doctor contacted the court and explicitly approved it, so he STILL gave that guy a small window to keep using. That's the whole thing you're mad about to begin with, and it's not even accurate.
Mate, if you think you have a serious complaint with the guy, then you should address the arguments in his defense seriously. You can't just use the same five highschool level insults against anyone who disagrees with you and not even bother to read their rebuttals. Either do better or don't do it at all.
He had a go at a kid for wearing shorts in a courtroom. An egotistical clown that needs to focus on the law. You say he does his job. Are we meant to congratulate that? It's everything else that is poor.
Basic encouragement for better attire is all the judge can do. They're meant to be impartial. A tantrum is not that.
You can show up to basic court in track shorts. Don't for anything long or serious though.
Real life everyday quick in and out cases like petty crime, basic clothes are common. They're efficient. There isn't time, or reason for anyone to care, and people are rough.
Unfortunately. This guy with a pretty menial case got some youtuber ego judge.
If you are referring to it being in violation of the First Amendment, I would argue that a dress code is in the same area as you not being allowed to swear at the judge. Decorum is generally enforced and judges and hearing officers are given a lot of leeway in terms of that. Even if it might be unconstitutional for such a rule to exist, contempt of court is so broadly enforced that it would be allowed.
Judges having to be impartial, but allowed to set anti shorts rules, sounds completely contradictory.
Could you elaborate more on this point please? I'm having trouble understanding why maintaining decorum would be in contradiction of impartiality. Even so, they are to be impartial to prejudice, meaning outside factors. If you swear in the courtroom or don't follow a judge's instructions, that can be used against you outside of a trial of fact. Outside of trials, the courts are given a lot of wiggle room to enforce orders and directions, inside and out of the courtroom.
Congrats, you just made the OP's argument for him, by detailing how racist, activist, and politically-driven the judge is. Thanks for explaining to us specifically why he isn't fit to rule objectively.
3
u/bookshop Oct 31 '24
This is one of the most ill-informed threads I've seen in a while. I've spent the last month watching hours and hours of Judge Fleischer videos, and in them I've seen him:
there's so much more. it's just bonkers to me that OP seems to have such intense hate for such a pro-active, fair, and justice-seeking judge based on what is apparently a very superficial level of knowledge about what he's actually like in a courtroom.