|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Clancy
(chermanstovall@msn.com)
on 09:39 PM November 16th, 2005 EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 10:09 PM November 16th, 2005 EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
Excerpts:
Lawrence now admits his actions were wrong and would "consider other alternatives" to resolve the situation, the commission said.
"Respondent's failure to adhere to mandated contempt procedures — which he clearly knew about but disregarded — constitutes misconduct warranting public discipline," the commission said. Repeatedly raising the sentence "was a gross abuse of discretion and a substantial overreaction to their efforts to protest his ruling."
---------------
Basically, amongst the other rights that have been stripped from men, is the right to free speech. I am sure for this one case that drew public censure on review, there are a significant number of cases that slide by unprotested and uncommented on. Just remember, don't piss off the judiciary: Our Modern Gods on Wheels.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:00 AM November 17th, 2005 EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
I came to the men's movement after judge locked me up for 9 days after denying to determine bail in a situation where my ex used false allegations of domestic violence to destroy me and gain upperhand in the procedings.
In my case, the judge never even looked at me...once. Never mind hear my plea that how can I be held when no injury occured?
If a man is in court for any reason with any sort of allegation against him form a woman, justice is not blind. You are considered guilty.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 11:11 AM November 17th, 2005 EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
...before men were jailed just for BREATHING.
Why doesn't this story shock me...? (sarcasm)
Thundercloud.
"Hoka hey!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Luek on 08:33 AM November 18th, 2005 EST (#5)
|
|
|
|
|
Just more proof that we have more to fear from the bastards in black sheets than the ones in white ones.
Judges should be subject to malpractice suits just like lawyers are. That is the only way to stop crap like this example of judicial tyranny.
Why are we fighting in Iraq when garbage like this happens to men every damn day family courts are in session? Right here at home is where the real war on terror should be fought!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on 02:37 PM November 18th, 2005 EST (#6)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by unrulypassenger on 06:23 PM November 18th, 2005 EST (#7)
|
|
|
|
|
If he's worth his salt, he'll tell you how to dress, deport yourself and address the judge. As unfair as this sounds, that judge (probably a man) has been listening to and putting up with that crap for years and it won't cut it. Save the drama queen stuff for the parking lot. You really might do yourself a favor and it won't kill you to exercise a little self control. Reflect on this post when they ask you to bend over and spread 'em. Only trying to help.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
SJones writes "A New York "Family Court" judge is in the news for sending a man to jail because he sighed and because the judge didn't like the way his eyes looked. The judge was admonished not for his prejudice in sending a man to jail for what amounts to breathing and standing silently, but simply for failing to follow protocal. Apparently the judge was supposed to warn the man before sending him to jail for essentially no reason at all. The story is