Judge removed for faulty judgement!

[IEATV8S]

ALBANY, N.Y. (AP) -- New York's top court has upheld the removal of a Niagara Falls city court judge who jailed 46 people after no one would own up to a cell phone that rang in court.

The state Commission on Judicial Conduct concluded in a November decision that Judge Robert Restaino "snapped" during the March 2005 session. It voted 9-1 for his removal.

Restaino was hearing domestic violence cases when the phone rang. He released everyone later that day.

He says he was wrong and under personal stress at the time. He says his record was otherwise unblemished and there would be no similar incidents.

The New York State Court of Appeals on Thursday unanimously upheld his removal. It calls punishing innocent people "inexcusable."

[slow87]

Why would some one who has a temper become a judge. Glad he's gone

[John Larkin]

I'm glad he did what he did. It kills me to hear a cell phone ring in a meeting; there is a vibrate-only option. Adults act like children in regards to cell phones. Happens all the time as if their life will be ruined if they miss a call. I also enjoy the excuses of "eminent family emergencies" as to why the phone is on. If you have a loved one on death's bed, why the frik are you not with them?

[no-nos]

If i was there , i would have a really good attorney by now

[BlackoutDrunk]

He got what he deserved. I don't get why some judges act like dictators. They should be held to the same standards everyone else is. A JUDGE of all people should be cool, calm, level headed and not personally involved in a case he is presiding over. It's called being a professional.

[sixgun86gn]

He got what he deserved. His position does not give him power over the people...the people gave him the power to carry out the law.

The whole judge power trip thing is stupid to me.

I am a voter,I vote for senators,representatives,councilmen and even judges.

Yet, if I end up in one of thier courts for whatever reason they can talk down to me,and I have to call THEM "your honor" ?!!! Without being able to defend myself under threat of being held in "contempt".

Who the F do they think they are?

Total BS

They should be called Mr. or Mrs. or whatever,but "your Honor"?

The dude was given his job by the people and it has absolutely nothing to do with honor. Maybe competence,or understanding of the law...

Bottom line is they work for US,not US for THEM.

I don't get this stuff,it's not rocket science. The law is the law,but if a judge makes a decision that runs against the majority of the people (thats right libs,its still a majority rules democracy) he should be fired by the people and replaced with a judge that does what the people want.

That would fix the whole legislating from the bench by these activist judges that think they can force thier beliefs on us.

[a trail rider]

Originally Posted by John Larkin

I'm glad he did what he did. It kills me to hear a cell phone ring in a meeting; there is a vibrate-only option. Adults act like children in regards to cell phones. Happens all the time as if their life will be ruined if they miss a call. I also enjoy the excuses of "eminent family emergencies" as to why the phone is on. If you have a loved one on death's bed, why the frik are you not with them?

Did you read the whole story? He had 46 people held in jail because 1 phone rang. Did all 46 people own that 1 phone? No, surely they didn't.

While phones are irritating to those of us who aren't getting the call, we have no right to hold everyone accountable for 1 phone ringing.

Besides, who's to say people cannot simply forget they have a phone turned on? Sometimes you think you left your phone out of a room specifically to keep from bothering others when infact, you forgot to set it where you planned. In that case, you wouldn't attempt to turn it off for court proceedings and would be just as surprised as anyone when it rang.

If you happen to be in a courtroom when it happens and the "judge" goes on a tirade, you may think it wiser to keep your mouth shut, thinking he or she will soon settle down rather than continuing the act like a 6yr old having a temper tantrum... So really, in this case, it wasn't the adults acting like children. It was one adult, who had been a judge, acting like a child.

The point of removing him from his post is clear... Even though many judges deem a courtroom "their courtroom" on a daily basis, that court belongs to the very people sitting in the audience and the judge does nothing more than represent the system... He/she has no added rights due to the position, but they do have provileges... Taking them to a point of "rights" is beyond their legal allowance and those judges should be removed from that spot immediately.

Having been a victim of a judge overstepping his bounds in the past, I fully agree with kicking him to the curb. I wasn't on trial that day... But I was treated as a criminal because I wouldn't say what the judge told me to say... Which is illegal on his part. He got away with it. This one didn't.

Btw, if you have children, they may be fine when you head to work, but near death by the time you get news of an accident... It's not like most people just decide to visit a court when someone they love is expected to die... Of course, in domestic violence cases, that could well be the situation and a family member may be in court with hopes of having a criminal kept in jail...

[John Larkin]

Wrong. The right thing to do was for whomever knew the phone rang, including the person who owned it, step up and admit their error. Instead they cowered and avoided their adult responsibility to admit their mistake in a court of law where orderly conduct is required. The persons next to the offender played it cool, just like the gang T-shirts that read "No Snitchin". Just let the law figure it out, ain't my problem. You'd feel differently if witnesses to an offense against you didn't speak up. Theoretically they all were in contempt of court.

[sixgun86gn]

Originally Posted by John Larkin

Wrong. The right thing to do was for whomever knew the phone rang, including the person who owned it, step up and admit their error. Instead they cowered and avoided their adult responsibility to admit their mistake in a court of law where orderly conduct is required. The persons next to the offender played it cool, just like the gang T-shirts that read "No Snitchin". Just let the law figure it out, ain't my problem. You'd feel differently if witnesses to an offense against you didn't speak up. Theoretically they all were in contempt of court.

Yes they were all in contempt,by the judges point of view. But the fact remains that there is no law to back him up for his actions and they are actually his BOSSES...yep that's right... And they fired his ass too,by holding THIER justice system accountable for his actions.

Like it or not the courts belong to the PEOPLE and not judges.

BTW you are in the minority in this forum based on your stance. Most people would probably not agree with you.

So what do you think the absent minded person with the phone should be sentenced for? What actual law did he break? What sentence would you like them to recieve? Death?

[a trail rider]

Originally Posted by John Larkin

Wrong. The right thing to do was for whomever knew the phone rang, including the person who owned it, step up and admit their error. Instead they cowered and avoided their adult responsibility to admit their mistake in a court of law where orderly conduct is required. The persons next to the offender played it cool, just like the gang T-shirts that read "No Snitchin". Just let the law figure it out, ain't my problem. You'd feel differently if witnesses to an offense against you didn't speak up. Theoretically they all were in contempt of court.

Wrong? Did you have more to go with that, or were you just realizing the judge ...er ... former judge over reacted?

See, you're basing your argument on an "offense" against someone... No such thing actually happened, except to say the judge was offended that a telephone rang, upsetting his rule of law according to him. That's just tough though, because the judge is just a person too, and it's not his place to be offended... His job is to be impartial at ALL TIMES! Even if he's unhappy. He worked for the people, not the other way around. They should've held HIM in contempt for having a childish tantrum, and being unprofessional... Instead, they waited and had him thrown out... This is good.

Generally, the idea of owning up to ones mistakes is agreed upon. However, the owner of that phone probably knew how much of an ass that judge was, and may even have set him up for a fall. Acting like an idiot made that happen. Judges shouldn't be idiots...

The only person in contempt about this situation was the judge himself. He had no right to do what he did. He definitely broke federal, state and local law by having all those people held against their will. HE should be in prison for kidnapping, false arrest, false imprisonment, and violating the rights of 46 people, among other things... And that's based solely on this particular incident. He got lucky they only decided to fire him.

Two moral wrongs don't make a right, morally, or otherwise. Those other 45 people were under no obligation to speak up against the one who's phone rang because that ringing violated no law. The owner, likewise, was not obligated to speak up(though he/she probably should've) because our rights are protected against that. Being offended, even as a judge, does not measure up according to our constitution as a reasonable excuse to break the law of the land.

Perhaps the only really good thing about this case is that some judges may actually take note that while the court may have their name attached somewhere, they DO NOT own any of it individually and they DO work for every soul who steps inside while they are on the bench. Even when they're offended, they still owe the people respect because it's almost always those people who put them in such a reputible position.

And I can hardly believe anyone would defend the judges actions here. He adnitted he was wrong... Once that happens, I ain't feelin' sorry for ya!

[The Blob]

Originally Posted by sixgun86gn

BTW you are in the minority in this forum based on your stance. Most people would probably not agree with you.

I'm 100% behind Larkin on this one.

And just because a majority of people agree on something does not make them right.

So what do you think the absent minded person with the phone should be sentenced for? What actual law did he break? What sentence would you like them to recieve?

Probably all the judge wanted was for the person to admit it was them and to apologize.

Instead, he/she and all of the other sheeple acted like cowardly douche bags.

[Gothmog]

I dont get why the people next to the cell phone person, didnt rat him out, I would have, rather than go to jail

[a trail rider]

Originally Posted by Gothmog

I dont get why the people next to the cell phone person, didnt rat him out, I would have, rather than go to jail

Probably the principle rather than the general reasoning. The 1st thing people tend to do is go, "wasn't me" and disregard things that aren't clear problems. Far too often they disregard things which are... Anyway, if the judge seemed to instantly lose it... Then I can see people thinking... "Who does this idiot think he is, anyway?" And with that, zippin' it... Just to see if he does something really stupid. As I suggested earlier, this may have been a setup due to his past actions. Sometimes folks get fed up with bad attitudes and scheme to get even, or even to make certain a problem gets fixed. In this case, it got fixed. Donno if it was a setup, but hey... Couldbe...

[BlownZ]

Originally Posted by The Blob

I'm 100% behind Larkin on this one.

And just because a majority of people agree on something does not make them right.



Probably all the judge wanted was for the person to admit it was them and to apologize.

Instead, he/she and all of the other sheeple acted like cowardly douche bags.

So if you were in the court room...and didn't see whose phone rang and honestly did not know whose phone rang....then you should go to jail?

That's stupid, and you know its stupid.

[baknblk]

Originally Posted by BlownZ

So if you were in the court room...and didn't see whose phone rang and honestly did not know whose phone rang....then you should go to jail?

That's stupid, and you know its stupid.

I agree ! I can not imagine going to jail because of someone's phone ringing let alone my 80 year old parents whom both do not hear that well. Sounds like a Communist thing ! What would he do if someone farted, start cutting noses off until someone admitted ?

[a trail rider]

Originally Posted by The Blob

I'm 100% behind Larkin on this one.

And just because a majority of people agree on something does not make them right.

Just because we have laws though, the judge was wrong. That's the point of the matter. The judge broke the law on purpose merely because he was angry. He shouldn't get a pass because he wears a black robe, let alone because he's not happy.

The majority is required to make law... So in this case, the majority was indeed right.

Probably all the judge wanted was for the person to admit it was them and to apologize.

We can probably all agree with that. Doesn't mean he gets to break the law.

Instead, he/she and all of the other sheeple acted like cowardly douche bags.

Seems more like they held to a plan to me... To rid that court of its tyrant dictator. Looks like it worked too.

[The Blob]

Originally Posted by BlownZ

So if you were in the court room...and didn't see whose phone rang and honestly did not know whose phone rang....then you should go to jail?

That's stupid, and you know its stupid.

Welcome back!

[The Blob]

Originally Posted by a trail rider

Just because we have laws though, the judge was wrong. That's the point of the matter. The judge broke the law on purpose merely because he was angry. He shouldn't get a pass because he wears a black robe, let alone because he's not happy.

The judge did what I can only dream of doing... putting some inconsiderate prick with a cellphone in jail.

Every now and again that would be so much fun!

Seems more like they held to a plan to me... To rid that court of its tyrant dictator. Looks like it worked too.

Are you kidding?

Forty six people could never get together and order lunch without completely F'ing it up so I totally doubt they could pull something like this off on purpose.

The person with the cellphone deserved to go to jail for being too big a prick to admit it was him/her and apologize.

Anybody who knew whose phone went off... and that would probably be a good many... and didn't say anything deserved to go to jail for being pusssies.

Anybody who didn't know whose phone went off and didn't apply some serious pressure to those who did to rat him/her out deserve to go to jail for being sheep.

That the judge was completely out of line matters little to me because... well, just because.