Judge Resnick
UPDATE: I was sent this link, (NBC 4) and in that article they did not provide the full details. I then found other articles and linked to them without reading. I'm guilty of jumping to Zambia, which is on the other side of the Conkulshun mountains. Foot, ankle and leg fully in mouth. You (Hat tip to the cool headed CenterLeft)
Here are the links to the "good" articles I have only just now read. (Links: Toledo Blade, Cleveland Plain Dealer and Ohio News Network)
I have deleted the original post as I was so far off base there was not point to keeping it up. It was a good one, if only it had been true. I'm human. I can and will make dumb mistakes. I just hope to have more integrity than CBS when I do.
posted by Dublin Saab @ 10:57 AM
8 Comments:
You don't have to drive yourself, Judy. They're called cabs, they're very easy to get in the middle of the afternoon, and, as a judge, I imagine you can afford them.
Any other person that did that would have been dragged from the vehicle and handcuffed quite unsociably, while officers with guns drawn screamed not-at-all nice things. This is unconscionable that someone who had already failed the breathalizer and was generally being an uncooperative nuisance should be allowed to simply decide she didn't want to be there anymore.
I hope this does get much wider publicity. Let me know if there is anyone I can harass or write to to bring this to light. No free lunches for felons.
I tried to comment know if there is anyone I can email to try to draw attention to this beyond what you've already done. You or I would have been dragged from that car at gunpoint with a lot of very angry staties shouting mean things. She can afford cabs; she might look into it. This legal gold standard cannot be allowed to go unchallenged.
Whoa..Nelly. I actually went and read those articles. There is no "felony fleeing." Even if she were charged with it after leaving the gas station--which she probably did because she was hammered and didn't understand the instructions, not because she was willfully evading--its still a misdemeanor less severe than a DUI. She was arrested, not "allowed to drive home." This post has its facts badly wrong, and I regret linking to it without investigating it first. No more repeating rumors--belated New Year's resolution.
Hopefully I'm not responsible for getting Dublin Saab in a furor over this incident with the original NBC4 link.
I too have cooled off today with the new details. The Justice has apologized (though anyone can issue a contrite statement written by their handlers) and her attorney has even entered a motion to have her "not guilty" plea withdrawn (likely to "no contest").
That still leaves some serious issues. The video doesn't lie...she was drunk at 2pm on a school day, speeding an weaving in a state owned Jeep. Her attitude toward the officers was demeaning and rude. She acted like a washed up drunk, not a supreme court justice. She obviously has a drinking problem and needs to seek treatment.
The Dispatch also stated this morning that she will automatically lose her Jeep for three years, and there's no likelihood of a private chauffer from the State Patrol as she requested while sloshed.
As for the "driving off"...I still think they were light-handed with her. Had it been me, it would have been stop-stick, multiple cruisers, K-9, dragged from the car a gunpoint time.
While you did send the link I am fully responsible for not reading futher before posting.
And I agree with you that she does have a "problem" and was handled with kid gloves. However I think the fact that her political career is completely ruined is enough to satisfy me. Remember we vote on the justices in this state and she will not be re-elect. Not with that video floating around. Her term runs up on Jan. 1st, 2007. That will be the last we see of her.
Let's explore felony eluding vs. failure to comply further. They are part of the same ORC section, ยง 2921.33.1. The more serious charges can be levied depending on the circumstances surrounding the chase.
My contention is...had Joe Citizen driven off from the gas station...it would have escalated into a full-blown pursuit, ending with felony charges and "honey bring the bail money."
I think what happened in those six miles were frantic radio calls between the officers and supervisors on how they were going to deal with a DUI supreme court justice. This is beyond celebrity. A supreme court justice is bigger than life, with deep pockets and far-reaching political connections throughout the state.
In the end, the State Patrol showed restraint in a highly unusual situation, which is the best outcome for all involved, including ordinary citizens of Ohio. They had no choice but to end the situation without incident, for the alternative would have been a disaster. For the rest of us though, this stunt would have ended in handcuffs.
One last comment and I'll drop this issue. The Dispatch (which unfortunately requires registration) had the following headline Wednesday morning on the front page, below the fold: Justice Ignored Police Orders. If that isn't casting the first stone, I don't know what is.
Let me clarify a point: yes, she was certainly treated (as I think we all agree) different than the ordinary citizen. However, cuffs or no, I think had we not floored the car when the cruiser lights went on, we would have been charged with misdemeanor failure to comply. That would probably (I'm not certain) be a concurrent suspension with the DUI, so not much additional harm. DublinSaab is right though; driving sideways drunk at two in the afternoon (and, by the way, a lot of her previous traffic history looks conspicuously like whitewashed DUI's) is not one too many on a Friday night; it seriously implies a drinking problem. Her career is in all likelihood finished, with no tears shed here.
Nice job on the retraction and apology. "Integrity Even if it Stings" will be your honorary blog slogan for the day.
Post a Comment
<< Home