Higher Rank

It's interesting how many hierarchies exist in our world. It's just funny because we are taught to think on an equal basis, yet virtually every aspect of work and school is based on either a bureaucratic or hierarchical system. Certain grades are higher than others, which give a person more merit and credibility. And, here at the Court House, apparently the lower you are on that chain, the more likely you are to be disrespected by a parent. My first experience of being told, "You're too low to speak to." Well it's funny, because most people do not realize that it is absolutely possible that the "lower-downs" have power too. For example, let's think of upper classmen guys in school, and lower class girls...See my point? Maybe not totally more mature, but definitely in some aspects. Even here, this woman tried to undermine me as an 18 year old intern. Ok, you want to play it that way? Well you wanna know my credentials: disrespect me, you will be escorted off of the premises in hand cuffs. Disrespect that power, and you'll not only be escorted off the premises, but you'll be escorted to jail. BAM! So as much as we want these hierarchies to limit the power that those who are in a lower position, there are ways to access and use the power that the "higher-ups" have.

In other news, I am shocked about why older men insist on getting with younger girls. In court on Friday, we heard a case of a girl who was impregnated by a 20 year old when she was...14!! I just don't understand. Actually, I get it, most 14 year olds just want to have that first guy that will give them those butterflies, and their vulnerability is attractive to these disgusting predators. So how do we teach these 14 year olds, or these "lower downs," that they still have the power to deny the "higher ups"? Will it help if we drive in their head that it's against the law? Will it help if we tell them that the older they are the more likely it is that they have an STD? Because we can be somewhat skeptical that a 20 year old is not losing his virginity to a 14 year old. Maybe it's better to ingrain into young women that they are just as powerful as men! We choose! It's a mindset thing, and it's about time we start believing it.

Hectic Day At the Office

I'm sorry...actually NO, I'm not going to be sorry for embracing my feminism. But today explained why the world crumbles when a man steps into woman's work: the courtroom. My job is to "run the court," basically meet with the parents/attorney/juvenile and the judge to bring into the court room. I was doing my  job...then comes Steve.

"The person who knows how……. will always have a job, but the person who knows why….. will be the boss."


Now, I'm not saying I could be the boss (well at least not at this point in my life) but that quotation explains the difference between me and him. I knew why. I knew where...and who, what, when, and how. He knew... the wrong damn cases. I'd call a case, and he'd come in and "confuse the flow," in other words begin to annoy the solicitors and the judge. Guess who that falls on if that happens? Needless to say, Mr.Man was put back in his place, and let the women run the place. 


Initial Appearance this week, juicy stories are-a-comin'. 


In other news... how much you can twist the law-- Bullshit


"If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law."
         - Winston Churchill

Hmm...

It's Chambers Week (meaning no court, and nothing to do). Except for me :) I was put in charge of a sociology project for the solicitor's office: I am taking all of the 1993 delinquents, documenting their age, race, sex, age of first appearance, and all of the charges they have acquired over the years. After I put that into the database, I must then see if there is a trend: Do we dismiss more female cases? Do we try more blacks? Is truancy the most common first offense?

Now lets be real here, we could conjecture what the realistic answers are going to be. But, in the past week, I have only seen 4 black people in the courtroom, out of the 50 or so I have seen. It's funny, that same dichotomy pops up all the time. You stick to the stereotype, but then see that it is different in reality. So, I leave it up to you? What do you think it would really be? I'm troubled because I feel like we are so stuck in the past down here, I mean we have these databases that they think are the greatest things that have happened to technology, when it's probably what we used in the 90s, but I can't say that there will be an obvious trend. But, I could be wrong.

"Lukewarm acceptance is more bewildering than outright rejection."
                 - Martin Luther King, Jr.

Friday, Friday, Gotta Get Down on Friday

"This is a court of law, young man, not a court of justice."

- Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr.

The definition as given by my wonderful Mac for justice is "the quality of being fair and reasonable." So, think about this, where do those two qualities depart from law. It is true, no where is it mandated that the law has to contain justice. But, this is America, where justice is an intrinsic part of law! I mean the perfect example would be eminent domain. I bring all of this up because I wonder if it is fair and reasonable to take children from there parents for having several number of unexcused absences. I believe they should be punished, but to be detained? Really, though, think about how "reasonable," "fair," and "just" some laws are. 

Not too many exciting things today. So I just thought I would make you ponder a little bit about our justice system. Next week is chambers week, so I will be doing lots of snooping and I will interview my office about the case with the juvenile that brought the gun to school. Of course, I will be taking Monday off so expect to hear from me on Tuesday. 

Have a happy Memorial Day!

"The law isn't justice. It's a very imperfect mechanism. If you press exactly the right buttons and are also lucky, justice may show up in the answer. A mechanism is all the law was ever intended to be."

              - Raymond Chandler

I Pity You on Resurrection Day

So if you have noticed, I start and/or end with a quotation that I ponder and build off of. Well let me tell ya, today there is not an intellectual in the world that can create a quotation adequate enough to explain my experience today. So, I'll just begin by quoting people I heard from today:

"You want to be a lawyer? [I reply by saying yes] He chuckles. I pity you." 

                            - Public Defender Paul Rathbun

"Ma'am do you have a legal objection to admitting this evidence?" The woman responds, "Yeah! He's lyin' and sleepin' with that girl from the oval winda."

And my personal favorite -- "His sister is dating outside da race in front of MY children!"

I will put each of these quotations in context by adressing the first and then the second and third together. You're in for a treat because that case was so good I had to reenact it. 

Public Defender, great guy. Very down to Earth. He told his client that most people who are caught with their drug-selling boyfriend will use their body to buy from their significant other and she said, "Ok, I'll definitely remember that." ?!!!!!???!!?? Anywho, today was my first initial appearance (IA) [the first phase I described yesterday]. Well today we met with about 50 different delinquents it was all quiet boring until Ms. 14-year-old, 3 months pregnant, snorting cocaine because it "won't hurt the baby," rolls in handcuffed because she ran away from her detox home. Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I rest my case. Y'all provide your own commentary to that hot mess....

Moving on.. Remember when I talked about the juxtapositions of law? Well it hit me today that the biggest and most bizarre combination in court has to be the oath. The pilgrims, or so I was taught, (but you really can't trust your elementary text books because they still teach that Christopher Columbus discovered America. That man didn't do anything but reveal his geographical stupidity) that they worked hard for the separation of church and state. Yet, LOOK we are making people swear under a God that they may or may not believe in. What would have happened if we put Osama Bin Laden on trial? Do we change the words to Allah? Didn't think so. 

Now, for the special. It was so special it made it to my facebook status! Today I got to shadow a well respected and feared FEMALE judge today :) and today she was to oversee proceedings in divorce court. Never in my life, have I held in so much laughter and was baffled to the point..well just wait. Today we saw the case (I'm going to name it Case Lollipop [that's currently playing on my itunes and I will be changing it] so to protect myself from this crazy woman and not to talk about things that I may not have permission to talk about) Lollipop, with Mrs. Lollipop as the Plaintiff and Mr. Lollipop and the Defendant. They got married in 1989 and separated in 2008....Right I know what you're thinking, this case has been carried out for three dog-on years. Well that's because Mrs. L refused to split up the marital property. Throughout this case, I will be offering you lessons that I have learned today:

First, DO NOT represent yourself if you literally do not know a damn thing about the law. Mrs. L, heaven help her, but seriously, help her, came to the court room willing to represent herself [well I heard later, her former lawyer couldn't work with her]. So we heard her testimony first, seeing as she was the plaintiff. These are some of the things she had to say: (note none of the people were wearing hijabs, but I brought a bunch of scarfs down here and this was the only way I would ever wear them this summer)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k005QzZZF1c

And trust me the judge had to keep repeating that the defendant's attorney's objection would be sustained because the matter of their children was settled in a final agreement prior to the trial.

Second, if you want to get a leg up with the judge do not interrupt in any way, especially not her.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=81zJ4bNMa88

The defense testimony continued by submitting 8 pieces of evidence about the property, proved that it was marital property that can be split up in the agreement, and the financial standing. Mrs. Lollipop, of course, refused to submit anything of the sort because "he ain't getting nothing!" (Basically she thought that if she changed the deed from being under her name to her mother's, that he couldn't get any of the land. Which brings me to my next lesson.

3) Sorry Austin, but resisting positive law on moral grounds doesn't work in this world. I would say the best part of the trial was the mother's 35 minute testimony (she was also considered a party in the case because the land was deeded to her; she also represented herself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mXZTbUNQKQA

I guarantee that the real life version was much better, but I think this will suffice for now. I'm sure you either got a kick out of the testimony or just my acting. Basically the judge split it 60/40, 60 going to the woman because it was her family owned property. But this lady was asked to get a psychological examination because she is mentally ill clearly. Let me know what you think of the reenactments. Tomorrow back to the juveniles. P.S when the defendant’s lawyer requested for a restraining order an asked his client if he thought that she would abide by it, she shouted no i won’t….haha!

I leave you with this: 

"Many of life's circumstances are created by three basic choices: the disciplines you choose to keep, the people you choose to be with [Mr. Lollipop learned that one today], and the laws you choose to obey."

                        - Charles Millhuff