Should Judges "hug" people convicted of serious crimes?

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Yeah, but when you criticize human compassion, regardless of where it is, you become part of the problem.

I'm not criticizing human compassion; I'm criticizing a lack of ethics, poor judgement, and a breach of the law.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

I just don't see rejecting compassion as ever being a worthy cause. I see it as archaic, traditionalist type thinking.

Of course, people will whine and complain when police officers offer no compassion and treat people like numbers. That's why just about everyone on this thread is a hypocrite...

Yup... You're all a bunch of hypocrites.

It has nothing to do with compassion but with professionalism. I don't expect cops to be lovey dovey and hand out hugs, either.

 

[Cooky]

It has nothing to do with compassion but with professionalism. I don't expect cops to be lovey dovey and hand out hugs, either.

Why not? We can change the world..!

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Why not? We can change the world..!

Because that's not their job. I expect a judge to be impartial and stoic, deciding things based on the facts.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

The trial was over. The woman was convicted. Are you implying that the judge cannot do her job because she is a Christian ?

Her job is to serve as an arbitrator. Her religious duty is irrelevant to the judicial system as arbitration must be without prejudice or religious. Ironic considering Christians whine about Sharia law yet see no issue with a Christian judge sharing personal religious doctrine in a court of law. So I guess as long it's not Sharia and Christian it's okay to violate state law?

It seems to me that the judge has every right, after her job was finished in the particular case, to express whatever she chooses to a convicted criminal.

No, a judge does not have that right:

(C) Nondiscriminatory Membership. A judge should not hold membership in any organization that practices invidious discrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, or national origin.

Federal Court Finder

Just because a judge renders a sentence, her appearance while in court must be professional, and never implicating any religious, political, racial, or gender bias while in court.

If, after a trial, a judge chooses not to say or do anything with a subject of the trial, so what ? It is based on personal feelings of a person after their job is completed.

She was still in court. This isn't like a judge is at the bar. She was in court where the media was filming and pictures were taken. Regardless whether the sentence was rendered, she was still in uniform and therefore she is still while in court, an officer of the law. that is like a cop buying a pint of whiskey and taking a swig in public. the judge was still on duty while in court and while wearing a uniform.

If a judge wanted to give a Bible and speak to a child rapist after conviction, so what ?

What part of "she was still in court" do you not get? Judges aren't allowed to display any sort of bias while in court especially to someone who is convicted.

What if a judge volunteered to go into prisons and conduct Bible classes in her spare time, is that too a bad thing ?

This is different because they're not in a courthouse.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Imo, sex offenders deserve getting raped by big Bubba. Repeat sex offenders deserve to be chemically castrated.

How Christian of you, and also hypocritical.

 

[Cooky]

Because that's not their job. I expect a judge to be impartial and stoic, deciding things based on the facts.

Me too, in sentencing, but not allowing a judge to express his or her humanity is the road toward cold-heartedness, that can spread in every direction.

...and we all know how cold the criminal justice system is, and how it needs reform. Why not take this as an opportunity to promote change and start here?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Hugging the convicted defendant can be taken as an expression of regret at the ruling, which would suggest that the judge doesn't consider the outcome to be just.

BTW: did she offer any compassion to the victim's family?

The judge did hug the family of Botham Jean. But still, I find this problematic all around and the red above comment you made is spot on.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

but not allowing a judge to express his or her humanity is the road toward cold-heartedness, that can spread in every direction.

Then that sets the precedence for other judges to present partial like behavior which may call into question their rulings as arbitrators. That is a dangerous and slippery slope that would in fact question the entire process of the impartiality of the judicial system. For example, if I'm Muslim why would I perceive myself to have a fair trial if I know the judge is outwardly Christian towards other people facing judgment? I wouldn't think I'd get a fair sentence.

Why not take this as an opportunity to promote change and start here?

Because this is not change. OJ Simpson never received a hug and he was found not guilty, why all of a sudden we are going to be different now?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

If she followed her training, his chances of survival were extremely thin.

Um, he's dead, following training or not, he is dead.

the judge has the right to spend 30 seconds however she chooses with the convicted killer.

Not in a courtroom no she doesn't and that is why she is being investigated and a complaint has been filed against her

Atheist group says Texas judge 'crossed the line' when she handed a Bible to Amber Guyger

According to the Texas code of judiciary conduct:

(6) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not knowingly permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so.

 

[Cooky]

I find this problematic all around and the red above comment you made is spot on.

Maybe I have high standards, but I think professionals should be able to multi-task, knowing to be impartial in judgement, but able to express other aspects of human thought at the same time.

Maybe humanity is not ready for this yet.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Honestly, what actual harm do you see possibly coming from offering compassion after a just ruling?

A judge can show compassion by their understanding of the case and their rulings. A hug is far too familiar in an atmosphere of high formality.

and show their humanity.

They need not display physical contact for that. It would be unethical and illegal in many professions that resolve around showing human concern and compassion towards those in distress. It should be no different a judge.

 

[Cooky]

A judge can show compassion by their understanding of the case and their rulings. A hug is far too familiar in an atmosphere of high formality.

They need not display physical contact for that. It would be unethical and illegal in many professions that resolve around showing human concern and compassion towards those in distress. It should be no different a judge.

Again, the rejection of compassionate gestures is an extension or our archaic thinking, that will eventually fade, like all the other counterproductive instincts of early man.

...IMO.

 

[Saint Frankenstein]

Me too, in sentencing, but not allowing a judge to express his or her humanity is the road toward cold-heartedness, that can spread in every direction.

...and we all know how cold the criminal justice system is, and how it needs reform. Why not take this as an opportunity to promote change and start here?

You're not there to be friends. You can treat someone humanely or respectfully without hugging them or giving them religious literature.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Maybe I have high standards, but I think professionals should be able to multi-task, knowing to be impartial in judgement, but able to express other aspects of human thought at the same time.

Not while in a court of law. She was still in a courtroom wearing a judge's attire and thus she was still displayed as an active arbitrator of the court.

Maybe humanity is not ready for this yet.

What does her displaying and reading a Bible to a convicted murderer have to do with the fact that the judge violated the Texas code of judicial conduct?

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Maybe humanity is not ready for this yet.

Or instead of blaming "low intelligence" or humanity as a whole, you could just accept life as it is, which is that not all professions afford the luxory of mixing your assigned tasks with your personal feelings. If a judge wants to hug someone and give them a Bible, that is fine. However, that it is not a part of their duties and tasks, and is way too familiar for someone who is supposed to be unbiased, impartial, and disinterested.

 

[Cooky]

Next time a cop treats you like a number, just remember how you discouraged compassion in the criminal justice system.

I have nothing else to add.

 

[LuisDantas]

I think that Trevor Noah's speech on this matter was very proper.

Judges and other authorities are not IMO really out of line simply for being human beings having emotional reactions.

But we should be wise to what those reactions, as well as their absences, indicate.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Again, the rejection of compassionate gestures is an extension or our archaic thinking, that will eventually fade, like all the other counterproductive instincts of early man.

...IMO.

I think the only archaic way of thinking here is thinking of must be a simplistic This-or-that. By the very nature of what a judge does, their judgements alone can show great compassion and mercy or subject someone to harsh punishment.

 

[shmogie]

Um, he's dead, following training or not, he is dead.



Not in a courtroom no she doesn't and that is why she is being investigated and a complaint has been filed against her

Atheist group says Texas judge 'crossed the line' when she handed a Bible to Amber Guyger

According to the Texas code of judiciary conduct:

(6) A judge shall not, in the performance of judicial duties, by words or conduct manifest bias or prejudice, including but not limited to bias or prejudice based upon race, sex, religion, national origin, disability, age, sexual orientation or socioeconomic status, and shall not knowingly permit staff, court officials and others subject to the judge's direction and control to do so.

How was what the judge did bias or prejudice ? The trial was over, the killer was convicted and going to prison, the judge had no further role in the case. So, how could she manifest bias ? Bias of what ?

These anti religion groups file complaints all the time, and anyone has the right to complain. Now days no good deed goes unpunished.