Courtroom is wrong place for judge to have his hawk
Regarding “A Hobby for the birds” (Feb. 21):
I cannot believe that a Superior Court judge would be allowed to have a hawk in the courtroom while he is conducting court. Superior Court is where really bad cases are tried. Where judges demand respect and decorum while court is in session. What a slap in the face to victims present and all victims! How do you think they feel while a farce is made of their attempt to get justice? Would the prosecutor be allowed to bring his cocker spaniel to court during trial? How about the defense attorney bringing his pet cat? The jury and their pets, or how about the defendant and his pit bull?
From what I’ve heard, Judge Craig is often sympathetic to the defendants and rude to victims’ families, almost to the point of insulting them.
I can only assume that the hawk was a victim or sympathetic to the victims. After all, “He used the bathroom on the judge’s bench.” I’d like to think this was a protest on behalf of all victims.
Taunya Warren
Greensboro
Comments (3)
To report abuse of the comment feature on this site, please use the feedback form at the bottom of any page.
In the Courtroom, Judges are God.
Posted on March 2, 2009 6:50 AM
Judge Elreta Alexander started her day by proclaiming to the courtroom that "the truth shall set you free." These idiots would blab and brag about the whole caper. Then off to jail they went...
In another era, there was an elderly black lady who'd been brought in for stealing from a grocery store. The store manager said she had stolen a pack of souse meat. The judge asked "what is souse meat?" After the manager told him, the judge looked at the lady and said "why didn't you steal a steak?" He then advised she get the help she needed for food stamps and found her not guilty.
Cool judges.
Posted on March 2, 2009 11:01 AM
"What a slap in the face to victims present and all victims! How do you think they feel while a farce is made of their attempt to get justice?"
I feel good that the victims don't get their way in court. I, of course, greatly sympathize with their plight, but the defendant is innocent until proven guilty.
Until he is proven guilty, the victims are just emotionally lashing out at other innocent victims, creating a cycle. The defendant needs every ball in his court, or else we will convict the wrong people. Just look at how many people have been freed from long sentences due to DNA testing. Every hurdle the victim and the prosecutor has to leap is a good thing.
Posted on March 2, 2009 12:28 PM