"Young kid, adult crimes" : Off the Record : Blogs : News-Record.com : Greensboro, North Carolina

John Appel said:

What do I think?
I think your "discussion in the editorial board meeting" has as much relevance to whether a judge made a proper and legal decision as my discussion with my dog about whether your editors make good decisions or not.
You guys sit and pontificate about things in which you have no experience, so what makes your opinions have any value?
I could sit here all day with friends and discuss whether the doctors over at Cone are doing their jobs properly or not, but our opinions have no value, either. I'm sure my tire mechanic probably has an opinion about how the local supermarket should or should not be run, but that has no value either.
I have gotten so tired over the years of people outside the court system trying to tell them what they should or should not be doing, and whether their decisions were proper or not.
The law and the courts are a very technical institution, not based on what others think or whether people who aren't involved agree with them or not. You don't have the education, knowledge, background, or experience to judge those whose life and profession has been spent doing something you have not.
Sorry for the rant, but you asked.

Posted on May 5, 2005 10:42 PM

Yvonne said:

Mr. Appel, I disagree that you were merely giving the staff what they asked for. They asked what we thought about the judge's ruling. They did not ask for all the venom that spilled from your gut.

I also disagree that just because a person is not an "expert" in something their opinions are of no value. Besides, I did not read into the topic that any one at the N&R was trying to "tell" the court system how it should operate.

Back to the subject at hand. If you are old enough to do the crime, you are old enough to do the time. It is a mockery of justice to allow him to remain in the juvenile justice system with the possibility of release after only three years and the probability of having the crimes exponged from his record.

It is my opinion the judge made the right decision to allow him to be tried as an adult. He will be off the streets a little longer and have more time to contemplate the consequences of his actions.

Posted on May 6, 2005 2:27 AM

Doug said:

Yvonne,

Thanks for your comments and for your defense. We certainly think everyone is entitled to express an opinion - even us!

John,

Whew!

Let me respond this way.

We elect judges in North Carolina. That means voters -- every four years in the case of District Court judges like Susan Bray -- express an opinion of how well they think the judges are doing.

I take it from your remarks that you regard this idea as absurd, that you think people outside the court system aren't qualified and shouldn't be allowed to pass such judgment. Is that an accurate reading of your view? If so, how do you think judges should be seated, and who should evaluate their performance?

Posted on May 6, 2005 8:35 AM

John Appel said:

The question "What do you think?" was very broad, and what I wrote is what came to mind when I read that question. I hardly think that my opinion, expressed in civil terms, constitutes "spilled venom." I don't think your attack on me personally was warranted.
The editorial staff seems to think that Judge Bray needs their affirmation that she did the proper thing; that somehow the editorial staff has an obligation to pass judgement on every judicial decision as to whether it's correct or not; and that what they think carries some weight in the judicial process. Our judges don't need the permission or affirmation of mass media commentators in order to determine if they did the right thing.
By it's very nature, the "editorial" in the newspaper purports to be the position of the "community," but it's really the opinion of the newspaper commentators who snobbishly think they should have a larger say in what happens in our community because of their exalted position. I don't buy that crap.
As for the subject of the column: Judge Bray is a duly elected judicial official, we elected her to make these decisions. Let her do her job without trying to interfere in the process from the outside by granting or withholding the newspaper commentator's "blessings" on her decisions. I don't think our judges should need to read the feelings of editorial staff every morning to decide what judicial decisions they should make that day.
Sorry, I just ranted on you, didn't I? I apologize, but I worked in the criminal justice system for many years. It's probably the most maligned, most discussed and cussed, and least understood entity in our community. Everybody thinks they "know" what the judge should do, but nobody understands what the judge is legally bound to do. I could go on and on, but few people outside the inner workings of the process have a clue as to what goes on or why.

Posted on May 6, 2005 8:42 AM

Doug said:

John,

Thanks for the additional post.

I'll have to take exception to one point in particular. We don't portray our editorials as representative of the community. Sometimes, in fact, we take positions that we're pretty sure most people in the community would not agree with. For example, we recently endorsed in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants under certain conditions. Our editorial board also opposes the death penalty. At the same time, we encourage readers to express their own views, which we publish in letters to the editor, counterpoint articles and op-eds. We also provide this forum and other blogs for exactly that purpose.

As for judges, we have the same right as anyone else to agree or disagree with the decisions they make. We offer editorial endorsements of judicial candidates, and we prepare those by interviewing candidates, talking with courtroom observers and reading opinions in the case of appellate judges. I've interviewed many members of our state Supreme Court and Court of Appeals over the years, and feel I've learned a lot about how the court system works.

I have a great deal of respect for judges, who make difficult and critical decisions every day. Are they always right? No. If they were, no case would ever be overturned on appeal, and every higher court decision would be unanimous. Is every judge a good judge? Unfortunately not. Some have deserved to lose their seats at election time.

I suppose if we couldn't express disagreement with the actions of our judicial system, we'd have a tyranny of the courts.

Posted on May 6, 2005 9:02 AM

John Appel said:

Doug, I did crack on you guys pretty hard.
You statement was not about expressing an opinion on her decision, but about passing judgement on whether it was "right" or not; whether Judge Bray made the "correct" decision. The wording of your statement implies that somehow you have a duty to review and affirm or reject the "correctness" of a judges'decision. Who gave you this power? Do you think your (liberal editorial staff) determination of "correctness" should sway a judge in what they do on the bench?
I have the same problems with unpopular jury decisions lambasted by the public, editors, etc. The decision of a jury is, by it's nature, correct because it IS the jury's decision. You can agree or disagree, but it's a legally binding decision made by a duly constituted jury. Not a question of whether it was correct, just whether you agree or not.
Yes, please report on what our judges do so those of us outside the courtroom can determine if we like their decisions. This will allow us to decide ourselves whether we want to reelect this person next time around. But don't try to do the judges job yourselves by telling me whether a decision was "right" or "correct" based on your feelings, not on what the judge has to evaluate from the bench.

Posted on May 6, 2005 9:02 AM

John Appel said:

Sorry, Doug, we're typing at the same time and falling all over ourselves, like a time-delayed phone conversation. I'll give this a rest.

Posted on May 6, 2005 9:04 AM

Yvonne said:

Mr. Appel, I regret you took my comments as an attack. I did not mean for it to sound like that. You say you reacted to "What do you think". Well, I reacted to the hostile tone of your post. For me it seemed like a sharp sword of words piercing the flesh of all who were reading your post.

I have said many times I love people with passion as it identifies them as real people; ones that really give a dang. While I admire your passion in relatively controlled doses, the unsensored, unleashed version seemed a bit overwhelming.

I do not claim to know the intricate workings of the criminal justice system. My limited experience has been confined to two stints as a juror. I did my best to stick to the facts presented and not let my personal feelings enter into my decision.

From my point of view no one outside the CJ system is qualified to judge what happens within the system. But being reasonably intelligent adults with a variety of experiences does, however, make us qualified to render an opinion. And that is all I was doing and how I construed the comments of Mr. Clark.

So can we back up and start over from that premise? No more attacks from me, just opinions.

Posted on May 6, 2005 12:12 PM

John Appel said:

Unfortunately, Yvonne, this was not about "opinions" it was about the editorial staff meeting to decide whether an elected judge made a "correct" or "right" judicial decision, and then promising us a future editorial on how they ruled on the judges decision. The NC Court of Appeals and NC Supreme Court decide that, not newspapers.
I'm all for discussion of topics, including the courts. But where does the N&R staff get off acting as if they have some power or authority to review judges decisions, and acting as if we commoners look to them as a power higher than the court?
Discuss the issue, don't promise us the decision of the "high, exalted, loyal order of the editorial staff" to let us know if someone in a profession they don't practice did the correct thing or not.
Doug, I'm glad you've spent a few minutes over the years talking to judges. I've talked to many horseowners and riders over the years...but that doesn't mean I can ride a horse.
I'm sorry, Yvonne, I just reread my post and didn't get a hostile tone from it. Perhaps it's that you feel anyone who disagrees with you is hostile, I don't know.

Posted on May 6, 2005 5:07 PM

Doug said:

Our editorial will appear in Saturday's edition.

John, it will not contain the word "correct." That seems to be the major hang-up here. You're absolutely right that we are not judges here, so we don't get to say what is a legally correct ruling by any court. That's my poor choice of word in the blog post. So your input had an influence on what will appear in the paper.

I'm still perplexed as to why you think mere mortals (including editorial writers) shouldn't comment on the work of the courts. They are public institutions, after all.

Anyway, thanks for the discussion.

Posted on May 6, 2005 5:22 PM

Doug said:

Just one more thought, John. In this case, Judge Bray would have been legally "correct" either way she ruled. She had discretion under the law. I assume she made a decision based on what she thought was best under the circumstances. For what it's worth, I think she made a good call.

Posted on May 6, 2005 5:52 PM

John Appel said:

Doug, I fully support discussion of court issues, or any issues. I engage in it frequently. The more the merrier, and that is exactly the purpose of editorial comment and letters to the editor, etc.
I just don't think that editorial writers (or Hollywood actors) have any more credibility than us regular folks, or that by virtue of their position we should give more weight to their opinions. I don't think it's proper that they try to hold themselves out as "experts" or intimate that the rest of the world needs their affirmation as a sign they did the correct thing in a profession not practiced by the opiner. (Is that a word? Opiner?)
I've seen Judge Bray work both as a prosecutor and a judge, and I usually concur with her decisions.
Thanks for the discussion.

Posted on May 6, 2005 11:04 PM

Rifleman said:

I have been watching this discussion from the jury box and am pleased to see that Mr. Clark has been swayed by by reader opinion and argument. It gained momentum and reason when Yvonne the troll left and crawled back into her cave or wherever she lives.

Posted on May 6, 2005 11:59 PM

Yvonne said:

Rifleman, In several different posts to Mr. Clark Mr. Appel made reference to his anger (Sorry for the rant, Sorry, I just ranted on you, didn't I?, Doug, I did crack on you guys pretty hard) but denied it to me. He tried to turn it back on me and suggested it was my problem. I had already asked him if we could start over and discuss the issue at hand but he clearly rejected that.

It was apparent to me Mr. Appel did not want to be inclusive in his discussion with Mr. Clark so I bowed out. I fully understand his issue was with the staff and had no trouble bowing out.

If that makes me a troll in your opinion, all that means is that is your opinion. I certainly don't care, for you have as much right to express an opinion as Mr. Clark, Mr. Appel or me. I wish you could have been a little more fair in your evaluation of my position but evidently you couldn't. Se la vie.

Posted on May 7, 2005 8:05 AM

John Appel said:

I use the term "rant" to describe a long-winded, all -inclusive, sometimes rambling discourse on any subject, not an expression of my anger. I rarely get angry. "Cracking" on someone means you expressed a differing opinion, no anger necessary.
I have my opinions on many things, as we all do. But it takes a lot more than words on a paper to make me angry. I may express my opinions in strong words sometimes, but it's the conviction of my beliefs coming out, not anger.
As I said before, my discussion was not directed to the topic, but the wording and apparent attitude of the editorial staff and their treatment of the topic.
Except in case of egregious error, I rarely discuss the merits of a judge's decision.

Posted on May 7, 2005 9:56 AM

Yvonne said:

Mr. Appel, Apparently I offended you so I do apologize. It was not my intent. I do not recoil easily but your strong responses evoked that reaction from me. I am satisfied to agree to disagree.

Posted on May 7, 2005 12:33 PM

John Appel said:

That's OK, Yvonne. It's hard for the written word to convey the same feelings and tone of the writer that you get from a face-to-face discussion or conversation. Facial expressions, tone of voice, body language, etc., all contribute to understanding the attitude and fervor of the speaker. Perhaps you mistook my sarcasm for anger, it was not.

Posted on May 7, 2005 4:52 PM

dede said:

http://www.rena.gr/xxx

http://www.rena.gr/xx/

http://www.rena.gr/

http://www.rena.gr/xxgrfree/

http://www.rena.gr/xx1/

http://www.rena.gr/dating/

http://www.rena.gr/

http://www.rena.gr/aaxxx/

http://www.rena.gr/links2/

http://www.rena.gr/host/