Was Judge Donald Stephens Black-balled?

When considering why it is so important to have an informed electorate prior to our judicial elections, consider this: Former House Speaker Jim Black was sentenced to federal prison for corruption and was allowed to pay off half of a $1 million fine with the transfer of some land he used to own. Wake County School Board member Ray Margiotta and many others voiced their opposition to the deal and said that Black should have paid off the entire $1 million fine in cash. (Hey, look, the guy had the resources!)

Margiotta especially objected to the deal because Wake County schools, the recipient of the proceeds of the fine got $500,000 in cash and the property, which was assessed (wink, wink) at $613,000. Margiotta and others noted that the Mecklenburg tax valuation was really only about $149,000, and it was discovered that the appraisal had been arranged by Black's family.

Now this is a cool deal. If I ever get in trouble in Wake County Court and I have to pay a fine, I could turn to my collection of antique stereographs valued at anywhere from $500 to $3000, depending on who's buying. So if my fine is $2,500, I won't go out and try to sell the darn things...I'll just turn the collection over to Judge Stephens and simply tell him they are worth $3,000.

Anyway, when Stephens learned of the criticism from Margiotta, the News & Observer's Rob Christensen reports, Stephens was "livid at the remarks and summoned a Wake County School Board attorney to his court room to be chewed out. The judge called the remarks 'idiotic' and noted that he had not been obligated to levy any fine against Black."

King Donald was right. He could have simply told former speaker Black to take is Black-as* home and not to do it again....under the law he has that power. However, having accessed the million dollar fine, King D had an obligation to the people of North Carolina to secure the darn money.

Judge Stephens actually said publicly, that he would have to give serious thought to whether he would levy fines in the future that would benefit the Wake County school system.

WTH? ("H"ell sounds better in polite company). Let me get this straight. You are a judge hired by the people of North Carolina to I-N-T-E-R-P-R-E-T the law. You make a decision that some of the people have questions about and you get sooooo upset at them have the nerve to question your reasoning and decision, that you decide to punish their kids in the future? Now THAT'S Royal reasoning.

Now Margiotta, an Art Pope, Koch Brothers supported Republican, apparently bent on segregated schools in Wake County, was most likely more concerned to make sure that the knife in the chest of the former Democrat Speaker, would be pushed in deeply and turned real sweetly, so his views may have been more myopic than it appeared at first blush.

However, Judge Stephens' threatening comments concerning future fine-based financial support to the children of Wake County, prompted The Wake County School Board to send a letter King Donald Stephens thanking him for devoting fines and forfeitures to the school system.

The letter was signed by school board chairman Kevin Hill and said in part: (read between the lines boy and girls...)

Wake County Public School System is extremely fortunate to have been the recipients of fines and forfeitures granted through the courts. These resources are extremely valuable in supporting the education of our children.

As a Board, we hope you will continue to support education in this manner. The education of our children is one of the most important responsibilities of a community, and commitment such as yours has a positive impact. XOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXOXO

Talk about having to kiss the ring... (stop it...I said "ring")

Now the facts. If you read this story or see the video, you may come away believing that the King was simply scolding one of the court jesters, but (and I hate to say this about any republican) Margiotta was right. The land wasn't worth the $613,000 that Stephens had accepted that it was at the time; and the latest revaluations from 2011 show that the property’s value has fallen 3.4 percent to $143,900 since 2003.

So North Carolina, Wake County Senior Resident Superior Court Judge Donald "Wellington Alowishus Beauregard" Stephens von Wake, the 3rd (not his real name. He just seems like he'd have a name like that. LOL) made a mistake that cost the children of North Carolina $356,100. It was a mistake that was brought to his attention prior to him making it. It was mistake that legally cannot be challenged or amended. It was a mistake that he easily could have avoided had he been more of a judge and less of a king.

The citizens of North Carolina shouldn't be afraid to raise questions or criticisms with elected officials and judges shouldn't threaten our children if they are criticized. Stephens wasn't blackballed...he was Black-balled! The Jim Black team threw him a ball and watched with glee as he ran full court for the lay up!

This time, his animus, hubris, ego and myopia cost us money! November 2012...it's time.....

The Liberals seem to have stolen away all of the once reliable GOP talking points. The Republicans may still TRY to claim that only a GOP president can keep the country safe, but they will spend most of their follow-up explaining away Bin Laden.

They have completely lost the argument on taxes as the country has finally discovered that they are only concerned with rich people's taxes.

Today is Christmas. As a Die-hard Democrat, concerned with gun violence nationwide, the GOP may think I would be tactically unarmed, however, although Santa didn't bring me my AR-15, I did get one this year.

The increased rise of hate groups in response to the election of the first African American president, may have pushed some liberals to "cling to OUR guns and religion," also. Guns and ammo, more like it.

As a liberal, I believe that nobody really should own an assault weapon, but if the feces hits the fan, I don't want to get caught bringing a 9 iron to a gunfight. I've always believed that had Emmett Till been better armed, he coulda whistled at any gal he wanted. Outrage always seems to be enhanced proportionally with the vulnerability of the accused...

Conservative candidates, as well as the once unchallenged hate groups, dismiss the ever changing dynamic of the liberal electorate at their on peril...

Have A Raleigh Jolly Christmas

As the 2012 Judicial Elections begin in earnest, we at Outlier Magazine are taking a look at these judges we have given so much power to rule over our lives. Case in point. Business Court Chief Judge John R. Jolly, Jr. (kinda rolls right off your tongue doesn't it?). I once drove an hour and a half to appear before him for a Monday morning calendar call. When I got there, he proclaimed my case wouldn't be held that day, but later "sometime" during the week. Maybe Wednesday or Thursday. He wasn't sure. (scheduling...hey it happens).

I asked him if he could let me know the day so I could get a hotel room in town the night before or schedule the case for the afternoon of whatever day he chose so I could be sure to be there because I-40 is a bear in the morning and the inclimate, snowy weather was brutal. He simply said "No!"

Well, I arrived the morning of the hearing about 35 minutes late. As I walked into the courtroom, he pronounced loudly and with glee, "You weren't here and I dismissed your motion!" His subsequent order stated the motion was dismissed due to "failure to prosecute!" No mention of my request to be informed of the hearing date early enough to get a hotel the night before or to have a afternoon hearing out of concern for the inclimate weather. Pretty slick there Jolly!

Anyway, Not wanting to jump back on the road during rush hour traffic, I sat and watched the next case. The attorney was from the same law firm as the one I was facing (YMW) although I didn't know this one.

I was initially confused. The YMW attorney was representing a white lady (let's call her Lucy) whose child had been bitten by a dog owned by a black pro se litigant (let's call him Martin). Martin looked like he was some simple under-employed guy and I was left wondering why Lucy had paid all this cash to a high priced law firm to go after some guy that looked like he didn't really have any cash. I later found out that the guy and his brother (no, not brutha...brother)(let's call him Bill) owned their home and Lucy was going after that asset.

First the YMW attorney told the judge that they had served the Complaint on Martin and Bill and although Bill had replied, Martin had not, within the time limit and therefore he was in Default. There was a little problem... They had served the Complaint on Martin and Bill (let's call it "Peterson"), when in fact Martin and Bill were actually named (let's call them Philips).

The attorney and Judge Jolly knew that failure to serve someone under their correct name should have voided the service and the Motion for Default should have been dismissed, so he asked Jolly to rule the improper service was inconsequential. Surprise civil libertarians...Jolly did just that!

Now that Martin could not object to the improper service, they moved to have Jolly rule that the failure to timely respond was fatally consequential. Jolly did and granted the Default. No, no wait....it gets better!

Martin was now in Default. He was going to have to give up some cash. The only question now was "How Much?" So they had a hearing. Lucy was sworn in and testified that Martin and Bill's dog jumped up, bit their little girl's face and she needed medical care and stitches. There wasn't a dry eye in the house.

Then Lucy testified that her husband went over to Martin and Bill's house and said that Martin threatened to whip up on him and called him names yada, yada, yada. She also testified that the child had long-range school issues, had made statements of fear of dogs and continuing medical issues "according to the doctor..."

As I am sitting there, I am wondering when Judge John R. Jolly, Jr. was going to stop the witness from testifying for the hospital, the child and the husband, but the pro se litigant had no clue this was improper and Jolly did nothing to protect his right to cross-exam the non-present testifying witnesses.

We later learned that the child had left Lucy's house, walked across the street, climbed over the fence and was bitten by the dog IN THE ENCLOSED YARD of Martin and Bill. It is doubtful any jury would have given Lucy a dime under these circumstances. Nevertheless, Jolly, not a jury was the trier of fact and Lucy won; and although Bill had responded to the Complaint, it didn't matter because Martin lost the home as a Default judgment.

Now did Jolly do anything illegal? Probably not. But was justice applied fairly in this case? Ask yourself had the parties been different, would the results have been the same? A black child climbs a locked fence of a white couple, the complaint incorrectly misnames the Defendant, the black litigant testifies for her husband, child and the hospital; and in the end the black couple ends up with the white couple's home....in Wake County, North Carolina...Judge John R. Jolly presiding.... Ya think?

The courts are very crowded in Wake County. I propose to streamline the system: Take all of the cases where a litigant is black or pro se or ESPECIALLY BOTH. Have the judge's clerk send them a note that simply says "YOU LOSE! Pay the man!" In the alternative, make the parties pay $20 to file any motion. That way in civil litigation cases that typically end after dozens of motion, the pro se litigant can be outspent and lose that way. What? Oh I forgot. The $20 rule went into effect October 1, 2011.

North Carolina Business Court Chief Judge John R. Jolly, Jr. With Liberty and Justice for Ya'll.....

Judge Donald and the Stephens Dynasty

You couldn't make this stuff up! At the Wake County Courthouse in Raleigh, North Carolina, there sits the Senior Resident Superior Court Judge Donald Stephens. Frequently, depending on rotation, there also sat another judge named Ronald Stephens, the Donald's identical twin brother, who has since given up the judge game. They look just alike. They sound just alike and having appeared before both of them, I noticed something else. Unlike judges like Baddour or John R. Jolly Jr., both the Stephens boys usually took the time to read the entire motion before them, which is kind of a big deal when you've taken the time to cite the case law and include the relevant facts.

Unfortunately, that's where the similarities ended. Judge Donald tends to disregard the law when it suits him and his demeanor over the years has become, well... de Meaner. (separate story #1) (separate story # 2)

He's never met a motion to quash access to information that he didn't love and if it comes down to a choice between the First Amendment and the other side's request to deny you that right...you're out of luck.

Case In Point: In a recent case Judge Ronald (that's Ronald with an "R") heard a Motion for Criminal Sanctions. The Plaintiffs' witness was lying so badly, Judge Ronald tossed the case out of court without even needing to hear the Defense's case.

After that, the Defendant, (Now became the Plaintiff) sued for malicious prosecution. The Plaintiff (confused yet?) also posted the case on a blog. The Defendants went crazy and asked Judge Donald (King Donald) to hold the Plaintiff in Contempt for posting the information.

However, the Plaintiff cited North Carolina General Statute 7A-276.1, which bars the courts from entering orders which restrict publication or broadcast of testimony, evidence, argument, rulings, etc., that occur in open court. Such an order is declared by the statute to be void and of no effect, and no one may be held in contempt for violating it.

However, Judge Donald, decided, the law didn't actually apply to him or that "HIS" orders would be void and of no effect; and ruled in favor of the Defendants.

To provide some cover though, he invoked the power of the judge to control extra-judicial comments and issued a "gag" order on both parties, so as not to "presumably" effect the jury pool in the purportedly pending case.

In the lead up to the case, the Defendants filed numerous motions claiming that the Plaintiff was continuously breaching the gag order and actually asked Judge Donald to throw the Plaintiff in Jail! The Plaintiff informed Judge Donald that many of the internet posts had been posted years earlier, some by others following the case and some on blogs where the bloggers had lost interest in the blog and abandoned it, making removal of the posts, virtually impossible.

Judge Donald's response to this information? He angrily stated "You remove it all or you can figure out how to do it from a jail cell...! Yea, I know...crazy right? He either doesn't understand how the blogger sphere works or simply doesn't give a crap.

Not to go down without a fight, first the Plaintiff removed everything that he could, but then he filed a Motion to Assert Right of Access to public records. The strategy was simple. If the Plaintiff was saying this information was public record and the judge had no legal right to punish anyone for posting the information, BUT Judge D was saying it was not public information (actually he never said it one way or the other. He simply pretended not to hear the issue) then this statute would basically force the judge to hear evidence that the information was public record and rule accordingly. Pretty simple right?

The hearing was to be on a Monday in November 2009, I believe. The Plaintiff showed up with the evidence that all the information in question was public record. The Defendants showed up with a signed order from Judge Donald "Wellington Alowishus Beauregard"Stephens, the 3rd (not really his name. LOL) that said the Plaintiff already has access to the records in question and there was no need for a hearing on the matter. Cut. Print. File. Let's go to lunch; and shut that dog up!

Now if you are up on your Civil Law 101, you have already identified some troubling aspects of this situation. Number 1: When and How did King Donald meet with these guys to hear the motion, if the Plaintiff wasn't invited to the party? Meeting with one side without the other is ex parte communication and clearly in violation of the Canons of Judicial Conduct.

Number 2: Pursuant to § 1‑72.1. Procedure to assert right of access. The court (Judge D) shall (that's "shall" with a implicit "MUST" attached to it) cause notice of the hearing date and location to be posted at the courthouse where the hearing is scheduled. The court shall rule on the motion after consideration of such facts, legal authority, and argument as the movant and any other party to the action desire to present. The court shall issue a written ruling on the motion that shall contain a statement of reasons for the ruling sufficiently specific to permit appellate review.

However, in this case, the hearing was apparently held in the hallway of the courthouse, Judge Donald's chambers, his house or the Dunkin Donuts down the street! Either way, the Plaintiff was not present, and therefore had no opportunity to present facts, legal authority, or argument, as the statute mandates.

And Number 3: His one sentence ruling flies in the face of the statutory provision that his ruling contain a statement of reasons for the ruling "sufficiently specific to permit appellate review." The Plaintiff was found in Contempt for publishing these public records and immediately appealed the ruling. Take a guess who sits on the North Carolina Court of Appeals? That's right...you got it...Judge Linda Stephens, the queen at the side of King Donald.

Now, there is no evidence that Lady Linda influenced the ultimate dismissal of the appeal....that was left to her colleagues on the Court of Appeals, but it begs the question: If your life, your freedom or even your money is on the line, would you feel comfortable betting on the Stephens Dynasty for justice? We'd like to believe our judges are all sent down from a Frank Capra movie to do the right thing in the face of having to rule contrary to family, friends or political pressure, but we all kinda know that isn't true of most human beings. Most people just aren't that stoic.

So even without the constant verbal bashing of litigants, bullying of persons before him or as in this instance, a question as to if he willfully violated the law and the Canons of Judicial Conduct to help out one side over the other, can we afford to knight one man with such far-reaching power and simply assume a case that began in his twin brother's court, metastasized through his court and ultimately was decided by his wife's court, will absolutely be decided absent extra-judicial forces? I'll answer that for you...Hell No!

Oh, by the way... want to know what happened in the end? After the Court of Appeals dismissed the appeal on technical grounds (most appeals die this slow judicial death) the Defendants moved to have the Plaintiff jailed for publishing the records that he had no way of getting removed. The stage was set for a hearing that would determine if the Plaintiff would go to jail. (and the fallout afterwards...No standing on the courthouse steps with Barry Scheck, handing out verbal absolution for this guy...)

Then the Plaintiff realized that the Defendants had also violated the judge's order and posted even more egregious information about him, including his medical information. So he filed a motion to have them held in contempt also. The result? After thousands of dollars, hundreds of documents, several subpoenas, a few depositions and a dismissed appeal; when the parties met at the hearing, the Defendants asked the court to drop the whole thing and the court found the issues on both sides to be "moot." Not to be confused with "Moot Court".....well actually...strike that...it is. I guess the Defendants', and more importantly, the court's, outrage was decidedly diluted when faced with the double-sided blade on the sword of justice, that would not only cut the cotton pickers, but the cotton growers too!

Why is this important? If your neighbor kills his wife and dumps her body in your back yard, one would think "nice try...", but even elementary forensics and a judge paying even half attention to the case would interject common sense into the process and you would have nothing to worry about...right? Wrong!

Judge Donald Stephens, Judge Baddour...Jolly Jr. and a few others decide many of these issues when they see you walk into the courtroom. The legislature in North Carolina passes these basic protections for the people, but if a judge is willing to simply disregard the law, based upon race, class, position or legal representation; then the law means nothing.

After reading this article, mentally calculate the hubris it takes to simply disregard and violate a fundamental First Amendment based law in a case that arguably began as a simple review of an administrative hearing. Now consider the thousands of rape and murder cases that Judge Donald has ruled on.

Ask yourself, if the King would blatantly use his position to improperly support the litigants representing "the state" (that's another issue...stay tuned) when the stakes were no more serious than judicial review of an administrative hearing, what about the innocent defendants over the years, who, faced public outrage and a mob mentality need for swift justice for a rape, child abuse or murder, had to face the King, armed only with a public defender and that unfortunate black tint to his skin? How many of those people are sitting in prison right now?

Judge Stephens asked me once in open court, "If you think this is racism, this case was partly heard before Judge Stanback (Big Black retired judge), is he racist too?" Then he went on with a big smile as he exclaimed what a great judge Stanback was and how he was just one of the coolest people he's known over the years....yada, yada, yada....

Putting aside his obvious cliche "I'm not racist. Some of my best friends are black" example, he was shocked when I pointed out that "yes", Judge Stanback was racist also. If you read his appellate cases or sat in his courtroom, you find that Standback was rude, curt and dismissive to litigants and just like Judge Baddour, he frequently (always) came down harder on black and Hispanic litigants; and did so as a"tip of the hat" thanks to the old boys club. They are actually tougher, to deflect charges that they may be softer on black litigants. It's why President Obama, can't be seen at too many "black" events. "Count the number of photos you've seen of Obama with a majority of black people in the photo).

Judge Stephens was kinda shocked at my opinion of Stanback ( guess he had been using that "get out of Harlem" card for years) and he was even more shocked and amazed when I brought up that when he (Stephens) was presented with that study that showed his Wake County judges were setting higher bail for black defendants accused of the same crime as white defendants, his remedy was woefully inadequate. And he got absolutely pissed when I said "Take a look at the calendar call in Wake County Civil Court! With almost no exceptions, the attorneys in attendance are white...some female...but mostly white males. Is it that black attorneys are more inclined to represent petty criminal cases with much smaller paydays; or is it that they have discovered that in Wake County, if you have a black litigant or a black attorney...YOU-ARE-GONNA-LOSE!?" Stephens decided these comments being place on the record, might be better abandoned; and changed the subject. Pity. I was going to ask him how many times his good buddy and great colleague, Judge Stanback, had been to his home... I'll bet ya a meal at Golden Coral, it never happened!

They say a good lawyer knows the law....but a great lawyer knows the judge! In Wake County, there are very few truly "Super Lawyers." But there are lawyers who win every time because they get the case heard before the King! That's kinda super for their clients... Not so much for the rest of us.

When the Motion for Sanctions came before Judge Donald, to determine if Jack Nichols had stolen evidence from the courthouse file, he held the hearing, read the evidence, realized Nichols was guilty and quickly turned the case over to Judge Baddour. Now D is "THE" man in charge of the Wake County courthouse, but he didn't want to take ANY part of this issue because of WHO the accused was and more importantly, WHO the accuser was; and simply passed the ball to Baddour, who has no problem with pretending he didn't understand the issue...feigned confusion and dismissed it. Now the issue is before the State Bar. It will be interesting to see what THEY do with this political football. They know they attempt to protect Nichols at their own professional peril.

Judge Ronald has retired. Judge Donald, like tobacco in North Carolina, is still King. The 2012 judicial election cycle is upon us. The King may sweep to re-election as in years past. I mean, hell, he's got lawyer and politician money on his side. We only have his record and the truth. Yes, he may win re-election, but this time...Not under the radar! Stay tuned...

Dog Whistle Racism On Today's Political Landscape

It was less than a generation ago when politicians rode the wave of overt racism into office and based their political staying power on their perceived harsh stance against the civil rights of "colored" people. Our state's own Jesse Helms was really good at it. We'd like to think we've moved away from that sort of thing, but if Helms were still here, it seems clear that he'd probably still be representing North Carolina. However racially enlightened we proclaim America to be, it is also clear that the GOP has been hijacked by the worst among us. The amazing thing, in a country that has elected it's first African American president, is the collective refusal to admit the raw covert racism that dominates our political discourse. When Jimmy Carter correctly called it racism; the press and the GOP went nuts. "What do you mean? We can't criticize Obama or we are called racist?" President Obama came out and downplayed the notion, less he give his racist critics like Rush Limbaugh and FOX News an additional avenue of attack against him. So we all have to pretend that racism hasn't simply taken over the political landscape. Consider Natalie Maines of the Dixie Chicks. She made a simple comment that she "was ashamed that President Bush was from Texas." The right wing nuts went crazy. She received death threats, people boycotted radio stations that played their music, people took their small children down to the town square to burn Dixie Chick records, etc. It was crazy; and when you asked them why, they all said the same thing; "She criticized the president at a time of war, on foreign soil, yada, yada yada. Flash forward to today and enter President Obama... Imagine if a black member of Congress had yelled out "You Lie!" during a Bush State of the Union Address. He'd never have been allowed back in the place. Imagine if a "Trump styled" idiot was demanding Bush's birth certificate. How many Nascar drivers would turn down an invitation to the Bush white house because of a "scheduling conflict" or how many of their peeps would boo Laura Bush? Newt Gingrich (his sister says it's pronounced "Gingrick") suggests that "really, really poor children" (dog whistle for "black") should replace unionized school janitors and get paid to clean the toilets. He goes on to say that they have no role models that know how to do the 9 to 5 thing and work for a living unless it "illegal" drug dealing, prostitution, etc. The racist GOP base are eating that crap up with a spoon. They live in a world that they see as "SEINFELD" and "FRIENDS" and but for those lazy, violent, do-nothing black people, life would be grand. Why doesn't he suggest that white middle class or rich children get a job helping to renovate foreclosed homes in their neighborhood; or that poor children be given a job on Wall Street to see how "real" money is made? This next election will be about contrasts. To some, it will be a battle of black against white, rich against poor, 1% against 99%, and good against evil. In an era when we are all pretending that this assault on voter access to the polls, attacks on organized labor, and record filibusters are not based on racist angst and dreams of putting that presidential "boy" back in his place; let's call it what it clearly is...racism! Elections have consequences, but if President Obama loses next year, it will affirm to many that if you don't like the result, you can simply stop everything in Congress, call the president illegitimate, destroy the economy and lie about the president for 4 years; and then try to fix what you've broken "after" you get your guy in there. We can only pray it doesn't work. Well, pray and also FIGHT THE BASTARDS! The funny thing about racism is it blinds you. Many racists would rather their daughter marry the white ex-con that beats her than the good upstanding black guy that loves and cherishes her. Unfortunately for the GOP, they aren't going to find a live boy or a dead hooker in President Obama's bed. It is a testament to how different both sides see the country, that both see Newt as an early present from Santa! Take a look at the GOP field. In President Obama, you're running against the most articulate, intelligent, and savvy politician in the country. That all you got?

Judge Baddour: He's No Tortured Soul

Justice demands that "we the people" be represented by judges that often find themselves "tortured" in deciding the questions of law that arise in criminal cases. However, judges like Superior Court Judge Allen Baddour isn't one of those "To Kill a Mockingbird" judges, sent down from central casting. On Monday, November 28, 2011, Judge Baddour ruled that evidence about the murder of Abhijit Mahato can be introduced during the trial of Lawrence Lovette. Lovette is the defendant accused of first degree murder in the shooting death of Eve Carson. If you recognize the name of Eve Carson, but not Abhijit Mahato, you are not alone. Carson was beautiful, blond, female, American and white. Abhijit Mahato was neither. Ironically, the case of Mahato, who was murdered over a month and a half before Carson has not been tried yet and if his death is in the North Carolina consciousness at all these days, its because Baddour's ruling opens the door for the prosecution to establish a purported pattern against the defendant using evidence from the Mahato case. Under the law, for Baddour to allow the evidence from the Mahato "yet tried" case, he had to rule the cases were similar. To no one's surprise, if you have studied Baddour's rulings in cases involving non-white defendants (and plaintiffs), Baddour ruled the evidence can come in. The effect of his ruling is to prejudice and confuse the jury with a possible jury instruction like: "Now, the Defendant hasn't been convicted of the Mahato crime, so just put that connection out of your head, but both Mahato and Carson were college student (like the other 18.2 million each year)." Don't get us wrong. If Lovette is guilty, and it looks like he very well may be, he should be treated like a lame horse, but we can say that because we are spectators to the wheels of justice. Judges like Baddour do not have the luxury to decide someones fate like he's belly up to the bar with his peeps. In this trial the jury is the trier of fact; but as the judge purportedly concerned with issues of law, he consistently rules for the state (ruled the defense had no right to tipster evidence in this case) despite his clear constitutional mandate to do otherwise. In short, he's fueling his political and judicial rise with the kindling of people's civil liberties. Ironically, as Lunsford Long purportedly said of Baddour after he was appointed by former Governor Mike Easley, “he’s just a kid!” and that he had been appointed solely due to his father’s political influence as Director of Athletics for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Now Baddour's dad "Big Dick Baddour" is out due to scandal, Easley is facing disbarment by the State Bar, and Judge Baddour sits on the bench having refused to pay over $7,000 in delinquent taxes. Oh yea, if you are reading this Mr. Lovette...your judge's daddy was the Director of Athletics for the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Want to take a guess what school the victim Eve Carson attended and was the Student Body President of? Nuff said. Many of us might wish Baddour was tortured when reaching his decisions, BUT HE AIN'T. Prediction: This case becomes an appellate attorney's dream!

REPRINTED FROM BLUENC:



The North Carolina Association of Educators is calling on shoppers to boycott stores owned by conservative powerbroker Art Pope this holiday season. The teachers are targeting stores in Pope's Variety Wholesalers retail chain, which includes Roses and Maxway, in response to what they call his "anti-public education" policies.

The flier announcing the boycott, which launched November 28, reads:

Conservative, anti-public school businessman Art Pope owns Variety Wholesalers, Inc., the umbrella company for the 8 stores listed. His profits fund anti-public education political candidates and supports anti-public education initiatives that include vouchers, reduced investment in public education, merit pay schemes, and the elimi- nation of professional development programs for educators.

Support the NCAE holiday season boycott.

I guess that is what passes for progress in race relations these days. Not so many years ago, if a black man was accused of sexual harassment and sexual assault of a white woman, he'd be dragged from his home and lynched. Enter 2011 and Herman Cain. The GOP was willing to call every woman that came forward with horrific tales of abuse, a gold-digging liar. His campaign coffers swelled and his support grew. It was only when a woman came forward and said she had a 13 year sexual affair with him, that his support dropped off and the "Cain Train" jumped the tracks and crashed. Some might say they dropped the old "How dare you disrespect a white woman" mantra, but still haven't let go of the "How dare you two race mix" firebrand. In the end, Cain had NO CHANCE of becoming the GOP choice to run for president. And make no mistake; his appeal among Republican primary voters wasn't his so-called 999 plan, his so-called heralded business experience or even his straight talk (ala Chris Christie). The GOP lead this idiot out like a drug dealer's pitbull, to snap at President Obama. They could tell the world "We're not racist. We just don't like Obama's policies. See? We support Herman Cain!" But in the end Cain helped to define the depths to which the GOP has sunk. We support President Obama. In fact, I'd take a bullet for the man. But if he came out and said "The people want a leader, not a reader! No, don't know the president of Ubeki, beki, beki, stan, stan...do you? China is trying to get the bomb! etc.," no thinking person could support him. The multiple women coming out of the woodwork were just the pieces of corn in this sh*t sandwich. The GOP has proven, it's not just ideology...these are not serious people; and in a world that is increasingly more serious and deadly, it is incumbent upon the American people to usher them off of the political landscape.

Outlier Magazine is working on a story about Senior Resident Superior Court Judge Donald W. Stephens for the December 2011 edition. However, we are taking a moment to address attempts to repeal The Racial Justice Act. The Racial Justice Act has to do with the death penalty and it allows people sentenced to death, to appeal on the grounds of racial bias. A study found a defendant will be 2.6 times more likely to be put to death if the victim in the case is white, and out of 159 people on death row at the time of the study, 31 had all-white juries and 38 had only one person of color on the jury. Imagine if you were white, accused of killing a black man and the entire jury were black. Of course you'd have not problem with that...or would you? However, according to the N&O, the N.C. Conference of District Attorneys wants the act repealed. The president, Susan Doyle, Johnston County DA, says "If you do not address this issue quickly, the criminal justice system will be saddled with litigation ...” We all know litigation is so much worse than killing the wrong guy...right? The one problem that nobody seems to want to address, however, is what do we do about the racial bias in the judiciary? These DAs are not offering any additional checks and balances to prevent the undeniable racial bias that generated the need for The Racial Justice Act. There is also a large disparity between races when it comes to sentencing convicts to Death Row. Looking just at the federal death penalty data released by the Department of Justice between 1995–2000, 682 defendants were charged with death-eligible crimes. Out of those 682 defendants, the defendant was black 48% of the cases, Hispanic in 29% of the cases, and white in only 20% of the cases. A study of Wake County, North Carolina found that African Americans had bail set 18% higher than whites charged with similar crimes. The median white household in the United States is worth $113,149. The median wealth for a Hispanic household is $6,325. For blacks, the figure is a meager $5,677. That means when a judge sets bail for both a white and black defendant at $50,000, its like actually setting it at $996,556 for the typical black defendant. If they are setting it 18% higher for the black defendant....Damn! When Judge Stephens was informed of this disparity, he simply cautioned the judges to just write down some reason for these harsher bail limits...like an educated racist judge wouldn't be able to figure out something to scribble down and just decide to adjudicate the cases fairly. Imagine if the study discovered the judges Stephens supervises, were setting higher bail for anyone with blond hair or with Jewish surnames. We don't think his response would have been so niggardly. In North Carolina, judges are elected and serve 8 LONG years! Now, finally, the next election is our chance to say we've had enough of this judicially defective King. Most voters elect judges because they've heard their name somewhere or they've seen a photo of him once and he looks like a judge sent down from central casting, but they really don't know who they are or what their record contains. Outlier seeks to turn that around this time. Stay tuned...

The Dog Ate My Homework Dawg...

Former County Commissioner Jack Nichols is currently facing a 111 page State Bar Complaint. Among the many counts, are allegations that he routinely violates the North Carolina Rules of Professional Conduct, by simply providing false information during the administrative and civil litigation process. Case in point: While defending a false statement, made under oath by Donna Mooney of the NC Board of Nursing, Nichols simply lied. Mooney falsely testified that she served subpoenas. When she was asked if she could produce copies of the subpoenas, Nichols jumped in and said the following:

Nichols was then asked who had typed the subpoenas. Nichols' response?

Jack Nichols- License to Steal???

Former Wake County Commissioner, Jack Nichols and the North Carolina Board of Nursing are under investigation by the North Carolina State Bar, The North Carolina Attorney General's Office, the Governor's Office and the North Carolina State Auditor. One of the 133 Counts listed in the COMPLAINT is that he stole evidence from a courthouse file. Probably the most serious charge is that he improperly orchestrated a state agency, the North Carolina Board of Nursing, to hire him as its general counsel to provide litigation services. Under state law, state agencies receive litigation support from the Attorney General's Office and its many Assistant Attorney Generals, who are paid a salary of around $40,000 a year. Nichols convinced the Board of Nursing to pay him a retainer of $5,3000 a month for litigation. Insofar as a state agency (G.S. 147-17) must receive special permission from the Attorney General to hire its own attorney for litigation; AND the Attorney General has to receive permission from the Governor to pass such litigation on to a private attorney, the complaint alleges that Nichols convinced the Board to make legislative changes to the Nursing Practice Act that halted the practice of providing a yearly summary of all agency actions, that would have notified the Governor and facilitated the discovery of the massive over payments. Before the "fix was in", the Board paid its general counsels an hourly rate to advise them during the 3 or four yearly board meetings and to review other such legal questions. The General Counsel would also advise the Disciplinary wing of the Board on any issues they had questions about. The resulting payments to the attorney was around a couple of thousand dollars a years, at most. However, Nichols basically took over the prosecution of nurses under review for disciplinary complaints and essentially became a prosecutor who was paid a bounty for each prosecution. Shortly after Jack Nichols facilitated this massive income stream, he began to run for the North Carolina Senate. His campaigned recorded over $143,000, much of which was loaned to the campaign by Nichols himself. Curious timing... By our calculations $5,300 a month is $63,600 a year. The improper retainer agreement was signed in 2007. Therefore, the State of North Carolina, which has a specific law that states a state agency cannot pay its own attorney for attorney fees associated with litigation, nevertheless, has paid Jack Nichols $318,000 [and counting]. Now THAT'S a [law] license to steal!

Camera Causal Decisions

Judge Allen Baddour did not rule on a request to move accused murderer Barbara Clark from the Chatham County jail to a psychiatric institution in 2008. Instead, Baddour recused himself from the case, citing relationships with some of the people involved. He did say what those relationships were, however; choosing to keep that information close to his judicial vest. Baddour said presiding would not be a conflict of interest, (huh?) but he wanted to avoid even the appearance of bias. Public defender James Williams had asked to have Clark evaluated at John Umstead Hospital, citing a report from a forensic psychiatrist saying she "was suffering from a major depressive disorder ... sense of helplessness, cognitive distortions and suicidal thoughts." Clark eventually pleaded guilty in the of beating deaths of two elderly women at the Fearrington Village retirement community. In December of that year, Judge Baddour announced from the bench, that he had been made aware that the pro se litigant appearing before him that day had made comments on YouTube that he would campaign to defeat Baddour in the next judicial election. The indigent litigant immediately moved Judge Baddour to recuse himself from hearing the pending motions in light of the clear appearance of bias. However, there were no cameras rolling and the case would not be in the news, so Baddour denied the motion to recuse himself, heard the case and surprise, surprise...ruled against the man. Baddour has a clear disdain for pro se litigants. His writings have included papers such as his "Pro se Litigants: An Update and a Survival Guide" in which he essentially outlines how to screw over a pro se litigant and make it look legal. His purported "Survival Guide" is a series court decisions, judicial opinions and rules that help a judge dismiss a pro se litigant's issues and usher him out of court. He even includes a bunch of letters that he sent to inmates, where he seems to rejoice in turning them down for appropriate relief. He ends this "pat myself on the back" guide, with an example of a "gatekeeper order." A gatekeeper order is an order that says a litigant cannot file another motion, paper, lawsuit, etc. unless he gets permission from the court. Unfortunately, gatekeeper orders are supposedly based upon repeated violations of Rule 11 (basically you don't know what the hell you are doing and you're wasting the court's time). The problem with Rule 11, is judges like Baddour apply the rule overwhelmingly against pro se litigants and almost NEVER against lawyers. If you look at his rulings (and we have) you will find two things Baddour includes in almost every order. 1) "Based on its consideration of the matters noted above, the Court concludes that it has the requisite jurisdiction to address the matters presented in the Motions." and 2) "Plaintiff’s documents and filings were served or filed for the improper purposes of harassing defendants and unnecessarily increased the cost of litigation." Baddour proclaims that he has the requisite jurisdiction, even when the law would tend to say differently...like when he ruled that Judge Joseph Buckner violated a defendant's constitutional right to due process when Judge Buckner increased the defendant's bond without making any findings of fact, contrary to the United States and North Carolina Constitutions. Although we applaud that decision, in North Carolina, one Superior Court Judge cannot overrule another. It's kind of crazy, but that is the law in the state and Baddour violated it. Ironically, it's Baddour that refuses to give findings of fact when requested and required under Rule 52(b). He takes it as an attack on his robe-wearing authority and simply fails to include it in his order, although Rule 52(b) demands it. Next if an attorney moves Baddour to find that a pro se litigant filed a lawsuit or a motion to harass or for some other improper purpose, Baddour will so find EVERY TIME! Unfortunately, under the law, this rubber stamp ruling should be very hard to find, if Baddour was following the law. A review of his survival guide goes into great detail about pro se litigants but is curiously absent two critical elements. First, most courts recognize that they have an absolute legal duty to treat pro se litigants with special consideration; and must, BY LAW, treat pro se pleadings liberally. CONLEY v. GIBSON How could a judge draft a purported Pro se Litigants: An Update and a Survival Guide, without even mentioning the most critical element dealing with the protections for pro se litigants? Answer: Baddour views pro se litigants as a bother...an affront to his power as a judge over the big powerful attorneys that appear before him. That he has to deal with an unrepresented litigant simply upsets the power struggle going on inside his head. Finally, a review of the sample gatekeeper order within his Survival guide, written in 2010, includes a date: December 8, 2008. In a subliminal consciousness of guilt, that was the exact date when Baddour announced from the bench that he was aware the pro se litigant had publicly called for his election defeat, but still heard the case! Not exactly ready for his close-up Mr. Demille. Show Baddour the Door!

Judge Allen Baddour is a Sexual Predator's

Get Out of Jail Free Card?

Superior Court Judge "Richard" Allen Baddour, Jr. ruled that two parts of a North Carolina general statute aimed at protecting children from child molesters are unconstitutionally vague and unconstitutionally overbroad. Baddour said in his opinion the statues infringe on the constitutionally protected right to worship. However, Baddour failed to address why child molesters could not simply worship at the overwhelming number of churches that do not provide on-premise childcare. His decision came after authorities arrested registered sex offender James Nichols for attending a Baptist church outside of Raleigh because the church provided on-premise childcare. The statute says offenders must stay 300 feet away from any area intended for the use, care of supervision of minors and any place where minors gather for regularly scheduled events. This myopic view of the law, together with his insensitivity for the rights of the less powerful in our community; and his willingness to violate campaign finance and tax laws has fueled calls for him to step down or be replaced. Rumors that Baddour tends to support some critical elements of sharia law don't seem to have entered into his decision, insofar as even those who support sharia law, understand the importance of barring child molesters from having access to our children. Although Baddour has small children and lives within 5 miles of 6 registered sex offenders, he seems to believe playing Russian roulette with our children's' safety is an acceptable part of his job description. Someone needs to tell Baddour that this is North Carolina, not Penn State! Show Baddour the Door!

Jim Crow- Black Witness

The Plaintiff repeatedly informed Judge Baddour that the Defendants were covering up a criminally negligent homicide. All the Defendants had to do (over several years) was to simply laugh and say "Your Honor, this case isn't about that at all. It's about the Plaintiff saying bad things about us on the Internet!" Baddour never said "Let's get the witnesses and the documents in here and see who is lying and if anyone was really killed!" He simply dismissed the Plaintiff's case with that disgusted "How dare he accuse these good people" look on his face. Baddour poked the bear with the stick. He was repeatedly asked to recuse himself, but like most bullies, he relished in his power to abuse the Plaintiff without Court TV showing the world. Now WE won't recuse until he's off the bench!

Outlier Magazine joins BlueNC

Aah Haah!

While investigating Resident Superior Court Judge Richard Allen Baddour, Jr. (hereinafter "Dick Jr." or "Little Dick" or "Little D") I came across something most telling. I first appeared before Little D in 2007. There I was telling him "Your Honor, these guys created a hostile work environment, stole evidence from a courthouse file, are covering up a homicide, etc." Little Dick not only didn't give a crap, but seemed pissed that I was even there. At the time I chalked it up to racism or Napoleon syndrome, or whatever. However, I discovered a NC Court of Appeals decision that listed his daddy, former Director of Athletics, Richard "Dick" Allen Baddour, Sr (hereinafter "Dick" of "Big Dick") as a defendant in a lawsuit brought by a female student alleging some of the same issues: hostile work environment, etc. Some of the language is exceptionally disturbing (ie: a coach asking a female student "Who are you f*cking?). Question is, in light of his daddy having to face these kind of charges during that period, was Little D predisposed to use his new found power to screw Plaintiff's with similar causes of action? It may not be that Freudian. He simply may have been raised by Big Dick, to be less sensitive to issues of hostile workplace issues. The scandal that eventually caused Big Dick to resign this year didn't necessarily stem from the above mentioned incident, but from other ethical lapses associated with the sports program and students. Big D had the stones enough to resign. After discovering he has willfully failed to pay his property taxes to the tune of $7,665, and is under investigation by the State Board of Elections for violations of campaign finance disclosure laws, we call on Judge Baddour to show some character and do the same. RESIGN!

In North Carolina, judges are elected to 8 year terms. Therefore, our only opportunity to get rid of the bad ones is during the election process. Superior Court Judge Richard Allen Baddour, Jr. arrogantly bends and breaks the judicial rules of conduct with no consideration of how his decisions affect the lives of those before him. Earlier this year the litigants met to address criminal contempt for failure to pay a judgment. As the criminal defense lawyer began to speak, Baddour declared that despite the previous judge's order to show cause as to criminal contempt, he was going to decide this as civil contempt! Despite the people of North Carolina having to pay a criminal defense lawyer to represent an indigent litigant, he was going to decide this as civil contempt. Despite the movants' failure to obtain a Show Cause Order, he'd let them get a do-over and come back later in the month. (gotta help a buddy out you know!) Despite the evidence being an affidavit sworn by Partrick, and he not being in attendance to be cross-examined, Baddour granted the Show Cause Order. The attorney, having been licensed only 6 months, arrived to defend criminal contempt. Baddour tells him, "argue both criminal and civil!" Unprepared, he did the best he could. The elements of criminal contempt were not present, so Baddour wanted to go with civil contempt! Surprise, Surprise...he finds the Plaintiff (he kept saying "Defendant"...telegraphing his mindset) guilty of willfully failing to pay the judgment, despite the fact the judgment had been on appeal and despite the fact the litigant had paid a partial payment after his appeals had been exhausted. When the attorney brought this to Baddour's attention, he agrilly stated "You didn't show me any evidence of a payment!" The attorney coward instead of saying "You can ask Mr. Kesler here if he received a payment!" Baddour ruled, gave the Plaintiff 45 days in jail (stayed) and ordered he begin making payments within 4 days. Essentially, the Plaintiff was found guilty of having the nerve to appeal a judgment! As they left the courtroom, Kesler, smiling, quietly handed the Plaintiff his previously sent money order back. During the time of that extra-judicial disgrace, Baddour, owed over $7,000 in UNPAID taxes! His financial challenges known, only to the state, himself and his family, but when faced with litigants that come before him with even more significant financial sitiuations, he exercises an extreme double standard and does so with the arrognace that masks what should be a knowing solidarity. Baddourisms: If a person is 50% disabled, then he is 100% able bodied half of the time! Huh? If a landlord let you pay rent late last month, due to a unexpected hardship, but you had to pay that rent together with this month's rent...then that means the landlord will let you go for 6 months without paying, while you pay a judment. WTF? This must be that fuzzy math we hear so much about. We have to wait until 2014 to relieve ourselves of this burden, but we need to begin now to get out the word! Show Baddour the Door!

Didn't this guy take an oath to uphold the freakin law?

As previously stated, Judge Richard Allen Baddour, Jr. owes over $7,660 in property taxes. However, a review of tax records reveals that he has a consistent pattern of paying his vehicle taxes late. Although these late payments were made within a few days or weeks of when they were due, Baddour signed an order that makes a payment due on the 5th of each month and if not received by that date, he authorized the Yates crowd to call the sheriff and have the indigent disabled veteran arrested. Not go into court and state that there had been a breach, but actually gave these attorneys the power of immediate arrest! Double down on his double standard! Looky Here!

What's Going on in This guy's head?

A recent North Carolina Court of Appeals decision highlighted Judge Baddour's "I got mine, the hell with the rest of you " attitude on Civil Rights. In a reversal of his ruling in the case of Earp v. Quinlan, the Appeals Court ruled that Baddour, true to his history in these kinds of cases, erred when he dismissed the plaintiff's claims of civil conspiracy to interfere with her right to work and her civil-obstruction-of-justice claim against one defendant. If he is going to constantly be a rubber stamp for big law firm litigants, why doesn't he just hold court from his neighborhood Kinkos and we can just mail the case to him. At least then we wouldn't have to endure watching him pretend to reach a reasoned decision. SIDE NOTE: When appearing before him, if a lawyer needs to hand him a document and asks "May I approach?", he says "yes." But if a pro se litigant (especially African American) asks the same thing, he tells them to hand it to the bailiff. He still is afraid of getting his lunch money taken like in school. This guy has got to go. In a recent paper he wrote for other judges, he lays out his fear of pro se litigants. Baddour wrote:
If you are this afraid of pro se litigants, that you have to alert the 60 year old bailiff, that he may have to rescue you, put your big girl panties on and get another job. You cannot be fair to both sides when you hold such fear and disdain for one side and such admiration for the other! Show Baddour the door!

When In Doubt: Follow The Money! Why is this man smiling? We think we Know!

As part of our investigation into Superior Court Judge Richard Allen Baddour, Jr. (Dick's son) we uncovered some questionable irregulaities in how he prosecuted his campaign. In February of 2006 the KEEP ALLEN BADDOUR SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE Campaign ceritified Sherrill Toler Murrell as it's Treasurer. In July of that year they filed a Financial Disclosure Report that listed as the Financial Institution [10 a.] SUNTRUST BANK. In October of 2007 Murrell left the campaign, presumbably to spend more time with her family (wink, wink, knod, knod) and Baddour appointed himself as Treasurer. Although the practice is allowed, it is generally not wise to do because of the time, effort and knowledge it takes to do it correctly without getting yourself a long prison term. And what do you know, Baddour screwed it up and was fined a penalty from the State Board of Elections for not filing his Semi Annual Report on time. They gave him a break and waived the $400 fine though! However, several documents filed by Candidate/Treasurer Baddour after he became Treasurer, listed as the Financial Institution [10a.]KEEP ALLEN BADDOUR SUPERIOR COURT JUDGE; and no longer SUNTRUST BANK. Therefore, at best Baddour screwed up the form by simply failing to mention the name of the bank, at worst he committed a serious election law violation by holding on to the cash and commingling it with his own. If this is what he did, he could be sitting in a cell right next to some of his victims...I mean Defendants. A Complaint has been filed with the North Carolina State Board of Elections.

§ 163-278.8. Detailed accounts to be kept by political treasurers.

(h) The treasurer shall maintain all moneys of the political committee in a bank account or bank accounts used exclusively by the political committee and shall not commingle those funds with any other moneys.

A WILLFUL Double Standard!

157 West Street, Pittsboro, NC

416 SMITH AV CHAPEL HILL NC 27516

An extensive investigation into Judge Baddour found, inter alia, some financial red flags! As of 2006, North Carolina Superior Court judges were paid $115,289. The state, like the federal government, offers attractive benefits to judges, but even so, it is worth asking whether judicial salaries in North Carolina are too low to attract the best possible talent and to be a deterent to ethical misbehavior. A bit of context provides food for thought. The average North Carolina worker earns $38,230 per year, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Most of the attorneys that appear before him make just over $113,000, but first-year associates at the largest law firms (ie: Yates, McLamb & Weyher) now make $160,000 per year. Baddour purchased his home in Pittsboro for around $152,000 in May of 2003. The market value of the home now is around $208,000. Currently he owes $ 2,069.21 in taxes on his home and nothing currently on his 2007 Honda Pilot. His home in Chapel Hill, however is worth around $486,000 for which he is delinquent in his tax payment of $7,662.96. His tax status is listed as UNPAID since September 1, 2011. I get very concerned when public officals with this kind of power are strapped for cash! Last month Baddour sentenced a man that he had adjudicated as indigent, to 45 days in jail (stayed) for not being able to pay a $1,270 judgment. Although indigent and disabled, Baddour found the man had nevertheless "willifully failed to pay." Currently, Judge Baddour has failed to pay $9,732.17 in taxes that are due and overdue! Insofar as he makes a pretty good living by North Carolina standards, his failure to pay his taxes on time can only be viewed as WILLFUL. One orange jump suit in an extra small please!

Judge Stephen’s administrative responsibility (NCGS 7A-105)
Judge Donald Stephens, the superior court judge in residence is responsible for firing court clerks for using and certifying fake court documents per North Carolina General Statue GS 7A-105). But instead, he continues to cover it up, a crime that violates both state and federal statutes. (See home page for full story).

Removal of clerk [GS 7A-105] — The senior resident reviews charges made for removal of the clerk of court, decides whether to suspend the clerk pending a hearing, and conducts the hearing to decide whether to remove the clerk. If the clerk is suspended, the senior resident appoints a temporary replacement.

A Wake County judge is refusing to lift his order sealing documents in the Kathy Taft murder case, despite an appeal by attorneys representing a consortium of North Carolina media outlets.



"I'm not going to strike my order, vacate my order or modify my order," Wake County Superior Court Judge Donald Stephens said after listening to arguments that the recording and documents are public records that deserve to be seen.



For investigators, the decision is what they say they need.



"There is still forensics work being done -- still detectives visiting the scene making certain they are doing everything we can," Raleigh Police Chief Harry Dolan said. "We have a one-time opportunity at that crime scene, and we're making sure everything is checked as thoroughly as we can." However, the chief all but admitted his detectives still have no suspects in the case.



"The department is saying that we can not rule out that it's a random act. ... If I had further information about any suspect that I was looking for -- if I had a sketch, if I had any information -- I would have already provided it to you."



For some who live in the neighborhood, the uncertainty about the case is becoming unnerving.



"I hope they figure out what's going on very soon so we can go back to being a quiet neighborhood and street," area resident Gillian Bowling said.



It was that kind of concern from the public that was part of the argument media attorneys used unsuccessfully on Judge Stephens, asking that some information from the Taft 911 calls or search warrants be released in a limited fashion to allay the public's worries.



"Look at the 911 call, look at all the contents, look at the search warrants and affidavits and all the contents and parse them to release as much as you can and redact the rest," media consortium attorney Hugh Stevens said.



The judge disagreed, saying he was going to err on the side of caution and public safety in siding with law enforcement to temporarily seal the material.



But Judge Stephens also said if Wake County District Attorney Colin Willoughby seeks an extension of that request after 30 days, the judge will have "harsh questions" for Willoughby about why that information is still being kept from the public.

The August Pinch Flat Award goes to ….Judge Donald Stephens

North Carolina Judge Donald Stephens earned this award for sentencing a cyclist-killing, felony-assaulter to teetotaling.

I’ve been putting a lot of thought lately into the appropriate charges for drivers hitting cyclists, but I should be just as concerned about the sentencing. In Brian Reid’s case the charges were right but the sentence was a ‘slap on the wrist’. Reid killed cyclist Nancy Leidy while driving home from class at NC State after a night of celebrating his 21st birthday. He blew a .12 on the Breathalyzer. The charges were appropriate; felony assault by motor vehicle. The sentencing last week by Judge Stephens was a joke; community service, 5 weekends in jail and teetotalism (really, he was sentenced to teetotalism).

Perhaps if you think ‘giving up drinking’ is a harsh enough penalty for such a crime…alcohol must be a pretty important thing to you.

Perhaps, just to be safe, judges with psoriasis, discoid eczema or superficial infections, common in heavy drinkers, should be barred from presiding over cases that involve alcohol – just to be safe.

How would Charlotte citizens react to ‘slap on the wrist’ sentence for a drunk student that killed a cyclist? Would they be outraged? Or would they sympathize with the student’s drunken rite-of-passage and not understand why the cyclist was in the road in the first place

charlottevelo.com

This Old State
Jack Betts on North Carolina people, politics,
history, environment, culture and books

Read more: http://jackbetts.blogspot.com/2009/07/ticking-off-judge.html#ixzz1chlhsP5A

Thursday, July 16, 2009
Ticking off the judge

Wake County school board member Ray Margiotta didn't think much of the deal when former House Speaker Jim Black, serving a five-year-plus sentence in federal prison, was allowed to pay off half of a $1 million fine with the transfer of some land he used to own in Matthews. Margiotta is certainly entitled to his views, which no doubt were shared by a great many people who thought Black ought to have paid off the entire $1 million fine in cash.

Margiotta especially didn't like the arrangement because Wake County schools, the recipient of the proceeds after Superior Court Judge Donald Stephens levied the fine in 2007, got $500,000 in cash and the Matthews property assessed at $613,000. Margiotta noted that the Mecklenburg tax valuation was a fraction of that, about $149,000, and complained that the appraisal had been arranged by Black's family.

"We've got an appraisal done for a criminal," he had said earlier. "Give me a break."

Margiotta was exercising not only his First Amendment right to say what he thinks, but also his right to royally tick off the presiding judge.

As the News & Observer's Rob Christensen reports, Stephens was "livid at the remarks and summoned a Wake County School Board attorney to his court room to be chewed out. The judge called the remarks 'idiotic' and noted that he had not been obligated to levy any fine against Black."

Christensen wrote, "'It's like giving your daughter a Toyota and her saying,"Dad, I'd rather have a BMW,"'Stephens said. The judge said he would have to give serious thought to whether he would levy fines in the future that would benefit the Wake County school system."

Stephens made his remarks about the fine at a hearing in Raleigh Thursday morning in which he ruled that Black can serve his state sentence concurrently with his federal sentence -- but that even if Black gets time off from his federal sentence, he'll have to continue serving his state sentence.

AP Reporter Gary Robertson noted in his story today that Stephens said, "If that occurs, I will not reduce this sentence." The judge added, "He'll have to go to the governor to have it reduced."
Posted by Jack Betts at 2:56 PM
5 comments:
Anonymous said...
Finally - someone who will point out how arrogant Judge Stephens has become. It's time to remove him from a place of power in our community.

July 17, 2009 11:08 AM
Anonymous said...
Judge Stephens ego has grown with his power. Someone needs to take note of this and really see if he is what the state needs. Who oversees these guys.

July 18, 2009 9:19 AM


Read more: http://jackbetts.blogspot.com/2009/07/ticking-off-judge.html#ixzz1chlYtaHt

This article was printe last year by a reporter:
Honest, judge, we’re on our best behavior
I don’t mind being threatened by government types every once in a while. It gets the blood pumping and has happened often enough over the years is amuses me more than anything else at this point.

Advertisement Advertise with Us But most public officials have the common courtesy to deliver their threats in person, or at least through an appropriate taxpayer-funded lackey, rather than sending their pronouncements through a working journalist.

Such courtesy was not extended during the run up to Gov. Mike Easley’s plea hearing Tuesday. Here’s what happened.

Various scruffy media types from around Raleigh and beyond were gathered in courtroom 10C at the Wake County Courthouse. About 15 minutes before Easley’s hearing is set to begin at noon, one of the cameramen says that somebody has requested said scruffy media types to assemble in the courtroom next door.

When we arrive, Ed Crump, (link) a reporter for the Raleigh ABC affiliate delivers the following lecture to his colleagues:

Crump started by saying he called us because, “Judge (Donald) Stephens, who for those of you who don’t know, is the senior resident superior court judge and basically god of the courthouse, knows me and Chad, he asked us to talk to all of you all of you all and say that he is the one who enabled us to have cameras in here – obviously reporters can be in here no matter what he says. But he’s very concerned about the sanctity of the courthouse. He particularly does not want photographers chasing Easley down stairwells. He said he can hold you in contempt in this courthouse and on the immediate grounds, the front steps, the back steps, and he will do that. And he…”

At this point, I interrupted and said something like … let me check the tape … yup, I said: “Why doesn’t he have the balls to deliver that message himself?”

Crump replied, “You can ask him if you like. I’m just imparting what he said.”

And therein lies the problem.

The judge’s message is condescending at best. He assumes that a group of professional reporters is going to act like a bunch of feces-flinging monkeys. He also is delivering a couple different threats. Aside form the contempt warning, we got an additional warning from Crump that Stephens made decide to change the “general rules for the courthouse” for everyone if things were to go badly. In essence, he was saying that North Carolina’s supposedly open courts could get a little less open if Stephens doesn’t like how we conduct ourselves.

Judges, particularly senior resident superior court judges, have latitude to say stuff like that. It doesn’t make it right, but he’s a judge and can condescend all he wants.Reporters suck it up, act professionally, and go about our business to get the job done.

Stephens does lose style points for not delivering the message himself or at least having one of the imposing-looking sheriff’s deputies on hand give us the warning. Heck, the elected sheriff for Wake County was in the courthouse and probably would have been a lot less ham handed. Stephens also loses a few credibility points because I happen to know that Easley was pursued after the hearing by reporters – who may have happened to have cameras but weren’t strictly speaking photographers – from the courthouse to little or no ill effect. (No, I wasn’t one of them.)

But Crump should know better.

He made himself an agent for the Court in general and Stephens in particular. It is one matter to cooperate with the courts to set up orderly pool feeds for trials – as WRAL kindly does much to the relief of my friends in the electronic media. It’s quite another to deliver the threat of judicial citation, jail time and a potential bar to doing one’s job. Crump should have handed that task, respectfully, right back to the judge.

As professional journalists, it is unseemly and unprofessional to communicate threats on behalf of the people we’re supposed to be covering. There’s a not-so-fine line between being friendly and respectful toward your sources and being co-opted by them.

Posted by Mark Binker on Tuesday