Here is the "heroine":
This judge was reportedly the subject of THREE writs of prohibition in one month - an extraordinary occurrence.
The subject of one writ was that the judge improperly silenced the testimony of an alternative suspect in a murder case.
Compared to New York, Missouri appears to be the shining example of transparency and accountability in judicial disciplinary proceedings.
In New York, a judge will only be taken off the bench if he displeases prosecutors.
As it happened recently to judge Thomas Keefe, the "sit the F**K down" judge of the Albany City Court.
I actually had a report from a witness from August of 2014 that this particular judge, in an eviction proceeding:
- used expletives against two women, for example, yelling at a grandmother "sit the F**k down" when she was in the middle of a pro se legal argument;
- mocked and humiliated pro se respondents for researching the law on their own and yelling at them for referencing the law to him
So, When Judge Keefe harassed pro se parties, mocked them for trying to make legal arguments and yelled at them "sit the F**K down!!!" during those legal argument - complaints about him were disregarded, and the court refused to release copies of audio recordings of his rantings to the parties whom he harassed in the courtroom.
Yet, Judge Keefe was recently forced to resign amid investigation of his misconduct.
Misconduct continuing over a LONG period of time.
SUMMARY of the 13 charges against Judge Keefe:
made impatient, discourteous and undignified remarks to and about the Albany County District Attorney's Office and the prosecutors who appeared before him and, by his words and conduct, conveyed an impression of bias against the District Attorney's Office
made discourteous and impatient remarks to the prosecutor,
failed to accord the prosecutor the right to be heard according to law and sua sponte dismissed the charges without a written motion to dismiss before him, in violation of Criminal Procedure Law §§ 170.30, 170.45 and 210.45.
sua sponte dismissed the charges in the absence of a motion to dismiss made in writing and/or reasonable notice to the District Attorney's Office, in violation of Criminal Procedure
Law §§ 170.30, 170.45 and 210.45.
created the appearance of impropriety by meeting ex parte with the defendant, shortly after pronouncing the defendant's sentence and contemporaneously signing a commitment order indicating a sentence that differed from the pronounced sentence, without providing notice to the attorneys of his meeting with the defendant and the change in sentence
created the appearance of impropriety by meeting ex parte with the defendant while his criminal case was pending before Respondent
created the appearance of impropriety by engaging in an ex parte conversation with the defendant about, inter alia, the defendant's potential sentence and ineligibility for the drug court program
engaged in an improper ex parte conversation with the defendant about the circumstances underlying the defendant's alleged violation of his drug court agreement
engaged in an improper ex parte conversation with a representative of the victim of the defendant's alleged crime, and asked the representative to reduce the amount of restitution sought from the defendant
engaged in improper ex parte communications with the defendant's mother, S C , who was the alleged victim ofthe crimes
engaged in improper ex parte communications with a man who claimed to be relative or friend of a defendant in a case pending before Respondent, regarding the defendant's purported violation of her drug court agreement
engaged in an improper ex parte conversation with defense counsel concerning the pending proceeding
Directed the defendant not to communicate with her attorney, in violation of the defendant's right to counsel pursuant to Article I, Section 6 of the Constitution of the State of New York
and the Sixth Amendment of the United States Constitution, and remanded the defendant to jail for one week for calling her attorney
made undignified and discourteous comments to the defendant, who was participating in the Veterans Treatment Court/Track
My MULTIPLE complaints about documented cases of ex parte communications were tossed by the NYS Commission for Judicial Conduct without investigation.
So - Judge Keefe was not suspended for something BAD (even though they did through in a couple of charges about violations of defendants' rights).
Judge Keefe was predominantly suspended for taking the defendant's side and hurting the prosecution.
And in New York, inlike Missouri, a judge cannot keep on the bench if it crosses the prosecution.
As Judge Keefe's example demonstrates.