Judge Persky, despite the national and international efforts to recall him because of his outrageously lenient sentence given to a rapist of an unconscious woman, was just re-elected - since he ran unopposed. And while sending a message to the community that the woman is to blame herself for drinking, partying - and being raped by a white privileged man behind the dumpster.
But, while efforts are mounting to recall Persky, he is already getting his comeuppance in the courthouse - from potential jurors.
Reportedly, now potential jurors refuse to serve under him.
20 potential jurors so far refused to serve under Judge Persky because of the mockery he did out of the jury verdict in the #Stanfordrapist's case.
I understand their feelings completely.
If they render the verdict of guilty, Judge Persky will simply make it disappear by a next-to-nothing sentence if he "feels" to favor the already convicted defendant, so what's the point?
So, when we are talking about giving absolute judicial immunity for malicious and corrupt acts on the bench (like Judge Persky's) as a matter of public policy - made up by the judiciary, bypassing the legislatures - the public appears to strongly disagree, and offer their own way of fighting it, by refusing to serve as jurors under the dishonest judge.
Who would expect such a turn of events?
But, that's people's true answer to what Persky is doing.
And, since the public started to oppose judicial misconduct by refusing to serve as jurors under a misbehaving judge, and that act of civil disobedience has been publicized, it can happen in other courts, in other states, and in regards to other misbehaving judges.
Let's see whether this trend will take.
No comments:
Post a Comment