In a case where a police officer gave a bogus ticket to one of my sons, I had him go into court to dispute the ticket (he said he didn't do what the officer claimed). It's immaterial what actually happened to cause the ticket. When we went into court, the judge remarked that he was kind of rusty with traffic law, since he normally handled other matters, and was just substituting for our usual municipal court judge. He then said, "Let's look at what the law says about the infraction and compare it to the officer's report." He read through both quickly, and since the officer had fudged up his report, and omitted including the "elements of the offense" pertaining to the law, he dismissed the ticket, without prejudice. This meant that the report could be amended and the ticket brought forward again. But since I had already told the city attorney that the officer had obviously lied in his report -- he had claimed actions that the car was actually incapable of performing -- it's possible the city attorney decided it wasn't a good idea. But the judge acted very properly, and even though he admitted he was rusty, he clearly took due care with the case in front of him.
I woikd rather a judge rusty on a subject who double checks what the law actually is than a judge that thinks they know everything and has seen it all before who misses a critical element.
As an alumni of the family law system in my area, this judge is stating what many other judges are guilty of, but simply remain silent. I found FL judges to be militant against cases that were not settled before their appearance in the court room. 10 or 15min of court room time not enough to convey the months or years of frustration in the case.
This is my question. Though it is bad that a judge says this openly isn't it worse that the judge is ruling on cases that he has little to no background in? I get he can study up on it but that does not equal a judge who has years of experience and knows how to rule on basic questions without having to do a ton of research. It seems a flawed system that puts a judge in that position in the first place. And my other question is okay he was not being professional but were his rulings inline and reasonable compared to other family court judges?
@@rationalbushcraft that's my take on this too. The is admitting that he isn't qualified but they stuck him in there anyway, seemingly as if all judges are equally competent in most areas.
As a former foster parent. I love this judge. Family law is so "how does it feel" compared to other systems. Having a judge that can admit that, and be willing to put that on the record, is fantastic. He knows he shouldn't be there, and says so.
Sounds like a good case for whistle blower laws. There is a big difference between being incompetent at one's job and being placed in a function that is not one's job. This man should be rewarded for his honesty, not punished for the bad decisions of those in charge
So the judge is working his normal judge duties and working family court as a substitute. Seems like a lot to put on one judge. In my exspences I've been rarely asked to do both my regular job and fill in part for a coworker. But never to completely fill in for a coworker because I would either A. I'm not competent in their job duties and not knowledge in their role. B. My normal work would suffer from doing 2 peoples jobs with very little overlap.
Agreed, I was thinking this long before the video was over and heard nothing that changes it. The Judge was honest that he did not know the law for this section of court. Whoever assigned him here is the one who should be brought up on an investigation of incompetence. Many will miss the critical point, to phase this a way easy to understand: He was basically called by "Dispatch" to go fight a fire when he was a trained paramedic. And is now he's the one being brought up on the carpet, while the incompetent dispatcher is totally being ignored. I think it is awesome he was honest about it as a good many of ego-boosted judges would just pretend they know what they are doing and hand down crazy and broken decisions.
I agree, we've dealt with incompetent teachers judges and policemen, and unless you got a lot of time and money on your hands you're pretty much f*caked. (I got burned by an incompetent DA but that's another story) I have a lot of respect for this judge and his honestly .
I would rather have a judge that admits that he doesn’t know everything about it than the one who claims he knows everything about it because he has already made up his mind before he hears the case
You can do admit you don't know this particular law very good in a manner that still makes you look competent. I was involved in a case in which the judge admitted he doesn't know this particular type of law very good. He questioned technical experts who told him they are only technical experts, not law experts, about the law which was probably not the best idea. But he tried to understand the law and not just said "I know nothing and I don't really care". He appeared competent and interested while admitting to not know everything about this particular law. That's how a judge should appear.
I got to give the judge some credit, at least he's honest. It would be nice if he cracked a book or two. I feel like other family court judges just hide their ignorance better.
At least he admits his faults. I would rather have a judge who is honest than a judge who isn't and sends people to jail wrongly. Of course neither should happen but RUclips has shown this seems to be common.
That's what I thought until I realized that he is ruling over the future of a child [i.e.: assuming that a child is involved]. He could lose his job, if he doesn't cooperate, but if he cooperates half heartedly, then the kid can lose his future and gets no vote or say in it.
@@eugenetswong If the judge had not admitted his shortcomings, but instead just acted like so many, and made rulings without truly understanding the situation or the law, would we even have heard about it? He still could be ruining children's lives, but it would be Business As Usual.
I have to respect that this judge admitted his incompetence. Like you said most judges will not admit they have no knowledge but will hear/read the case and laws that apply to the case. Family court is EXTREMELY fragile and I’ve seen many judges make terrible judgments due to such circumstances.
It looks like the judge blew the whistle on himself and the court system. I guess he's a hero? This is family law where the decisions have lifelong consequences and these cases should be treated as if it were a criminal trial where the consequences might be life in prison.
As a Professional Land Surveyor, I have ran into this issue serving as an expert witness regarding real property law. I had a judge who asked me as I was testifying what the law was as I was the expert. I gave case law and statute law references. The plaintiff’s council objected and the judge stated he was over ruled and asked him how many property law cases he had argued. That council stated it was his first case; therefore, my testimony was admitted and the judge dismissed the case because no one besides me knew case law and the subject matter.
Boundary law is a weird backwater unlike the rest of the law. I think it confuses a lot of lawyers and judges. Most of the law has been written into the Statute books but not boundary, step back 200 years to when most of the law was common law.
@@kingalexander43 well juries are assembled from the general population you would have to be a moron not to be able to do a better job than them. But also ya some judges should not be on the bench with how incompetent they are.
@@kingalexander43 with a jury, I don't expect expertise. I expect their opinions and observations to be honest. If a judge admits to it, good for them..but let's get them doing work that makes sense.
family court should only be done by someone who really cares about family law and families. If he even requested not to do it he should not have been forced to do it. Lives are changed by those decisions.
@@lrmackmcbride7498 A COMPUTER took two things into account. Income and % of time spent with child. Ex said she made only $300 per month (SF Bay area!) and wanted 49% custody. Computer said "OK" and I had to pay HER child support, even tho he ALWAYS lived with me. And of course, she was no more active in son's life. Blind 'justice'.
@@stevejette2329 I had custody of the kids, my ex never paid child support. I would call the child support enforcement agency to complain. After a year they suspended her driver's license and issued a warrant for her arrest. She gets pulled over, cop does nothing, just made her have a friend drive the car home. Years later the kids decided they wanted to live with her. If my employer was one day late submitting the child support payment she would call CSEA and the would be calling my employer the same day.
I've had to do the same kind of thing. I've been sent to repair equipment i am not qualified to work on. And probably 70% of the time i end up fixing the issue anyway. But if i am not the right engineer for a piece of equipment, i think it's only fair to the customer to let them know i am not an expert on this gear. There is gear i am extremely competent on, but the company i work for sells a ridiculous amount of equipment, and we don't always have someone competent to do the job at hand. But since they have to send somebody, i end up being that body sometimes. But i feel to represent myself as an expert on certain types of equipment, when i am not, is not only dishonest it raises unrealistic expectations. But if it is explained to the customer that "it was me or nobody" and that "i'll do my level best to help" tends to lessen the sting a bit. And as i said, i end up succeeding more often than i fail. But it tends to make those kind of calls extremely stressful.
Wow ! With out understanding the particulars of practicing law l couldn’t help but smile at this Judge’s honesty , it’s a breath of fresh air in his day and age , I know it flies in the face of the “ system “ and it’s process but good for him ! ✨🇺🇸✨🙏🏼✨
Same with an attourney. I learned that the hard way. Of course Finding an honest judge is like finding an honest attorney. Judges are basically attorneys who wear a black robe & wield a tiny hammer.. Cost of law school makes / school loans makes it so most attourneys couldn't afford to keep principles is my theory Whatever the reason; "the song remains the same"
Most people are actually this honest. Stories like this are extremely common. It's just hard to find news articles about them, since the bad news draws in a lot more viewers than "person acts like a normal person should" so it can seem like it's more rare than it is. Heck, even I do this sort of thing very often. If you ask me a question and I don't know enough about it, I'm literally going to tell you "I'm sorry, I don't know enough about that to give an opinion" . It's so weird to me that more people don't do this, if nothing else for selfish reasons. Why would you rather risk looking like an idiot when you could just be neutral and guarantee that you won't look like an idiot? Again... If an idiot like me can figure this out...🤷♂️
I love this judge. Honesty in Court! What a refreshing thing! DC PS Lehto I think you're taking him out of context. When someone admits to lack of knowledge and ASKS to be walked through it, how is that bad? He is trying to help. I'm sure in lemon law you have documents that aren't found in other types of law.
I had one of the messiest divorces in my county that consumed my life for many years. I was in front of over a half a dozen different judges at a time when only mothers were assumed to be the fit parent of very young children. It started out with false accusations of child sexual abuse which polarized everything and mom initially got everything she wanted. My family law specialist attorney advised me to be happy with every other week visitation. Even the court appointed counselor and psychologist were totally fooled initially, but flipped over time when they slowly learned that mom was a persistent persuasive liar. It was not a fair fight, but I eventually ended up with total custody of our toddler daughter including total control of visitation. New judges were frequently assigned to Family court on the theory they can’t do much harm there while they picked up their judicial skills. Most new judges apparently could not wait to get out of Family court to do interesting work like contracts or lemon law. A judge might hear 20 or 30 cases in a morning short cause calendar. Often, they would rule on only half of the requested issues. One judge read nothing prior to entering the courtroom. Most judges looked only at the motion in front of them. The gender bias was so great, one judge ordered me, the custodial parent, to pay child support to the non-custodial mother. It would take several hearings in front of the same judge before the judge would realize that assuming both parents were equally at fault was not accurate.
If the judge said, "This isn't my field of expertise, as I am filling in, I may have to take breaks to reference applicable laws and statutes. Please be as patient with me as I will be with you." I could understand that. It sounds to me like this judge just wanted to bitch about being assigned to family court, and did so in the most obnoxious way.
Doesn't a Judge have access to a law library and staff to help look stuff up? Isn't Westlaw online and searchable? Isn't the docket scheduled weeks/months in advance?
Agreed. This is more how he said it than what he said kind of deal to me. Had he put it as tactfully and professionally as you did, then this would not be a news story.
@@micwclar a fill in judge could have been assigned overnight if someone got sick and the CASE CANNOT BE LAWFULLY POSTPONED. they have to put them in frount of a sitting judge period. ( iv had a case POSTPONED because of a sick judge. )And another time it was kicked over to another judge , because our judge had a car accident and would be in hospital. The replacement judge didn't find out what cases he was taking untill 5 minutes before he walking in to courtroom. And everything started late.
Yeah, I've run into this kind of problem myself. As an aerospace engineer that works various aircraft systems, my office had an engineer that had to take extended leave for a medical problem. I had to pick up one of his re-design projects and was in meetings being expected to answer questions about that system and the component being re-designed. I told them honestly that until I can get up to speed, I can't answer their questions then and there in the meeting, I would have to take them as action items and update people by e-mail or in-person at the next meeting. I apologized that things will take more time than usual for awhile. I was in that particular repair shop a lot seeing components at tear-down and I was at the jet a lot with the guys repairing that system so I could hear from them what the common problems were, their troubleshooting, what the problem was with the part being re-designed, and all that. I had a lot of resources available but I needed to be able to digest a lot of information and it's just not as quick as it would be for the engineer that has worked this system for years. Everybody was cool about it because I did actually step out and make the effort to get up to speed and do what's right, I didn't just sit with my arms crossed and say pissily, "I'm not the expert on this system, what in the hell do you expect me to do?" This judge sounds very lazy to me. If you're not the expert, go make yourself the expert, or at least become competent. Quite honestly, most of the time people don't expect perfection and instant solutions, if you're making a decent effort and are competent then you're exceeding expectations and doing better than the average guy. People are used to seeing half-assed crap and are generally pleasantly surprised when you really are trying to do it right.
Family law shouldn't be treated like traffic court. The system should treat these cases as seriously as a criminal case that has lifelong penalties and consequences.
Sounds like the lawyers involved in the cases should have requested continuances to revisit the cases once he had had a chance to familiarize himself with the cases and the law. That might have been in the best interest of their clients, though it may have put him on the spot.
Yeah, my friends mom works at the Camden courthouse and just told me about this judge 2 days ago. I feel bad for the families that had to deal with that.
Kudos to the Judge for being honest. I would be more concerned about whoever forced him to hear cases that he knew nothing about that area of law he was not familiar law, and probably had little time or interest in learning.
Sounds like the idiots that forced this judge to do this is at fault not the judge. Someone should get disbarred for not checking to see if this judge was even qualified to do this let alone force him to do it regardless.
It's rare for a judge to be honest or any member of law enforcement for that matter. But is this really a surprise to find a clueless judge on the bench? There are a lot of incompetent and clueless judges on the bench, the only thing about this judge is he actually admitted it and was honest about it. I don't like judges or cops but you got to give this judge credit regardless.
And they often seem to be ignorant of the Bill of Rights. Too many decisions are based on judges' fee fees and ideologies. Seems they have a problem discerning between the spirit of a law, and what it actually says. I expect that from cops, but judges are supposed to know better.
I think the pilot and ticket taker example is to extreme, the guy IS a judge, he should know the workings of a court room and how to handle cases, sure the law is different as are the proceedings, but he should be able to negotiate them or they wouldn't have assigned him to the court. A better example using the airlines scenario would be asking the commuter flight pilot of a twin engine prop plane to fly a 747 because the assigned 747 pilot called in sick. Yeah, the commuter pilot is a pilot, but flying a 747 takes training and experience he doesn't have.
Imo it's just going down the food chain. Using your example, the plane is going down. 1st you look for a pilot that can fly 747. Down the food chain is just a pilot. Down the food chain is an adult that can drive. Fine, don't need to be able to drive... fine, a kid will do.... screw it, a parachute than....wtf, fine how about a cushion? No? How about a bottle of strong wine so i won't feel the pain when we crash.
It sounds like he was thrown in as an emergency fill in. Meaning he literally showed up and had no clue what he was up against until he had the docket in front of him.
A more nuanced example would be a pilot of a 747 being asked to fly a 737. To the public, these are just big jet airliners with a mind-boggling amount of gauges and buttons and switches filling the cockpit. But to an airline pilot, this would be a violation of the "type rating" which they are supposed to be up to date on and checked out in frequently in a specific model of aircraft. According to aviators, the 737 MAX problem had to do with Boeing trying to make changes to the 737 such that a pilot would not need a new type rating to fly the new type of 737 -- but they did it wrong, and people were killed. At least with judges like this, people aren't likely to be killed in a matter of minutes, but their personal lives will be profoundly impacted for a long time.
this channel should be required for all college students and first year law students - everybody needs to watch at least 20 episodes at minimum. Great stuff and really good at explaining process and legal rules - thanks for this effort
Whoever manages the court house staff, I think, is to blame here. Not the judge. They knowingly put him where he was not qualified to be, and he had not only a right, but a duty to inform his 'clients' of that fact. People have an absolute right to a competent judge.
the lawyers are all p.o.'ed because now they have to work to prove thier case. actually a brilliant move. a good way of sizing up who is who. i like this guy he's honest therefore probably more impartial than all the others
I took a police officer to traffic court once and the "temp judge" an accounting lawyer, responded to my question regarding cross walk traffic rules with "how are we interpreting that" to the police officer. Then he ignored the DMV rules I provided him regarding how traffic is supposed to "yield to pedestrians" vs the police officers opinion that traffic must stop and wait until pedestrians reach the curb. This judge was the most ignorant idiot in the room that day as I spent a good 3 hours listening to petty infractions one after another issued by tax assessing minded cops and a judge who pushed traffic school permissions for revenue. I've made up my mind, going to court these days is all about how much money you have, regardless of the type of law involved. Family law is as corrupt as it gets, especially divorces.
When he hadn’t seen a case in 18 years, that was accurate, so maybe he didn’t know what he didn’t know. The next week, it had then been a week since his last case. He knew what he didn’t know and could do something about it. Now repeat 15 times.
This reminds me of a Time Warner internet tech who visited my home while the Charter buyout was pending. We sat down and he told me plainly that he had lost all motivation for work as he suspected he'd be fired anyway when Charter took over. He didn't do any testing or work, but he spoke honest words and was friendly. As a result I had to go through the entire process of calling support, get yet another appointment, taking even more time out of my week. The next tech had to then spend two hours fixing a major problem with my Internet, had to cancel the rest of his appointments for the day, and he was entirely unhappy that the previous tech had passed the buck onto him. So you can say that the judge in question sat there and said honest words. However it's clear he did not do his job to the extent of his capability. He was asking others to spend additional time not to address his ignorance, but rather to address the fact that he wasn't performing his duties. He was still sitting there accepting taxpayer dollars in order to do a subpar job. You can say he was speaking honest words, but was anything else about his behavior honest?
Yes it was honest these cases are more then reading up on laws Its reading people a wrong judgement in these cases because one side made them self look better can be devastating for parents and children involved He no doubt told the supervisor who put him in 1 day a week everything and supervisor didnt care blame supervisor . As for 2nd cable guy he was going to your house to work and get paid for it no matter how it happen
False equivalency. You have taken two things that are mutually exclusive in every way other than that they are both paid in common American currency.... Congratulations, that's the dumbest thing I've read all day...
A judge in Utah did this to my son. It's so frustrating to wait for your day in Court and then have a judge tell you they have no idea what's going on with the case? 🤬🤬🤬
I'm a programmer and I do exactly the same thing when somebody tries to make me do a programming task I'm not familiar with or qualified for. It's not this judge's fault he lacked qualification, it would be irresponsible for him to mislead litigants by omission.
Part of being a programmer is doing tasks that you are not familiar with or qualified for. I wasn't qualified in C#, VB.Net, Python, or embedded platforms. I learned and made myself better in my chosen vocation and further solidified my position.
Maybe that's why it's so strange to me that people would rather risk being an idiot that guaranteeing that the won't be. I'm not a programmer yet (still in college) but that could be why it's so instinctive for me to be transparent in that way.
@@DerykRobosson I'm glad you know everything all the time, so that you're never not qualified when somebody asks. Seriously, you missed the entire point.
At first I thought the judge was right to say he didn’t know. Then I thought, this judge doesn’t want to be there and could care less about figuring it out. He should be removed.
@Steve Lehto : in my humble opinion, this is probably the best of your RUclips presentations, but (of course) I am not really competent to judge it, so on the toss a coin I have decided to "Like" it.
This sounds like the court has major management issues and this judge is quite annoyed by it. But I do think this judge is handling his frustration poorly.
There’s only so much time in a day and only so much someone can do in that time. If he’s handling stuff in another division because they are overwhelmed, it’s likely he’s busy too. Sounds like they are all overworked and it’s a big picture mismanagement problem then a specific problem with the one judge.
I attended high school with the woman who would become the family court judge in my hometown. She had no business being a paralegal, much less a judge.
@@Daves_Not_Here_Man_76 I see you have had dealings with "family court" also. I sat in that woman's court room one day to provide moral support for a friend. I still can't believe some of the decisions that woman made. Thankfully she retired recently.
You have no idea how many times I've been in this exact position. Working computer support, I get handed tickets sometimes on subjects where I have no idea what to do, and I certainly can't say a thing about it to the customers. Just like this judge, I have knowledge about a different area of the main subject, which will help a little in figuring my way around the other area, but much of the time, I'm figuring everything out from scratch. Management knows my weak and strong areas, yet I keep getting these tickets.
I feel for the judge, even though I'm a mechanic I'm a specialist. Even though the trouble shooting is pretty much the same, the tools, procedures and such are pretty much unique to the Italian cars. I'm going to have the basic hand tools and even air tools. Most of the tools and procedures are unique to Alfa, Maserati, Fiat, Ferrari, and Lamborghini adjusting the carbs on an 85 is totally different from a Chevy. So relating to the judge is easy I hate turning away people who need their cars worked on. But I don't have the tools or manuals. And won't work on anything that I don't have manuals and tools for.
The fascinating thing about this is that in most professions, that kind of behavior is likely to get you promoted, not complained about. Admitting you don't know enough about something to speak on it continues to become more and more important of a skill (as it become less and less common as a skill sadly).
Heroic judge tells the truth inspite of the fact that he had the power to pretend he did make a randon decision, then let the parties appeal. A huge portion of humanity exist in this situation ALL THE TIME, and just refuse to admit it. I support this judge based on what I heard here, but it is entirely possible the judge is just lazy. There was no information on the judges workload so its impossible to know whether or not his actions were reasonable based on the position he was put in.
2 года назад+1
Ignore the workload. Make Steve take family law cases once a week. Let's talk this case again after he did that for a month or three.
In my experience, the hardest thing to either say or hear is “I don’t know.” To be fair, isn’t the jury system built on the assumption that a dozen ordinary folks are the best way to decide matters?
The jury system’s primary role is a check on government abuse. You can make almost anything illegal, and jail people for life For it. And the jury can put a hard stop to it. Every time. It is the only direct democracy in our system.
As a past teacher I sympathize with the judge, but, tough cookies. You've been teaching a course for years and you have it nailed. Every class is familiar. Wham, the course is replaced with a new one and you HAVE TO BONE UP on this stuff to properly present it. BTW, this is performance art to some degree. In order to be a teacher you have to act like a teacher; likewise, a judge has to act like a judge. My two cents. There, I feel better now.
Don't forget, family law is not like civil law, guidelines aren't as well defined in family law. And IS very counter productive with its filings. I would rather that judge than an actual judge of the family law. At least you would be able to explain to him and have him LOGICALLY provided a opinion.
Family law court is about churning and exacting as much money as possible. I’ve seen obvious favoritism toward certain attorneys over others that are lesser known.
11:05 "I suspect these are elected positions"... really? You elect judges? That's insane, the idea of politics and a worry of re-election should not be involved. Thank God in my country judges are appointed by The King to serve in the best interests of the law, not elections.
A heart surgeon wouldn't perform brain surgery and a NASCAR mechanic wouldn't work on a Tesla software issue. Even a rural interstate truck driver and a NYC cab driver couldn't swap jobs.
I am always impressed by someone who knows what they are ignorant of and admits it. At least he is honest. Personally I would expect that a judge who is a professional would be working to understand what his current assignment is.
I live in a state where judges are elected. There are no professional qualifications required to run for the office. Anyone can run. This video is a stunningly cogent argument that electing judges is a bad idea.
He doesn't seem like a bad judge, just really snowed under. Anybody can have that experience, I hated being thrown into jobs I never even considered doing just so someone could bury their 6th grandparent that month. I tried to do them of course, but it was always a s**t show
I hate it so much when they say "on or about" Who the hell gets an hour and a half lunch break? Would you want to ride a bus or taxi if you had to teach them how to drive? The same for a court case. I wouldn't want to teach the judge anything. I would ask for a new court date so a proper judge can handle it.
I can tell you why he acted that way. He was unhappy about being assigned to hear family cases. He probably thought that if he complained enough that they would remove him from those cases. Looks like it backfired on him.
I know lawyers are required to turn down cases if they know they can't properly handle them due to their current workload. Aren't judges under the same obligation? Can't he just refuse to do it, if he knows it'll stretch him too thin to do each case justice?
i could not even imagine how frustrated these people would be... usually when in family court they already were having to go through something and the frustrations with such issues... then to finally think you might get some resolve just to have a judge say they know nothing and basically doesn't want to be there...
This is a good thing the judge is doing. It at least puts the lawyers on notice that they will have to make the judge aware of the prevailing law in their case so he can make an informed decision. If you think about it, motions and briefs are devices that are essentially saying to the judge, "hey, in case you weren't aware, here's not only our stance but the laws and case law that back up our argument." The other side does the same and then hopefully the judge sorts through it and makes a decision backed up by law and case law.
At least his statements about his knowledge base on family law gives either side the ability to have a new hearing on the subject. So that's fair.🤣😂😜 P.s. I would assume.
@@rjay7019 Agreed. Maybe we can start following the school of thought that says if someone sues for your tunic give them your cloak as well. But since it's family court we could just follow the wisdom of Solomon and cut the kids in half. Or if people stop being ass hats we wouldn't have to go before asshats in black robes to make decisions for us. Probably has to start with getting rid of redundant and unconstitutional dictates like car registration and driver's license most licencing for that matter. Am I right Steve.👍🤣😂😜
If, a judge states [ especially on the record ] he or she has no idea what they are doing, I would say there is evidence to support his or her decisions as being questionable if not totally invalid. And, that parents or others appearing before him in family court having been issued decisions against them, would have a case to sue him, his supervisors, the county, state and so on. Because, if they lost their parental rights due to the incompetence of the judge that is not just a civil lawsuit but in my opinion criminal as well. I mean seriously, you would not hire a real estate lawyer to represent you in family court, would you ? So why a judge who in his own words says he is incompetent ?
I don't know, I was going to give him a pass, but Steve Lehto convincing me that he was admiring to far more than "not knowing" or not. understanding. He should be familiar with the case. As S.L said he could read the briefs and try to study the case. It seems to me that he was trowing a tantrum. On the other hand the system should not be placing judged at random. It's nonsense to have an incompetent judge (for this area of the law) deciding someone that can send a man to a prison, have his means confiscated and have a criminal record.
These people are nothing more then a terrorist organization running wild on every street in our country and community mind blowing we as the people allow this to continue thank you good sir stay safe
On the one hand it's good that he can admit he doesn't know what's going on, but jeeze how demoralizing does it have to be for the plaintiff and defendant to hear the legal system completely break down for them like that. Especially when some of his statements come off as him whining about his job to folks who are trying to go through the system properly.
You would not want a family court judge on a murder trial nor a criminal court judge handling family court. His statements seem like fair warning to the people in his court. He does not normally handle family law, is not familiar with the proper case law and probably didn't get a chance to review the cases. It could have literally been a situation where he was told to handle the cases that morning.
In a case where a police officer gave a bogus ticket to one of my sons, I had him go into court to dispute the ticket (he said he didn't do what the officer claimed). It's immaterial what actually happened to cause the ticket. When we went into court, the judge remarked that he was kind of rusty with traffic law, since he normally handled other matters, and was just substituting for our usual municipal court judge. He then said, "Let's look at what the law says about the infraction and compare it to the officer's report." He read through both quickly, and since the officer had fudged up his report, and omitted including the "elements of the offense" pertaining to the law, he dismissed the ticket, without prejudice. This meant that the report could be amended and the ticket brought forward again. But since I had already told the city attorney that the officer had obviously lied in his report -- he had claimed actions that the car was actually incapable of performing -- it's possible the city attorney decided it wasn't a good idea. But the judge acted very properly, and even though he admitted he was rusty, he clearly took due care with the case in front of him.
I woikd rather a judge rusty on a subject who double checks what the law actually is than a judge that thinks they know everything and has seen it all before who misses a critical element.
As an alumni of the family law system in my area, this judge is stating what many other judges are guilty of, but simply remain silent. I found FL judges to be militant against cases that were not settled before their appearance in the court room. 10 or 15min of court room time not enough to convey the months or years of frustration in the case.
This is my question. Though it is bad that a judge says this openly isn't it worse that the judge is ruling on cases that he has little to no background in? I get he can study up on it but that does not equal a judge who has years of experience and knows how to rule on basic questions without having to do a ton of research. It seems a flawed system that puts a judge in that position in the first place. And my other question is okay he was not being professional but were his rulings inline and reasonable compared to other family court judges?
@@rationalbushcraft that's my take on this too. The is admitting that he isn't qualified but they stuck him in there anyway, seemingly as if all judges are equally competent in most areas.
Correct, they work for you and have to show you what happens when you have the guts to use their service against your will
I was thinking that, he only got in trouble because he said it out loud
@@HH-ru4bj he refused to exert even minimal effort to do one of the most important and potentially harmful/traumatizing jobs in the country
As a former foster parent. I love this judge. Family law is so "how does it feel" compared to other systems. Having a judge that can admit that, and be willing to put that on the record, is fantastic. He knows he shouldn't be there, and says so.
Sounds like a good case for whistle blower laws. There is a big difference between being incompetent at one's job and being placed in a function that is not one's job. This man should be rewarded for his honesty, not punished for the bad decisions of those in charge
I agree, Mr. Gibbons.
That's what my thoughts were. It's like asking a plumber to rewire your house.
So the judge is working his normal judge duties and working family court as a substitute. Seems like a lot to put on one judge.
In my exspences I've been rarely asked to do both my regular job and fill in part for a coworker. But never to completely fill in for a coworker because I would either
A. I'm not competent in their job duties and not knowledge in their role.
B. My normal work would suffer from doing 2 peoples jobs with very little overlap.
Agreed, I was thinking this long before the video was over and heard nothing that changes it. The Judge was honest that he did not know the law for this section of court. Whoever assigned him here is the one who should be brought up on an investigation of incompetence. Many will miss the critical point, to phase this a way easy to understand: He was basically called by "Dispatch" to go fight a fire when he was a trained paramedic. And is now he's the one being brought up on the carpet, while the incompetent dispatcher is totally being ignored.
I think it is awesome he was honest about it as a good many of ego-boosted judges would just pretend they know what they are doing and hand down crazy and broken decisions.
I agree, we've dealt with incompetent teachers judges and policemen, and unless you got a lot of time and money on your hands you're pretty much f*caked.
(I got burned by an incompetent DA but that's another story)
I have a lot of respect for this judge and his honestly .
I would rather have a judge that admits that he doesn’t know everything about it than the one who claims he knows everything about it because he has already made up his mind before he hears the case
But neither one is what we should have.
I’d feel better about teaching/training one, and the other I’d want gone from any/all government positions.
You can do admit you don't know this particular law very good in a manner that still makes you look competent.
I was involved in a case in which the judge admitted he doesn't know this particular type of law very good.
He questioned technical experts who told him they are only technical experts, not law experts, about the law which was probably not the best idea. But he tried to understand the law and not just said "I know nothing and I don't really care".
He appeared competent and interested while admitting to not know everything about this particular law. That's how a judge should appear.
He was throwing a fit because he didn't want to be there. I'm blown away by these responses
I got to give the judge some credit, at least he's honest. It would be nice if he cracked a book or two. I feel like other family court judges just hide their ignorance better.
Yep, family court is a hot mess and everybody knows it. If you're male, it's pretty much guaranteed that you're getting railroaded.
💯 this.
And will give contempt charges out like candy to keep hiding their inadequacies.
Family court judges are at the mercy of their respective wives...thus the bias against men.
That's what it looks like in my state. And it's the kids that get screwed over.
But it's just so hard to find good help these days....
At least he admits his faults. I would rather have a judge who is honest than a judge who isn't and sends people to jail wrongly. Of course neither should happen but RUclips has shown this seems to be common.
That's what I thought until I realized that he is ruling over the future of a child [i.e.: assuming that a child is involved]. He could lose his job, if he doesn't cooperate, but if he cooperates half heartedly, then the kid can lose his future and gets no vote or say in it.
@@eugenetswong If the judge had not admitted his shortcomings, but instead just acted like so many, and made rulings without truly understanding the situation or the law, would we even have heard about it? He still could be ruining children's lives, but it would be Business As Usual.
@@BruceS42 Well, yeah. For sure, there is always a worse outcome for sure. That doesn't clean his reputation, though.
I applaud him for his honesty.
By golly that's the Judge I want, honest man
He doesn’t want to be there and by him continuously stating this they will no longer be able to assign him to family court. This is a good strategy.
I have to respect that this judge admitted his incompetence. Like you said most judges will not admit they have no knowledge but will hear/read the case and laws that apply to the case. Family court is EXTREMELY fragile and I’ve seen many judges make terrible judgments due to such circumstances.
It take good judgment to admit the truth.
Texas solves that issue by having elections for those want to be in particular types of courts.
@@matthewmccoy9680 HE SHOULDNT discuss this in open court, should take it up with those who assigned him, he will end up out on the street.
If I was in frount of this idiot judge.
ID HAVE HIM DISBARRED.
It looks like the judge blew the whistle on himself and the court system. I guess he's a hero?
This is family law where the decisions have lifelong consequences and these cases should be treated as if it were a criminal trial where the consequences might be life in prison.
As a Professional Land Surveyor, I have ran into this issue serving as an expert witness regarding real property law. I had a judge who asked me as I was testifying what the law was as I was the expert. I gave case law and statute law references. The plaintiff’s council objected and the judge stated he was over ruled and asked him how many property law cases he had argued. That council stated it was his first case; therefore, my testimony was admitted and the judge dismissed the case because no one besides me knew case law and the subject matter.
Im sure he checked your references first, surely?
deth I was vetted based on previous court cases; that was stated when I took the stand.
Boundary law is a weird backwater unlike the rest of the law. I think it confuses a lot of lawyers and judges.
Most of the law has been written into the Statute books but not boundary, step back 200 years to when most of the law was common law.
Honestly the best character of a judge I’ve ever heard
"He shouldn't be sitting there..."
Pretty sure that's the judge's exact point, Steve.
I'm perfectly fine with the judge, it's not his fault that he was assigned to the work he wasn't supposed to do to begin with
Hopefully this judge doesn't get in trouble for his honesty.
I don't think I could morally make judgements if I didn't know it through and through.
Judges and juries do it all the time. I'm pretty sure you could do a much better job than them.
@@kingalexander43 well juries are assembled from the general population you would have to be a moron not to be able to do a better job than them. But also ya some judges should not be on the bench with how incompetent they are.
@@kingalexander43 with a jury, I don't expect expertise. I expect their opinions and observations to be honest. If a judge admits to it, good for them..but let's get them doing work that makes sense.
It says there are 3 replies but I can only see two? 🤔
@@Up2_nogood it says there are 4 replies and I only see 3. 🤔
family court should only be done by someone who really cares about family law and families. If he even requested not to do it he should not have been forced to do it. Lives are changed by those decisions.
John - In family law, somehow "blind" justice can determine which one is female and is automatically the winner. Ask me how I know.
@@stevejette2329 that is what is known a prejudicial views. Many people believe things that are not true.
@@lrmackmcbride7498 A COMPUTER took two things into account. Income and % of time spent with child. Ex said she made only $300 per month (SF Bay area!) and wanted 49% custody. Computer said "OK" and I had to pay HER child support, even tho he ALWAYS lived with me. And of course, she was no more active in son's life. Blind 'justice'.
I think thats why they were short on family law judges
@@stevejette2329 I had custody of the kids, my ex never paid child support. I would call the child support enforcement agency to complain. After a year they suspended her driver's license and issued a warrant for her arrest. She gets pulled over, cop does nothing, just made her have a friend drive the car home. Years later the kids decided they wanted to live with her. If my employer was one day late submitting the child support payment she would call CSEA and the would be calling my employer the same day.
To be honest, i can appreciate someone admitting they don't know things.
I've had to do the same kind of thing. I've been sent to repair equipment i am not qualified to work on. And probably 70% of the time i end up fixing the issue anyway. But if i am not the right engineer for a piece of equipment, i think it's only fair to the customer to let them know i am not an expert on this gear. There is gear i am extremely competent on, but the company i work for sells a ridiculous amount of equipment, and we don't always have someone competent to do the job at hand. But since they have to send somebody, i end up being that body sometimes.
But i feel to represent myself as an expert on certain types of equipment, when i am not, is not only dishonest it raises unrealistic expectations. But if it is explained to the customer that "it was me or nobody" and that "i'll do my level best to help" tends to lessen the sting a bit. And as i said, i end up succeeding more often than i fail.
But it tends to make those kind of calls extremely stressful.
Wow ! With out understanding the particulars of practicing law l couldn’t help but smile at this Judge’s honesty , it’s a breath of fresh air in his day and age , I know it flies in the face of the “ system “ and it’s process but good for him !
✨🇺🇸✨🙏🏼✨
I think I would prefer an honest but ignorant judge to one that is knowledgeable but corrupt.
Same with an attourney. I learned that the hard way.
Of course Finding an honest judge is like finding an honest attorney.
Judges are basically attorneys who wear a black robe & wield a tiny hammer..
Cost of law school makes / school loans makes it so most attourneys couldn't afford to keep principles is my theory
Whatever the reason; "the song remains the same"
@@jupitercyclops6521 Absolutely ! more transparency is not an option it’s the right of the people !
@@kimberlynoland3956
Couldn't agree more!
Most people are actually this honest. Stories like this are extremely common. It's just hard to find news articles about them, since the bad news draws in a lot more viewers than "person acts like a normal person should" so it can seem like it's more rare than it is. Heck, even I do this sort of thing very often. If you ask me a question and I don't know enough about it, I'm literally going to tell you "I'm sorry, I don't know enough about that to give an opinion" . It's so weird to me that more people don't do this, if nothing else for selfish reasons. Why would you rather risk looking like an idiot when you could just be neutral and guarantee that you won't look like an idiot? Again... If an idiot like me can figure this out...🤷♂️
Maybe a better analogy would be asking a pilot, who usually flies one type of aircraft, to fly a type of aircraft he hasn't flown in many years.
I love this judge. Honesty in Court! What a refreshing thing!
DC
PS Lehto I think you're taking him out of context. When someone admits to lack of knowledge and ASKS to be walked through it, how is that bad? He is trying to help. I'm sure in lemon law you have documents that aren't found in other types of law.
I had one of the messiest divorces in my county that consumed my life for many years. I was in front of over a half a dozen different judges at a time when only mothers were assumed to be the fit parent of very young children. It started out with false accusations of child sexual abuse which polarized everything and mom initially got everything she wanted. My family law specialist attorney advised me to be happy with every other week visitation. Even the court appointed counselor and psychologist were totally fooled initially, but flipped over time when they slowly learned that mom was a persistent persuasive liar. It was not a fair fight, but I eventually ended up with total custody of our toddler daughter including total control of visitation.
New judges were frequently assigned to Family court on the theory they can’t do much harm there while they picked up their judicial skills.
Most new judges apparently could not wait to get out of Family court to do interesting work like contracts or lemon law.
A judge might hear 20 or 30 cases in a morning short cause calendar. Often, they would rule on only half of the requested issues.
One judge read nothing prior to entering the courtroom. Most judges looked only at the motion in front of them.
The gender bias was so great, one judge ordered me, the custodial parent, to pay child support to the non-custodial mother.
It would take several hearings in front of the same judge before the judge would realize that assuming both parents were equally at fault was not accurate.
If the judge said, "This isn't my field of expertise, as I am filling in, I may have to take breaks to reference applicable laws and statutes. Please be as patient with me as I will be with you." I could understand that. It sounds to me like this judge just wanted to bitch about being assigned to family court, and did so in the most obnoxious way.
Doesn't a Judge have access to a law library and staff to help look stuff up? Isn't Westlaw online and searchable? Isn't the docket scheduled weeks/months in advance?
Agreed. This is more how he said it than what he said kind of deal to me. Had he put it as tactfully and professionally as you did, then this would not be a news story.
At least the way you said it they would be HONEST.
@@micwclar a fill in judge could have been assigned overnight if someone got sick and the CASE CANNOT BE LAWFULLY POSTPONED. they have to put them in frount of a sitting judge period. ( iv had a case POSTPONED because of a sick judge. )And another time it was kicked over to another judge , because our judge had a car accident and would be in hospital. The replacement judge didn't find out what cases he was taking untill 5 minutes before he walking in to courtroom. And everything started late.
Yeah, I've run into this kind of problem myself. As an aerospace engineer that works various aircraft systems, my office had an engineer that had to take extended leave for a medical problem. I had to pick up one of his re-design projects and was in meetings being expected to answer questions about that system and the component being re-designed. I told them honestly that until I can get up to speed, I can't answer their questions then and there in the meeting, I would have to take them as action items and update people by e-mail or in-person at the next meeting. I apologized that things will take more time than usual for awhile. I was in that particular repair shop a lot seeing components at tear-down and I was at the jet a lot with the guys repairing that system so I could hear from them what the common problems were, their troubleshooting, what the problem was with the part being re-designed, and all that. I had a lot of resources available but I needed to be able to digest a lot of information and it's just not as quick as it would be for the engineer that has worked this system for years. Everybody was cool about it because I did actually step out and make the effort to get up to speed and do what's right, I didn't just sit with my arms crossed and say pissily, "I'm not the expert on this system, what in the hell do you expect me to do?" This judge sounds very lazy to me. If you're not the expert, go make yourself the expert, or at least become competent. Quite honestly, most of the time people don't expect perfection and instant solutions, if you're making a decent effort and are competent then you're exceeding expectations and doing better than the average guy. People are used to seeing half-assed crap and are generally pleasantly surprised when you really are trying to do it right.
Family law shouldn't be treated like traffic court. The system should treat these cases as seriously as a criminal case that has lifelong penalties and consequences.
but then juries would get involved and they might have good outcomes. Cant have that.
@@calebfielding6352 people familar with criminal court say if you are innocent you want a judge, if you are guilty, you want a jury.
@@lrmackmcbride7498 Sure, cause prosicutors who hide evidence that proves the defense innocent never become judges.
10000% this.
Sounds like the lawyers involved in the cases should have requested continuances to revisit the cases once he had had a chance to familiarize himself with the cases and the law.
That might have been in the best interest of their clients, though it may have put him on the spot.
I feel that the judge acted with honesty and integrity in a situation he was forced into.
Yeah, my friends mom works at the Camden courthouse and just told me about this judge 2 days ago. I feel bad for the families that had to deal with that.
_"The blind leading the stupid"_ scenario comes to mind. 🤣
By blatantly stating such things it seems this judge actually wanted to get out of those duties one way or another.
No matter the cost to the families involved
Kudos to the Judge for being honest. I would be more concerned about whoever forced him to hear cases that he knew nothing about that area of law he was not familiar law, and probably had little time or interest in learning.
Sounds like the idiots that forced this judge to do this is at fault not the judge. Someone should get disbarred for not checking to see if this judge was even qualified to do this let alone force him to do it regardless.
It's rare for a judge to be honest or any member of law enforcement for that matter. But is this really a surprise to find a clueless judge on the bench? There are a lot of incompetent and clueless judges on the bench, the only thing about this judge is he actually admitted it and was honest about it. I don't like judges or cops but you got to give this judge credit regardless.
And they often seem to be ignorant of the Bill of Rights. Too many decisions are based on judges' fee fees and ideologies. Seems they have a problem discerning between the spirit of a law, and what it actually says. I expect that from cops, but judges are supposed to know better.
Wow, an honest judge. I think most try to make it up as they go along. Add in the often ginormous egos, and we are where we are.
I think the pilot and ticket taker example is to extreme, the guy IS a judge, he should know the workings of a court room and how to handle cases, sure the law is different as are the proceedings, but he should be able to negotiate them or they wouldn't have assigned him to the court. A better example using the airlines scenario would be asking the commuter flight pilot of a twin engine prop plane to fly a 747 because the assigned 747 pilot called in sick. Yeah, the commuter pilot is a pilot, but flying a 747 takes training and experience he doesn't have.
A paint and body guy trying to navigate the depths of some OBD2 BS...
Imo it's just going down the food chain. Using your example, the plane is going down. 1st you look for a pilot that can fly 747. Down the food chain is just a pilot. Down the food chain is an adult that can drive. Fine, don't need to be able to drive... fine, a kid will do.... screw it, a parachute than....wtf, fine how about a cushion? No? How about a bottle of strong wine so i won't feel the pain when we crash.
It sounds like he was thrown in as an emergency fill in. Meaning he literally showed up and had no clue what he was up against until he had the docket in front of him.
A more nuanced example would be a pilot of a 747 being asked to fly a 737. To the public, these are just big jet airliners with a mind-boggling amount of gauges and buttons and switches filling the cockpit. But to an airline pilot, this would be a violation of the "type rating" which they are supposed to be up to date on and checked out in frequently in a specific model of aircraft. According to aviators, the 737 MAX problem had to do with Boeing trying to make changes to the 737 such that a pilot would not need a new type rating to fly the new type of 737 -- but they did it wrong, and people were killed. At least with judges like this, people aren't likely to be killed in a matter of minutes, but their personal lives will be profoundly impacted for a long time.
this channel should be required for all college students and first year law students - everybody needs to watch at least 20 episodes at minimum. Great stuff and really good at explaining process and legal rules - thanks for this effort
Ben - Really tough to see. Took me longer than usual to find Ben. Yellow vet to Steve's left. Steve will have to lean to his right for you to see Ben.
Thank you
Ben filling in as an optional hardtop for the C8 Corvette, Steve's LHS
I was completely stumped. Thanks.
@@kanzicek 👍
Steve may be overestimating the baseline level of credibility the public gives to family courts.
This judge sounds like Klinger (MASH) bucking for a Section 8. He really wants out of that Family Court gig …
From all I have heard about family court, anyone sane would want to avoid being there.
Whoever manages the court house staff, I think, is to blame here. Not the judge. They knowingly put him where he was not qualified to be, and he had not only a right, but a duty to inform his 'clients' of that fact. People have an absolute right to a competent judge.
Like presiding judge should of had this judge do some family law training
the lawyers are all p.o.'ed because now they have to work to prove thier case. actually a brilliant move. a good way of sizing up who is who. i like this guy he's honest therefore probably more impartial than all the others
I took a police officer to traffic court once and the "temp judge" an accounting lawyer, responded to my question regarding cross walk traffic rules with "how are we interpreting that" to the police officer. Then he ignored the DMV rules I provided him regarding how traffic is supposed to "yield to pedestrians" vs the police officers opinion that traffic must stop and wait until pedestrians reach the curb. This judge was the most ignorant idiot in the room that day as I spent a good 3 hours listening to petty infractions one after another issued by tax assessing minded cops and a judge who pushed traffic school permissions for revenue.
I've made up my mind, going to court these days is all about how much money you have, regardless of the type of law involved. Family law is as corrupt as it gets, especially divorces.
When he hadn’t seen a case in 18 years, that was accurate, so maybe he didn’t know what he didn’t know. The next week, it had then been a week since his last case. He knew what he didn’t know and could do something about it. Now repeat 15 times.
This reminds me of a Time Warner internet tech who visited my home while the Charter buyout was pending. We sat down and he told me plainly that he had lost all motivation for work as he suspected he'd be fired anyway when Charter took over. He didn't do any testing or work, but he spoke honest words and was friendly. As a result I had to go through the entire process of calling support, get yet another appointment, taking even more time out of my week. The next tech had to then spend two hours fixing a major problem with my Internet, had to cancel the rest of his appointments for the day, and he was entirely unhappy that the previous tech had passed the buck onto him.
So you can say that the judge in question sat there and said honest words. However it's clear he did not do his job to the extent of his capability. He was asking others to spend additional time not to address his ignorance, but rather to address the fact that he wasn't performing his duties. He was still sitting there accepting taxpayer dollars in order to do a subpar job. You can say he was speaking honest words, but was anything else about his behavior honest?
Yes it was honest these cases are more then reading up on laws Its reading people a wrong judgement in these cases because one side made them self look better can be devastating for parents and children involved He no doubt told the supervisor who put him in 1 day a week everything and supervisor didnt care blame supervisor . As for 2nd cable guy he was going to your house to work and get paid for it no matter how it happen
False equivalency. You have taken two things that are mutually exclusive in every way other than that they are both paid in common American currency....
Congratulations, that's the dumbest thing I've read all day...
A judge in Utah did this to my son. It's so frustrating to wait for your day in Court and then have a judge tell you they have no idea what's going on with the case? 🤬🤬🤬
That's typical 21st century workmanship...
I would prefer that to the judge faking it. If judges are overworked the city/county/state need to allocate funding for more judges.
I'm a programmer and I do exactly the same thing when somebody tries to make me do a programming task I'm not familiar with or qualified for.
It's not this judge's fault he lacked qualification, it would be irresponsible for him to mislead litigants by omission.
Part of being a programmer is doing tasks that you are not familiar with or qualified for.
I wasn't qualified in C#, VB.Net, Python, or embedded platforms. I learned and made myself better in my chosen vocation and further solidified my position.
Maybe that's why it's so strange to me that people would rather risk being an idiot that guaranteeing that the won't be. I'm not a programmer yet (still in college) but that could be why it's so instinctive for me to be transparent in that way.
@@DerykRobosson I'm glad you know everything all the time, so that you're never not qualified when somebody asks.
Seriously, you missed the entire point.
@@GamesFromSpace I stated the contrary to that which you assert.
Perhaps you need to write further documentation in support of your point.
Finally! An honest judge
Honesty and consideration is a nice change of pace in family court. I like this judge.
I respect this judge. He is incompetent in the field of family law, and hes making it known.
At first I thought the judge was right to say he didn’t know. Then I thought, this judge doesn’t want to be there and could care less about figuring it out. He should be removed.
@Steve Lehto : in my humble opinion, this is probably the best of your RUclips presentations,
but (of course) I am not really competent to judge it, so on the toss a coin I have decided to "Like" it.
@Jim Hill That comment is very funny Jim, and clever I might add!
It is possibly a tactic to be removed from having to do it again.
It's a horrible idea if that's what he tried
This sounds like the court has major management issues and this judge is quite annoyed by it. But I do think this judge is handling his frustration poorly.
If a judge says "I am too busy to actually read this case, I have a Jury trial on other days." - he should not have a Jury Trial. Or any trial.
There’s only so much time in a day and only so much someone can do in that time. If he’s handling stuff in another division because they are overwhelmed, it’s likely he’s busy too. Sounds like they are all overworked and it’s a big picture mismanagement problem then a specific problem with the one judge.
I attended high school with the woman who would become the family court judge in my hometown. She had no business being a paralegal, much less a judge.
considering most family court judges are deeply rooted in sex trafficking she sounds like exactly the kind of judge they want
@@Daves_Not_Here_Man_76 I see you have had dealings with "family court" also. I sat in that woman's court room one day to provide moral support for a friend. I still can't believe some of the decisions that woman made. Thankfully she retired recently.
You have no idea how many times I've been in this exact position. Working computer support, I get handed tickets sometimes on subjects where I have no idea what to do, and I certainly can't say a thing about it to the customers. Just like this judge, I have knowledge about a different area of the main subject, which will help a little in figuring my way around the other area, but much of the time, I'm figuring everything out from scratch. Management knows my weak and strong areas, yet I keep getting these tickets.
I feel for the judge, even though I'm a mechanic I'm a specialist. Even though the trouble shooting is pretty much the same, the tools, procedures and such are pretty much unique to the Italian cars. I'm going to have the basic hand tools and even air tools. Most of the tools and procedures are unique to Alfa, Maserati, Fiat, Ferrari, and Lamborghini adjusting the carbs on an 85 is totally different from a Chevy. So relating to the judge is easy I hate turning away people who need their cars worked on. But I don't have the tools or manuals. And won't work on anything that I don't have manuals and tools for.
The fascinating thing about this is that in most professions, that kind of behavior is likely to get you promoted, not complained about. Admitting you don't know enough about something to speak on it continues to become more and more important of a skill (as it become less and less common as a skill sadly).
Heroic judge tells the truth inspite of the fact that he had the power to pretend he did make a randon decision, then let the parties appeal.
A huge portion of humanity exist in this situation ALL THE TIME, and just refuse to admit it.
I support this judge based on what I heard here, but it is entirely possible the judge is just lazy. There was no information on the judges workload so its impossible to know whether or not his actions were reasonable based on the position he was put in.
Ignore the workload. Make Steve take family law cases once a week. Let's talk this case again after he did that for a month or three.
In my experience, the hardest thing to either say or hear is “I don’t know.”
To be fair, isn’t the jury system built on the assumption that a dozen ordinary folks are the best way to decide matters?
The jury system’s primary role is a check on government abuse. You can make almost anything illegal, and jail people for life
For it.
And the jury can put a hard stop to it. Every time.
It is the only direct democracy in our system.
"Hey, poor family planning on your part doesn't necessitate an emergency on mine!" -- hypothetical judge
I gotta love the guy. He openly admits to what most judges vehemently deny.
I have much respect for this judge for admitting he didn't no what he is doing and asked for help
I think most judges are now just paper-pushers. Actual judging seems rare.
Difference is that this judge was HONEST.
As a past teacher I sympathize with the judge, but, tough cookies. You've been teaching a course for years and you have it nailed. Every class is familiar. Wham, the course is replaced with a new one and you HAVE TO BONE UP on this stuff to properly present it. BTW, this is performance art to some degree. In order to be a teacher you have to act like a teacher; likewise, a judge has to act like a judge. My two cents. There, I feel better now.
Whatever you say Groomer
@@calculator1841 I taught networking and computing topics to industry professionals. Buttwad.
Judge sitting at bench: "I'm phoning this in"
Courtroom: O_o
Don't forget, family law is not like civil law, guidelines aren't as well defined in family law. And IS very counter productive with its filings. I would rather that judge than an actual judge of the family law. At least you would be able to explain to him and have him LOGICALLY provided a opinion.
Family law court is about churning and exacting as much money as possible. I’ve seen obvious favoritism toward certain attorneys over others that are lesser known.
11:05 "I suspect these are elected positions"... really? You elect judges? That's insane, the idea of politics and a worry of re-election should not be involved. Thank God in my country judges are appointed by The King to serve in the best interests of the law, not elections.
I suspect that his self depreciation was meant to honestly move the process forward...
Not imply that he was incompetent.
LOL
A heart surgeon wouldn't perform brain surgery and a NASCAR mechanic wouldn't work on a Tesla software issue. Even a rural interstate truck driver and a NYC cab driver couldn't swap jobs.
I am always impressed by someone who knows what they are ignorant of and admits it. At least he is honest.
Personally I would expect that a judge who is a professional would be working to understand what his current assignment is.
I live in a state where judges are elected. There are no professional qualifications required to run for the office. Anyone can run. This video is a stunningly cogent argument that electing judges is a bad idea.
It's not a Court in this country that will show you respect 😭🤣🤦🏿♂️. Judge did right letting them people know that he doesn't know family law.
He doesn't seem like a bad judge, just really snowed under. Anybody can have that experience, I hated being thrown into jobs I never even considered doing just so someone could bury their 6th grandparent that month. I tried to do them of course, but it was always a s**t show
I hate it so much when they say "on or about"
Who the hell gets an hour and a half lunch break?
Would you want to ride a bus or taxi if you had to teach them how to drive? The same for a court case. I wouldn't want to teach the judge anything. I would ask for a new court date so a proper judge can handle it.
I can tell you why he acted that way. He was unhappy about being assigned to hear family cases. He probably thought that if he complained enough that they would remove him from those cases. Looks like it backfired on him.
Actually, like this Judge, would rather have him be honest than "fake it" and make bad calls.
I know lawyers are required to turn down cases if they know they can't properly handle them due to their current workload. Aren't judges under the same obligation?
Can't he just refuse to do it, if he knows it'll stretch him too thin to do each case justice?
i could not even imagine how frustrated these people would be... usually when in family court they already were having to go through something and the frustrations with such issues... then to finally think you might get some resolve just to have a judge say they know nothing and basically doesn't want to be there...
This is a good thing the judge is doing. It at least puts the lawyers on notice that they will have to make the judge aware of the prevailing law in their case so he can make an informed decision. If you think about it, motions and briefs are devices that are essentially saying to the judge, "hey, in case you weren't aware, here's not only our stance but the laws and case law that back up our argument." The other side does the same and then hopefully the judge sorts through it and makes a decision backed up by law and case law.
Irrelevant whether a judge understands the law or not, because total immunity has them ruling whichever way and for whatever reason they like.
I love it when the govt says “ignorance of the law is no excuse”
Ps. There’s over a million laws 🤮
At least his statements about his knowledge base on family law gives either side the ability to have a new hearing on the subject. So that's fair.🤣😂😜
P.s. I would assume.
After you've waited for your day in Court and then have to take more time off to come back again. It's frustrating to keep going back.
@@rjay7019 Agreed. Maybe we can start following the school of thought that says if someone sues for your tunic give them your cloak as well. But since it's family court we could just follow the wisdom of Solomon and cut the kids in half. Or if people stop being ass hats we wouldn't have to go before asshats in black robes to make decisions for us. Probably has to start with getting rid of redundant and unconstitutional dictates like car registration and driver's license most licencing for that matter. Am I right Steve.👍🤣😂😜
If, a judge states [ especially on the record ] he or she has no idea what they are doing, I would say there is evidence to support his or her decisions as being questionable if not totally invalid.
And, that parents or others appearing before him in family court having been issued decisions against them, would have a case to sue him, his supervisors, the county, state and so on. Because, if they lost their parental rights due to the incompetence of the judge that is not just a civil lawsuit but in my opinion criminal as well.
I mean seriously, you would not hire a real estate lawyer to represent you in family court, would you ? So why a judge who in his own words says he is incompetent ?
Very well said.
Thank you. Sometimes I wish I was a lawyer and other times am glad I am not.
We’re I a judge, I would expect both sides to be able present their case in terms even a child could understand.
Why does it not surprise me this is in NJ, Corruptville USA
I don't know, I was going to give him a pass, but Steve Lehto convincing me that he was admiring to far more than "not knowing" or not. understanding. He should be familiar with the case. As S.L said he could read the briefs and try to study the case. It seems to me that he was trowing a tantrum. On the other hand the system should not be placing judged at random. It's nonsense to have an incompetent judge (for this area of the law) deciding someone that can send a man to a prison, have his means confiscated and have a criminal record.
Wouldn't be an issue if he were a judge in Florida! I think Ben is too old to be push starting the bananavette like that.
These people are nothing more then a terrorist organization running wild on every street in our country and community mind blowing we as the people allow this to continue thank you good sir stay safe
He’s done a lot more and maybe a lot worse! Good luck!
Which is worse someone who tells the world they are not competent or some who claims they are competent and are clearly not.
Easy fix, just allow juries in family court.
this judge is trying to make it clear he dont want to to family law
My guess he was not elected but appointed and he just does not want to do family law
Heather, you could have also told him that if he wanted to prove his point, that he would need some "rock solid evidence". 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
Wait. He's telling the truth and in trouble for it?
If he would not have admitted it he'd be just fine 🤣
On the one hand it's good that he can admit he doesn't know what's going on, but jeeze how demoralizing does it have to be for the plaintiff and defendant to hear the legal system completely break down for them like that. Especially when some of his statements come off as him whining about his job to folks who are trying to go through the system properly.
You would not want a family court judge on a murder trial nor a criminal court judge handling family court. His statements seem like fair warning to the people in his court. He does not normally handle family law, is not familiar with the proper case law and probably didn't get a chance to review the cases. It could have literally been a situation where he was told to handle the cases that morning.