|
|
|
|
|
This seeker of justice is obnoxious, rude, in-your-face, arrogant, always correct, must never be contradicted, authored books, and gets lots of "face-time." What a disgrace!
WHEN I JUST STARTED TEACHING at Harvard Law School in 1964, some of the most popular professors would
take great pleasure in humiliating students who gave unsatisfactory answers or were unprepared. Other
students would laugh and cheer as one of their hapless classmates was insulted and mortified. Some of the
most flagrant abuses were directed against the very few women students especially on what one professor
called “ladies day.” When challenged, the professors would defend their actions by claiming that this
“paper-chase” method of teaching was necessary to prepare students for real world judges, who would also
badger and pull rank on lawyers and clients.
What surprised me most was not that some of the professors dished it out or that most of the
student-victims took it, but rather that the other students, their friends, roommates and colleagues seemed to enjoy the suffering inflicted by professors on their students. It occurred to me then that the need for
authoritarianism tyranny is an important component of human nature. People need to see other people put
down. Despite our commitment to democracy and equality, there is also a deep felt need for oligarchy and
hierarchy.
She even sinks to the depths of mimicking the speech patterns the stuttering of terrorized litigants. And people cheer her and laugh at the poor victims, just the way law students used to do.
If a real judge ever dared to speak to me or one of my clients in so boorish a manner, I would have her
robe. There is no place for such abusive misconduct in our judiciary. That is why we now have judicial
misconduct boards to monitor and discipline the kind of rude bullying that is the daily grist of Judge Judy’s mill. “Justice with an attitude” is the show’s motto. “Injustice without respect” is its real message.
Jewish World Review March 13, 2000 / 6 Adar II, 5760
"Justice, justice thou
shall pursue"?
By Alan M. Dershowitz
This thought recurred recently as I watched a popular American TV show that would have made Mussolini or Pinochet feel comfortable, but that made me squirm. The show was “Judge Judy,” whose star berates, insults, mocks, belittles and taunts litigants who come before her for “justice.” What they get instead are statements like the following: “On your best day you’re not as smart as I am on my worst day.” “You’re really stupid . . . dumb, dumb, dumb.” “You’re a liar.” Her standard conversation stopper is, “Shut up.”
Today in law schools around the country, no teacher could get away with and no good teacher would try insulting and harassing students the way Judge Judy does on a daily basis. One reason why law professors can no longer get away with the kind of badgering is that few real world judges today behave like Judge Judy.
The tragedy is that there are still some real judges who parrot Judge Judy. Occasionally they’re disciplined, but most lawyers are fearful of challenging judges before whom they may have to appear in the future. Moreover, the public loves the tough judge who is demanding and unforgiving. The judge who maintains control even by threats and sanctions is preferred to the judge who appears soft and accommodating. With more and more trials being televised, especially by Court TV, the public sees a wide assortment of judges ranging from Judge Lance Ito in the Simpson case to Judge Joseph Teresi in the recent Diallo case. They have never seen a judge anything like Judy on Court TV, but I fear that many might like her, even if she were a real judge.
It’s a shame that Court TV has been generally excluded from federal courts, where some of our best
judges sit. (It is no accident that federal judges are, for the most part, better than their state counterparts,
because federal judges are appointed, whereas many state judges are elected). If Court TV were allowed into the federal court in Brooklyn, the public could observe the anti-Judge Judy, a respected federal judge named Jack Weinstein.
Judge Weinstein often removes his robe, sits at the same level as the litigants and controls the courtroom not by bullying threats or foul language, but rather by the sheer power of his intellect and fairness. He, not Judge Judy, is a model of what judges should be.
King Solomon, the greatest of judges in the Bible, never raised his voice. He would be appalled by Judge Judy, as all decent Americans who love democracy and despise bullies should be appalled.
