James M. Redwine

judge

The Mouse That Roars

by Leave a Comment

Gentle Reader, I ask you, “Is this fair?” Last week I barely escaped a medical catastrophe when I slipped on the ice while attempting to relocate a mouse from our house to a fiery fate. You may recall this whole thing was started by Peg who went ballistic when she found the mouse stuck in a trap. Apparently there is some universal law that mouse disposal is a husband’s job.

After I fell and received zero sympathy from Peg I sought input from my legions of supporters who read Gavel Gamut. Well, forget that! I have heard from nearly everyone who read last week’s column and they divide into three categories: (1) One person who accused me of cruelty to a mouse – even though it escaped as I almost died; (2) Three women who wondered how Peg could abide my whimpering; and, (3) an attorney from Orlando, Florida whose law firm specializes in representing mice. I’ll just relate his letter for you.

“Dear Judge Redwine,

As members of the Bar we are amazed a judge would violate the rights of our client whose only error in judgement was to seek warmth in your converted barn home. Come on! You should expect such visitors as you live right in the middle of their community.

Be that as it may, please be advised that should you not cease and desist from your attempts to harm our client, legal action will ensue.

Respectfully, of course,
Attorney Reyfert Hogart, Esq.

P.S. Peg has also contacted us with a question or two.”

 

 

Why A Blindfolded Justice?

by Leave a Comment

You may know that for about twenty years I have been serving on the faculty of the National Judicial College where judges teach other judges to be judges. The NJC has a fairly high-tech approach due to needing to reach judges from all across America and in many foreign countries. About six years ago the College asked me and five other faculty judges to conduct a seven-week Internet class. Each faculty member is assigned areas of concentration. Mine are Court and Case Management and Judicial Ethics. If you have followed Gavel Gamut recently you may recall the other faculty and I just completed this year’s course.

Now, this week you and I could address the vicissitudes of Hoosier football or the most salacious sexual harassment scandal. Perhaps we could delve into the mysteries of competing religious philosophies or even this week’s almost certain to occur mass shooting. But I know my audience, small though it may be, and I am confident you would prefer to reflect upon the issues I hammered into the student judges via the Internet. Let’s get right to it.

May we start with the simple question, “Why do we even have Courts?” This topic might feel a little broad and somewhat amorphous. So, why don’t we narrow our focus and discuss just one court, say the Posey Circuit Court; What is its purpose?

Posey County government has numerous elements but each part can be reasonably placed in three general categories: (1) Executive, such as the Board of County Commissioners, (2) Legislative, the County Council; and (3) the Judiciary, which consists of two courts, Superior and Circuit.

The Commissioners are hired by Posey County voters to plan and execute short, medium and long-term functions, such as roads, jails and courthouses. The County Council is charged with managing the funding of all county services. I do not mean to ignore the important duties of such officers as the Prosecuting Attorney, the Sheriff, the County Clerk, the Treasurer, Assessor, Auditor and many other public servants. However we are painting with a very broad brush here; general, three-branch democracy is our subject.

Officials who engage in executive or legislative functions are not only allowed to, they are encouraged to advocate for certain policies and positions. Should Posey County have zoning and, if so, what kind? Can Posey County afford to hire more workers, and, if so, how much should they be paid? In county government there are thousands of important and often competing interests and interest groups to be advocated for and against. These are proper functions of those two branches of Posey County government. Therefore, it is altogether fitting that politics are involved. Policies are advanced and the voters decide whose policies they prefer, Democracy at work.

But, what happens when competing interests reach a conflict or an impasse? Where do citizens look to get a problem resolved? Where is there a fair arbiter? And, most importantly, where can citizens go with confidence the arbiter is not biased for or against either side? Of course, it is the Court, HOPEFULLY. However, if the Judge is perceived to be beholding to particular groups, a political party for example, people may fear any decisions the Judge makes is based less on fact than favor.

Perhaps next week you can be regaled with an even more in depth exposition of what I taught the judges about judges who may be perceived as partisan instead of blind to the identities and attachments of the people who have to appear in front of the Judge in Court.

What’s It All About?

by Leave a Comment

When a non-English speaking person appears in an Indiana courtroom the judge can call the Indiana Supreme Court hotline and get access to a certified translator. But what can we do when the words spoken by others do not fit into one of the world’s 6,500 languages?

When one watches mothers with babies it is obvious the babies feel the unquestioned love. However, as we age meanings get fuzzier. Mothers might urge general cautions to young children then threaten unspecified mayhem to teenagers.

Grandmothers may impart gentle lessons on useful crafts while grandfathers might impress grandchildren with stories that could be true.

As to fathers, many children are left to decipher what is meant by a grunt or a pointed index finger.

In elementary school we get direct teachings on such important life lessons as where and how to line up our things and how not to bother the things of others.

In junior high school teachers help us to face the unwelcome realization we are not as cute as we thought. And in high school it slowly begins to sink in that not only are we not cute, but we might even be required to do some work. However, it is in college where we are made to understand that what we say is usually not treasured by others.

Should you have been sentenced to participate in athletics at any level, your coaches most likely considered shouted invective a proper means of communication. And if you ever went through basic training in the military you are probably still laboring under a cloud of expletive ladened non-explanations for completing completely worthless tasks.

Those of you who, as was I, were reared in some religion may have often been mystified by lessons rolled into parables or analogies. Of course, that was more comfortable than the threats of eternal damnation.

In contemporary life we may find it difficult to communicate with other groups. For example, older people may hear gibberish spoken by the young and simply write them off as spoiled. On the other hand, the young may simply write the old off as old.

When politicians speak it is often to portray their opponents as liars or corrupt while the news media makes no effort to analyze any complicated issue. To take guidance from either of these groups is to proceed without a safety net.

I am not sure what advertisers want me to buy. It used to be some normal person would sing a little ditty such as, “You deserve a break today”, and I would pull into McDonald’s. Now when I watch TV I have no clue what I am supposed to waste my money on.

Movies are no longer, “Your best entertainment”. When Dirty Harry said, “Go ahead, make my day”, I got it. However, when the hero or heroine of a movie is a machine run amok, I might as well have saved the twenty bucks it cost for a Coke and popcorn.

But now that you have struggled to almost the end of these examples of non-communication, the ultimate human foreign language must be mentioned, Female Speak. I ask you, why can’t wives simply say what they mean? What occurred in the Garden of Eden to render asunder understanding between the sexes? One example is all I have space left for.

You may have noticed it is spring. Well, so has Peg. And when spring arrives at JPeg Ranch communication between Peg and me exits as the hummingbirds and onion sets appear.

I ask you, Gentle Reader, is it a felony to lie on the couch on Saturday morning? When Peg mumbles under her breath, “The garden looks like it needs tilling”, how am I supposed to gain from that she wants me to immediately drop my coffee and attack the unoffending soil?

How about, “Jim, would you please till the garden?” I would have got that; a daylong period of icy silence would have been unnecessary.

Statistics

by Leave a Comment

Statistical analysis in scientific matters depends on careful observation and good math. If Carl Sagan tells us there are “billions and billions” of stars, we can pretty well rely on his conclusion. However, in sociological matters, marriages for example, statistical analysis is more akin to religion. It is sometimes based on faith and fear rather than fact.

For example, one can readily find studies that compare and contrast the rate of “successful” marriages in different cultures. The standard measure of a successful marriage in these analyses is whether they end with the death of one spouse or whether they end in divorce. Of course, the researchers must factor in a margin of error for those married couples who bypass divorce via homicide such as might occur when the in-laws overstay their welcome.

An interesting statistic that is sometimes cited by those who report on arranged marriages verses marriages that result by chance is that arranged marriages tend to be less likely to result in divorce. Of course, the researchers must first set up criteria for what they define as an arranged marriage. The old shotgun wedding comes to mind as do marriages that result in cultures where young people are at the economic and social mercy of their immediate and extended families.

It is the definition of a successful marriage that may need to be addressed. Perhaps it is the “pursuit of happiness” as Thomas Jefferson might have advised, not simple longevity, which should be the defining element.

As judge, I have married many people. Some have planned and executed marvelous weddings involving numerous people and careful attention to detail. Some couples simply drop by the Posey County Clerk’s office to get their license then walk upstairs and ask me to sign it. I have not kept statistics on all these marriages but I often come into contact with couples from both types of weddings. Many of both kinds remain married and appear to me to be successful, i.e., happy.

This weekend I will have the honor of marrying one of our seven grandchildren. Her wedding will be of the more personal and intimate kind. I wish for Paxton and Collin, her young Marine Corps fiancé, the happiness that is to be found not in the trappings of the wedding but in the commitment of those exchanging vows.

Because grandparents believe it is their duty to impart wisdom, I will offer the newlyweds the advice I once received from my Mother via one of her favorite poems. Perhaps it will help when Paxton and Collin encounter life’s inevitable yang and yin.

 

Introduction to Philosophy

By Bonaro Overstate

Young spruces stood upright, every twig

Stiff with refusal to be bent by snow.

Young hemlocks sloped their boughs beneath the load,

            Letting it softly go.

Each solved, no doubt, to its own satisfaction

The problem posed by uninvited weight.

I’d not take sides with either. I have tried

Both ways of handling fate.

Stock in Trade

by Leave a Comment

Abraham Lincoln who was a storekeeper before he was a lawyer is credited with the statement:

“A lawyer’s time and advice is his stock in trade.”

But if an attorney becomes a judge what is her/his stock in trade? For what do we pay our judges? It is not their time; judges receive salaries. It is not their advice; judges are not supposed to give advice, only decisions based on the evidence and the law.

And why do we need somebody whose job it is to not give advice, i.e. to keep their personal opinions to themselves and decide cases objectively?

Society has plenty of people whose role it is to suggest and execute policy. County commissioners and council people, mayors, governors and presidents come to mind.

We also have lots of people whose job it is to pass legislation and fund it. State legislatures and Congress have those duties.

Such executive and legislative bodies have not only the right but also the obligation to express opinions and advocate for their positions. We elect these people for those very purposes. We may agree or disagree with our Executive and Legislative bodies as we choose.

But where do we look for objective decisions on important matters? What gives us confidence that issues wrangled over by individuals or such public servants as presidents and senators will be resolved fairly and impartially by that third branch of government, the Judiciary?

Judges have no armies or militia. Judges cannot impose taxes or pass legislation. Why do we even listen to much less comply with a judge’s decision, especially one we disagree with?

When I have taught judges from other countries such as Palestine or Ukraine or Russia they invariably ask me how I get citizens to accept my court judgments and follow them. In many other countries the concept of the Judiciary as a separate, equal and independent branch of government is impossible for the judges themselves to grasp. They are so used to court decisions being based on the political leanings and connections of judges nobody expects an unbiased judgment. America is supposed to be different.

Of course, we are all partisan. If a sitting judge voices a political opinion we agree with, we not only may not mind, we might applaud. Yeah for our side! However, should a judge portray prejudice against persons or positions we support we lose confidence in our legal system. And that is the only stock in trade judges have, i.e., confidence the judge is impartial.

The momentary elation we experience when some judge violates her/his duty and publicly rails for or against a particular person, party or position fades rapidly when we realize the judge is acting from prejudice. This is so because we know that we may have to face a judge who decides cases on whim not law.

There are many reasons America remains the land of the free but one of the most vital reasons is our independent judiciary. Are America’s judges human? Yes. Are they prejudiced? Yes. Is the perception they are going to decide cases without allowing their prejudices to control their view of the evidence important. You know it!