Judges, what planet are they on?

[Gob]

A Sydney judge has compared incest and paedophilia to homosexuality, saying the community may no longer see sexual contact between siblings and between adults and children as “unnatural” or “taboo”.




District Court Judge Garry Neilson said just as gay sex was socially unacceptable and criminal in the 1950s and 1960s but is now widely accepted, “a jury might find nothing untoward in the advance of a brother towards his sister once she had sexually matured, had sexual relationships with other men and was now ‘available’, not having [a] sexual partner”.

He also said the “only reason” that incest is still a crime is because of the high risk of genetic abnormalities in children born from consanguineous relationships “but even that falls away to an extent [because] there is such ease of contraception and readily access to abortion”.

Judge Neilson made the extraordinary and bizarre comments in the case of a 58-year-old man, known for legal reasons as MRM, who is charged with repeatedly raping his younger sister in the family’s western Sydney home in 1981.

The man had earlier pleaded guilty to sexually assaulting his sister when she was 10 or 11 years old in 1973 or 1974 after police recorded a telephone conversation between the siblings in July 2011 in which he admitted to having sexual contact with her when she was “a kid”.

But he has pleaded not guilty to the charge of sexual intercourse without consent, with an alternative charge of incest, regarding the 1981 events.

On April 7 a jury was empanelled and the Crown Prosecutor requested the jurors be told of the earlier misconduct to show MRM had a tendency to have a sexual interest in and have sexual intercourse with his sister.

The Crown argued that without the background information, the jury might find it hard to understand why MRM began raping his sister “out of the blue” and why she did not report it to her parents or police.

In the mid-1970s MRM had warned her not to tell their parents because they had just lost another son in a car crash and she remained fearful of upsetting her parents when the abuse recommenced in 1981.

But Judge Neilson refused to admit the evidence, saying the sexual abuse which had occurred when the girl was 10 or 11 and the youth was 17 occurred in a different context to the sex which happened when she was 18 and he was 26. By 1981, she had had sexual relationships with two men and had a young child.

“By that stage they are both mature adults. The complainant has been sexually awoken, shall we say, by having two relationships with men and she had become ‘free’ when the second relationship broke down,” Judge Neilson said.

“The only thing that might change that is the fact that they were a brother and sister but we’ve come a long way from the 1950s … when the position of the English Common Law was that sex outside marriage was not lawful.”

He went on to say incest only remains a crime “to prevent chromosomal abnormalities” but the availability of contraception and abortion now diminishes that reason.

“If this was the 50s and you had a jury of 12 men there, which is what you’d invariably have, they would say it’s unnatural for a man to be interested in another man or a man being interested in a boy. Those things have gone.”

On Tuesday Crown Prosecutor Sally Dowling SC asked the Court of Criminal Appeal to remit the case to a judge other than Judge Neilson because of the "misogynistic" attitude he displayed towards the complainant.

“These remarks in my submission are completely disgraceful,” Ms Dowling said.

"The reference to abortion is particularly repellent.”

Justices Arthur Emmett, Derek Price and Elizabeth Fullerton reserved their decision.

Adults Surviving Child Abuse president Dr Carol Kezelman said: "To equate homosexuality, incest and the crime of child sexual assault is as ill-informed as it is outrageous. For it to be paraded by a Judge in Australia in 2014 during the time of the Royal Commission into Institutional Abuse, or at any time, is beyond belief. Literally thousands of survivors of child sexual abuse have given testimony before the commission of the decades of damage their abuse has caused," Dr Kezelman said.

"The relational betrayal of the horrors of incest between a brother and sister of any age is abhorrently criminal. Failure to understand that prior abuse disempowers the victim establishing the ground for future assaults is ignorant. This together with referring to a sibling as being sexually ‘free’ or ‘available’ demands strict censure."

Bravehearts founder Hetty Johnston called for Judge Neilson to step down from the bench for "ludicrous and obscene remarks".

"These comments are offensive to every child, every victim, every homosexual person in this country."

Ms Johnston also called on the case to be referred to the current Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/judge-compare ... z370vYffWX

[Gob]

some signs of sanity...

A Sydney judge who compared incest and paedophilia to homosexuality has been referred to the NSW Judicial Commission by NSW Attorney-General Brad Hazzard.

Mr Hazzard has also written to the Chief Judge of the District Court, requesting that Judge Garry Neilson not sit on any criminal trials until the commission has examined the matter.

"I was extremely concerned to read the comments of His Honour Judge Garry Neilson in regard to his views on incest," Mr Hazzard said in a statement.

"In my view the community would be rightly appalled at his reported comments. Incest is completely reprehensible, unacceptable, disgusting and criminal."



Read more: http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/incest-statem ... z377hqzF55

[BoSoxGal]

HELENA — A judge who faces suspension for saying a 14-year-old girl appeared “older than her chronological age” during her rapist’s sentencing said he believes the penalty is unwarranted and proposed the Montana Supreme Court withdraw it.

Judge G. Todd Baugh suggested the court relied on incomplete media reports in ordering the 31-day suspension on top of the public censure recommended by the state Judicial Standards Commission. The sanctions were for comments Baugh made last year in sentencing Stacey Rambold to 30 days in prison — which the state Supreme Court found too lenient before assigning the case to another judge for re-sentencing.

He illustrated his point in a response filed Friday to the Supreme Court order by referring to news reports that said the victim committed suicide in 2010 before the case against Rambold, her former teacher, was tried.


There was no evidence the girl committed suicide because of the crime, Baugh wrote. The girl’s mother has said the teen’s death was driven largely by the rape.

“I do not fault the media for they, as do most businesses, present what their customers think they want. In today’s world of the Internet, what the customer thinks he wants is 24/7, sensational sound bites, and that is what is provided,” Baugh wrote. “So be it. However, for courts to rely on such is disconcerting, to say the least.”

Baugh said he found no other cases in which the Supreme Court went beyond the recommendations from the Judicial Standards Commission, as it did in ordering his suspension in addition to the censure.

In addition, the Montana citizens with whom he’s spoken believe his conduct had no negative affect on the court system, he wrote.

“If you see any merit in these observations, I will not object to you withdrawing the suspension,” Baugh said.

But, he added, whatever the court decides, he will not withdraw the consent he previously gave to be disciplined.

“A famous man once said something like, ‘From this day forward, I will fight no more forever,’” Baugh wrote, referring to a quote attributed to Chief Joseph of the Nez Perce tribe when he surrendered to U.S. troops in 1877. “I have some idea of what he may have thought.”

Marian Bradley, president of the Montana chapter of the National Organization for Women, urged the Supreme Court to impose the punishment it ordered.

“The suspension sends a strong message to judges who continue to victim-blame and engage in rape myths,” Bradley said.

A complaint filed with the Judicial Standards Commission led to its recommendation for censure, and the June 4 Supreme Court order added the suspension.

Chief Justice Mike McGrath wrote in the order that Baugh had eroded confidence in the court system, and “there is no place for perpetuating the stereotype that women and girls are responsible for sexual crimes committed against them.”

The judge previously apologized for his actions in sentencing Rambold for sexual intercourse without consent, and he plans to retire when his term expires in December.

In addition to saying she was older than her chronological age, Judge Baugh also asserted that the 14 year old rape victim was as much in control of the situation as her 40-something teacher - he then sentenced the rapist to only 30 days jail rather than the 4 year mandatory minimum. The Attorney General's office appealed the sentencing successfully; the matter is pending re-sentencing.

As disgusting as all that was, he proves himself entirely without any perspective whatsoever on the plight of victims when he compares his plight to Chief Joseph. I shudder to think this man sat on the bench for 30 years.

[Gob]

Maybe these judges need an hour in the shower with "Big Bubba" to give them a little perspective?

[Lord Jim]

I remember this case...

This jerk got a 31 day suspension and he's whining about it?

He should have been shit-canned...

[BoSoxGal]

Nope, he gets to leave on his own terms at the end of his term 12/31/14, and he'll collect a nice fat pension, too.

Another great Montucky Judge:

Montana's chief federal judge retired in May after admitting he had forwarded a racist e-mail about President Obama from a courthouse computer. Now an investigation by a court disciplinary council in San Francisco has revealed that Judge Richard Cebull sent hundreds of racist, sexist and politically inflammatory e-mails on the same computer over a four-year period.

The Judicial Council of the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals approved the report on March 15, 2013, with public release scheduled two months later.

But when Cebull announced his retirement May 2 after the furor over his Obama e-mail, the council, chaired by Chief Judge Alex Kozinski, dismissed its disciplinary proceedings, withheld its report and issued a statement saying only that it had found "similarly inappropriate e-mails" sent by Cebull.

On Friday, the U.S. Judicial Conference's Committee on Judicial Conduct ordered that the report be made public.

The council's attempt to conceal its findings reflects a system in which judicial disciplinary agencies tend to err on the side of confidentiality because of the volume of meritless misconduct complaints they receive, said Carl Tobias, a University of Richmond law professor and commentator on the federal courts.

"Because many complaints are frivolous, there's a mind-set to keep things as private as possible," he said.

Cebull has not commented publicly on the report.

A former Montana attorney and federal magistrate, Cebull was appointed to the court by President George W. Bush in 2001 and became Montana's chief federal judge in 2008.

The Great Falls Tribune first uncovered the Obama e-mail that Cebull had forwarded to a group of friends in February 2012, with an introduction that said, "Hope it touches your heart like it did mine." It read:

"A little boy said to his mother, 'Mommy, how come I'm black and you're white?' His mother replied, 'Don't even go there Barack! From what I can remember about that party, you're lucky you don't bark."

Cebull issued an apology after the newspaper reports and acknowledged the message was racist. He said he had forwarded it because "I am not a fan of our president."

In its now-public report, the Ninth Circuit Judicial Council said a subsequent search of court computer tapes dating from 2008 found hundreds of disparaging e-mails sent by Cebull to "personal and professional contacts and court staff."

Many messages were political and expressed "disdain and disapproval for liberal political leaders" or commented on legislation on topics like gun control and civil rights, the report said. It said a significant number included jokes or commentary disparaging African Americans, Native Americans, Latinos - especially illegal immigrants - and women, and a few were antigay.

The report did not quote any of the offending e-mails. [The Courts are OPEN to the public - why shouldn't this information also be? A group has sued under FOIA to have the full materials released, and the matter is pending - bsg]

The council said a review of Cebull's cases, and interviews with Montana lawyers, found no evidence of judicial bias, although the report conceded that some attorneys might be reluctant to criticize a sitting judge, even anonymously.

The council said Cebull had done nothing illegal that would justify his impeachment but reprimanded him for actions that undermined "public trust and confidence in the judiciary."

A council majority voted to bar him from receiving new cases for 180 days and order him to undergo training in ethics and racial awareness. Two council members - U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken of Oakland, the Bay Area's chief federal judge, and U.S. District Judge Anthony Ishii of Fresno - voted to go further and ask Cebull to retire, "in recognition of the severity of his violations and the breadth of the public reaction."

Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail: begelko@sfchronicle.com