Rachel Baird
Judges are required to be impartial finders of fact, but they also have thoughts and opinions about political causes and public policy debates, just like everyone else.
When a Rockville judge shared some thoughts from the bench about the origins of the constitutional right to bear arms, and his views about a Torrington lawyer's work representing gun owners, it raised some eyebrows. Judge Edward J. Mullarkey's was accused of comparing lawyer Rachel Baird, who is known for representing gun owners, to the historic Western gunslinger Annie Oakley.
There were reportedly other insults. Baird says she was informed that "anyone who supports the Second Amendment should be ashamed." And Mullarkey, who graduated from Harvard Law School, reportedly told her "I'll speak slowly" because she went to Yale.
Baird shot back. She promptly requested that Mullarkey recuse himself from the case, in which Baird was representing a man accused of disorderly conduct and lying to police.
The request for recusal resulted in a flurry of emails among lawyers who represent gun owners in issues regarding their rights to possess and carry firearms. The matter also caught the attention of lawyers who represent judges in grievance cases.
Among the latter is Steven Selligman, who said judges have to be mindful of what they say during court sessions. After all, a judge's comments about a defense lawyer or defendant can be fodder for later appeals. Any sign of bias from the court can result in an overturned conviction.
"Judges have the duty, among other things, to uphold the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary," said Selligman, a Hartford lawyer who represents judges when they face complaints of wrongdoing by the Judicial Review Counsel. Selligman said he wasn't in position to say anything good or bad about how the judge handled this case. But speaking generally, he said, judges "have to refrain from saying anything that would interfere with the appearance of being unbiased."
No one has suggested that Mullarkey's actions should bring about a formal complaint. But Baird cited Malarkey's comments when she argued he should relinquish this case. Under the Code of Judicial Conduct, a judge is required to step down from a case if requested if there impartiality might be reasonably challenged.
Baird, who has spoken publically about her litigation efforts on behalf of gun owners in the aftermath of the fatal school shooting in Newtown last year, said she was moved to request a new judge because she was concerned that her client would not receive a fair trial. At the same time, Baird said in the request she filed in Rockville Superior Court, her client was concerned he could not receive a fair trial by any judge in Connecticut, "due to the events of December 14 in Newtown."
Her client, Christopher Peterson, 38, of Winchester, was arrested in June. Vernon police said they were called to a report of domestic violence. When they questioned Peterson, he told them he did not have any firearms. Police said that information was untrue. Instead, they accused Peterson of illegally possessing several guns, based on his criminal record.
Read more: http://www.ctlawtribune.com/PubArticleCT.jsp?id=1202611738279&Lawyer_Objects_To_Judges_Second_Amendment_Remarks&slreturn=20130629220056#ixzz2aUSbvm2s
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting.
Your comment will be held for approval by the blog owner.