SC Family Court Judge Deemed Unqualified
Politics

United States

#21 Dec 3, 2009
Another chance for Segars-Andrews is next month .... THREE CHANCES?? WHAT HE F**K???
Peanut

Ladson, SC

#22 Dec 3, 2009
truthteller wrote:
Peanut, I know first hand of several cases where there were transgressions. I imagine that Glenn McConnell wanted to avoid a public display of those cases. That would be quite an embarassment for our local judicial system. This was well handled in a relatively quiet way on his part.
I certainly intended no criticism of McConnell. He's one of the heroes in this. I was really addressing her son's comment, meaning it as a warning. I know, also first-hand, of far worse transgressions and agree, this was a dignified way of removing her. I do not think it's going to end with her, however. Her son needs to brace himself.
Peanut

Ladson, SC

#23 Dec 3, 2009
truthteller wrote:
I wonder whatever happened to the grievances filed against her and her pals that were never investigated when she was the vice chair of the Grievance committee?
At least some of those grievances were refiled. She and her pals have made victims of too many of the wrong people. Their hubris is bringing them down.
Politics

United States

#24 Dec 3, 2009
SC system for handling complaints against judges and lawyers still operates in the shadows and in secrecy.
There has to be so much more to this than they will ever tell. But the Judicial Canons are clear as bell. And Segars-Andrews knowingly and willfully viotated them.
She may be involved with all these groups, like Camp Hope, etc. But history has proven to us all time and time again that criminals and liars and powers freaks engain themselves with such "feel good" groups which enlarges their social circles. Doing this can give someone, such as Segars-Andrews, some what of a wall of protection from critics of her unethical and illegal conduct. The petition her supporters used merely proves the same. But it failed because she clearly broke the law with no question. And she did it knowing she was. With everything else the commission knows, it was time for her to be taken off the bench because the public is just down right FED UP with tyramts like her.
She is a disgracce no matter what "feel good" group she is associated with or involved with. She used those groups to expand her social network. But they don't work with you outright and knowingly VIOLATE the LAW.

The members of the Judicial Merits Selection Commission would be totally and foolishly sticking their necks out to reverse ANYMORE votes next month. They would set themselves up for a firestorm in which they would be persecuted themselves on many avenues. Thus bring much shame to themselves, their peers, their employers, their family, and their friends. It's one hell of a risk to take, thats for sure!
Politics

Columbia, SC

#25 Dec 3, 2009
Everything above is written assuming the panel itself is not corrupt or acting on ulterior motives.
Family_Courts_Co rruption

United States

#26 Dec 3, 2009
Decision on judge expected quickly
Head of review panel will push for expedited ruling
Friday, December 4, 2009
As controversy swirls around her future on the bench, a final decision on whether Family Court Judge F.P. Segars-Andrews is qualified to continue serving could be released much sooner than expected.
Senate President Pro Tem Glenn McConnell, who heads the state's Judicial Merit Selection Review Commission, said the group's written decision isn't due until mid-January, but he will push for its release sooner because of strong interest in her case.
"We're going to try to get it done before Christmas," he said Thursday.
Meanwhile, Charleston lawyer Steve Dey said many in the legal community will continue doing what they can to get the commission to change its mind and allow Segars-Andrews to seek a new term.
Dey is co-chairman of the Family Court Liaison Committee, which communicates between Family Court judges and the Charleston County Bar Association.
"Our efforts, at least in the family liaison committee, are not stopping. We want to keep her seated," he said. "How, I don't know.... We're going to do whatever we can do."
The commission met Wednesday for a second time on Segars-Andrews, and its vote finding her unqualified changed from 9-1 to 7-3, still three votes shy of a decision that would allow her to continue to serve.
The commissioners adjourned and met in private four times, and none of the commissioners explained publicly why they voted the way they did.
McConnell said Thursday that the commission is focusing on whether Segars-Andrews' handling of a Clarendon County divorce case showed a significant enough ethical breach to undermine the public's confidence in the judicial system.
In 2006 she declined to disqualify herself from a divorce case after she learned late in the case that the lawyer for the ex-wife, Becky Simpson, had shared in a $300,000 personal injury award with the law partner of Segars-Andrews' husband, Mark Andrews.
Meanwhile, McConnell said that Becky Simpson's lawyer, James McLaren, had submitted $166,000 in legal fees in the divorce case, while Steve McKenzie, the lawyer for William Simpson, billed only $8,600.
McConnell said Segars-Andrews required Simpson to pay half of his wife's legal fees, or $83,000.
Also, Mark Andrews' law partner, Lon Shull, had submitted an affidavit on attorneys' fees in a separate, earlier divorce case involving Simpson's mother and father.
"This is a complicated set of facts," McConnell said, adding that the commission's written decision would lay out the facts and how commissioners weighed them in their decision.
Some legal experts defended her decision to rule in the case, saying there was no bias, and the S.C. Court of Appeals upheld her rulings, including her decision not to recuse herself.
The state's Judicial Conduct Commission also dismissed a complaint against her.
McConnell said the Segars-Andrews case will set a precedent for the commission's review of judges facing similar complaints, and he said the issue is whether her handling of the case violated the criterion for ethical fitness, one of nine criteria the commission considers when evaluating a judge.
"We try to look at whether or not there's a been a departure from the criteria. Otherwise, we'll serve as an appellate body for every litigant out there," he said. "We don't want to become a platform for disgruntled litigants."
Family_Courts_Co rruption

United States

#27 Dec 3, 2009
McConnell said the commission has received six additional complaints from litigants who were disgruntled with the outcome of their case before Segars-Andrews in the few weeks since the story of her reappointment made the news.
McConnell said they won't be considered unless the commission decides to reopen her case and finds good cause to review them. A motion to reopen the case Wednesday failed for lack of a second.
McConnell said those complaints came in after the deadline and will be moot if the commission finds her unqualified.
Dey said that several dozen Segars-Andrews supporters were stunned Wednesday when the commission kept its "unqualified" rating.
"There was absolute shock and awe in that room. The sergeant-at-arms had to throw us out. We didn't know what to do," he said.
Dey also wondered why McConnell told the group that commissioners should not be contacted until their decision is final. "I thought I could contact my elected representatives. I thought that was built into the constitution. I don't know," he said. "Maybe I was wrong."
McConnell said commissioners have told him they have been stopped at service stations and other public places regarding this case.
"People just need to know that's really not proper," he said. "Them telling us that she's a good judge or a bad judge isn't what we're considering. We're considering the record."
Family_Courts_Co rruption

United States

#28 Dec 3, 2009
The Segars-Andrews support petitions were a waste.

Contacting, or attempting to contact, members of the Commission to influence their vote in regard to the Segars-Andrews matter will land you in some pretty deep dung. These Segars-Andrews supporters have already been doing that and their names will come out.
lillycollette

Mount Pleasant, SC

#29 Dec 4, 2009
Politics wrote:
SC system for handling complaints against judges and lawyers still operates in the shadows and in secrecy.
There has to be so much more to this than they will ever tell.[...] And Segars-Andrews knowingly and willfully viotated them.
She may be involved with all these groups, like Camp Hope, etc. But history has proven to us all time and time again that criminals and liars and powers freaks engain themselves with such "feel good" groups which enlarges their social circles. Doing this can give someone, such as Segars-Andrews, some what of a wall of protection from critics of her unethical and illegal conduct. The petition her supporters used merely proves the same. But it failed because she clearly broke the law with no question. And she did it knowing she was. With everything else the commission knows, it was time for her to be taken off the bench because the public is just down right FED UP with tyramts like her.
She is a disgracce no matter what "feel good" group she is associated with or involved with. She used those groups to expand her social network.[...]
Ditto! Ditto to the max!
Itsaboutx

Huntersville, NC

#30 Dec 4, 2009
Steve Dey??? Who cares? What an idiot he is...bottom of the barrel slime.
CME

United States

#31 Dec 4, 2009
I think the commission voting 3 times sends a very negative message and it's likely unconstitutional for them to be allowed to do so.

SC is run up fooked up chitheads.
lillycollette

Mount Pleasant, SC

#32 Dec 4, 2009
There is a major difference between “Disgruntled Litigant” and “Victim” and to classify all victims as disgruntled litigants is blatantly dishonest.

What about the unmarried and childless man who was illegally hailed into this court on false allegations and verbally alleged to have agreed to sign over his property and monthly payments to a forger and thief?

I later married that man and have been fighting the corruption and crimes in this case ever since.

My husband was never a “litigant”—he was never allowed to litigate anything.

He was always a “victim”. Some of the crimes against him and me were directly committed by Segar-Andrews.
lillycollette

Mount Pleasant, SC

#33 Dec 4, 2009
Our case needs to be put in front of a federal grand jury and we need to have a Special Prosecutor brought in given all the bar members who have signed this outrageous petition to save the job of Segars-Andrews--the enforcer.
lillycollette

Mount Pleasant, SC

#34 Dec 4, 2009
I am fed-up with threats of how I risk being sued for telling verifiable proven truth. I am prepared to move forward with this case.

[email protected]
truthteller

Mount Pleasant, SC

#35 Dec 4, 2009
"McConnell said commissioners have told him they have been stopped at service stations and other public places regarding this case. "

The Andrews/Rosen mafia has been quite active so I hear. I bet they are worried. Their golden goose is being striped of her powers. I am so thankful that Glenn McConnell is not scared of them and is willing to shine a light on their behaviors. We have needed this for a long time. The sun is shining brighter in Charleston today... thank you Glenn McConnell!!!
Doug from the creek

Goose Creek, SC

#36 Dec 4, 2009
Politics wrote:
<quoted text>
Sorry Son .. but your mom has you duped.
Kind of like Mayor riley in the half cent tax increase. It gets turned or voted down so he just rewords it and brings it up again until it gets passed. I wonder how many times he would have brought it up again if it kept getting voted down.

They probably would still be voting on it. I never can understand why people are so anxious to vote themselves a tax increase. I also wondered why tax dollars should have been used to refurbish the dock street theater. Shouldn't that have been done by donations.
Doug from the creek

Goose Creek, SC

#37 Dec 4, 2009
Matt Andrews wrote:
This is my mother. A woman of upstanding in the community. She has been a judge for 16 years. She is being taken off the bench because of a ruling on one case. One case out of 1000 she has resided over. A case she ruled 60 % to 40% in favor of Mr. Simpson! If the Judicial Merit Selection Committee, which is not even made of of judges and contains some members without even a law degree, knew more of family law, they would know that 60% is the most you will almost ever be rewarded in a divorce case.It is quite clear there is more going on behind the scenes than the public knows.
To call a woman corrupt who has had as large an impact on the community as my mother has is ridiculous. I am not going to preach about her, and I am not writing as a pissed off son. Rather as a member of a community which is a little less bright without a judge as passionate as Judge Segars-Andrews. Read her petition page to see how much good she as truly does for this state. Then decide wether it is my mother or the committee, headed by McConnell, who is truly corrupt
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/judgeandrews
My guess is you are the one who posted that Bill Green was your Daddy too.
truthteller

Mount Pleasant, SC

#38 Dec 4, 2009
From the Post & Courier article today: "Meanwhile, Charleston lawyer Steve Dey said many in the legal community will continue doing what they can to get the commission to change its mind and allow Segars-Andrews to seek a new term.

"Our efforts, at least in the family liaison committee, are not stopping. We want to keep her seated," he said. "How, I don't know.... We're going to do whatever we can do."

Of course Steve Dey wants to keep the golden goose in power! He's gotten some income from the Andrews over the years. Check the record...
truthteller

Mount Pleasant, SC

#39 Dec 4, 2009
I think there are also some stories he doesn't want to come to light...
CME

United States

#40 Dec 4, 2009
Doug from the creek wrote:
<quoted text>
Kind of like Mayor riley in the half cent tax increase. It gets turned or voted down so he just rewords it and brings it up again until it gets passed. I wonder how many times he would have brought it up again if it kept getting voted down.
They probably would still be voting on it. I never can understand why people are so anxious to vote themselves a tax increase. I also wondered why tax dollars should have been used to refurbish the dock street theater. Shouldn't that have been done by donations.
Yes. Just keep contacting the Judicial Merits Committee members DAILY until they vote again. These Segars-Andrews people don't care about no stinking LAW. They are law breakers themselves. They are breaking the law contacting these Committee Members DAILY!!! People SEE THEM DOING IT!

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Charleston Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
run the yankees out of charleston 21 hr Fred 2
Leave Charleston Now 21 hr Fred 2
Augusta Chronicle Claims Fall Short Racist Tabl... Sat trustrum united 1
Marie Hicks Inabinett (Sep '12) Fri Think 68
News North Charleston police ask for input on Citize... Jun 20 Adonay 1
News What Charleston looks like, a year after the Dy... Jun 20 Adonay 1
News `a We Are Charlestona a new book that puts Moth... Jun 20 Adonay 1
More from around the web

Personal Finance

Charleston Mortgages