Judge's Narrow Confirmation Reveals Flaws In Evaluation System

The Senate's confirmation of a Superior Court judge by a single vote last week exposed old tensions over how Connecticut judges its judges.

[Gizmo]

If we evaulate judges with a comission one should e appointed to do the same to our crooked legislators. Maybe that would fix some of what ails Connecticut

[UNCLE SAM IS BACK]

WE NEED TO ELECT JUDGES! What you want to trust a bunch of ultra liberal democrats to pick and confirm judges? No thanks....

[downeaster]

in connecticut it.s all about who paid who what

did i get mine

will i get mine

the system and the people in it stink
corrupt

[Watcher]

What is up with this Joan Hartley character?? Lets see...she is intelligent, fair, open minded, not a follower, votes her conscience...but she is a Connecticut Democrat?? From Waterbury?? Something is amiss. Something is askew. Not here..not now...she must be a witch or something...lets burn her at the stake...or...maybe..better yet...get her to run for Governor !!!

[Bolo]

It is very simple you take care of me and I owe you Mr. Elected Official. Yes your Honor, what ever you say, you are confirmed.

[Yo Momma]

Shut up, all of you.

Remember, the citizens of CT voted to NOT BE ALLOWED A SAY IN GOVERNANCE last November.

No referenda, no citizen ballot initiatives, no voice, no change.

We had a chance, but we said no. To ourselves.

So suffer, pinheads.

[Donna Ploss]

The system DEFINITELY needs to be reviewed. Judges, such as the ones mentioned in the article as well as Judge Karen Nash-Sequino of Derby, should definitely have their records reviewed. The "Good Old Boy's Club" needs some housecleaning starting with Sequino. Not only does she not know how to do her job, but does it quite poorly at that. How many judges do you know who allow the criminals choose their own punishment?? Yup, that's our Honorable Karen Nash-Sequino. The "Criminal Friendly Judge".

[Brutus]

A pity a competent jurist who can discern right from wrong has to sit and have her career reviewed by a pack of corrupt, socialist jackals. Direct election of judges would be an improvement.

[ZENA AKAANGEL]

I HAD TO READ IT WORD FOR WORD BECAUSE IT IS JUST THAT DIFFICULT TO BELIEVE THAT THE JUDCIARY COMMITEE AND ALL THEIR COLLECTIVE EDUCATION CANNOT UNDERSTAND OR EXPLAIN EXACTLY WHAT IS WRONG INSIDE THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM IN CT.....

to save a career of an UNWORTHY RECIPEINT is NOTHING MORE THAN a bleeding heart WITH NO INFORMATION OR EDUCATION TO FOUNDATION A DECISION AT THAT LEVEL.......

unbelieveble..........YOU MIGHT FIND IT UNBELIEVEBLE.

MYSELF..........I AM NOT SURPRIZED AT ALL....

THESE COMMITTEES ARE FILLED WITH EDUCATIONAL DEGREES that have ABSOULTELY NO HANDS ON EXPERIENCE of the other side of the desk or bench....

SHAME ON YOU LAWLOR.....SHAME ON YOU

[Sheep Dog]

The pity is that the legislature is full of defense attorneys who don't like judges that hand down the law like it should be. Of course they arent going to let a tough on crime judge get reappointed easily.

[ZENA AKAANGEL]

Donna Ploss wrote:

The system DEFINITELY needs to be reviewed. Judges, such as the ones mentioned in the article as well as Judge Karen Nash-Sequino of Derby, should definitely have their records reviewed. The "Good Old Boy's Club" needs some housecleaning starting with Sequino. Not only does she not know how to do her job, but does it quite poorly at that. How many judges do you know who allow the criminals choose their own punishment?? Yup, that's our Honorable Karen Nash-Sequino. The "Criminal Friendly Judge".

AND THE PROMPT ...THE ATTENTION GETTER IS SOOOOOO EASY TO SEE...the deeper they hide and the more actively they fight to be VISIBLE...the more one can know ....ITS A PROBLEM OPEN THE DOOR..

parenting 101

[craig]

UNCLE SAM IS BACK wrote:

WE NEED TO ELECT JUDGES! What you want to trust a bunch of ultra liberal democrats to pick and confirm judges? No thanks....

It's not legislators who pick judges. It's the governor, smart guy.

[Judging the judges]

Election of judges is not a panacea. The process would ensure that we get politicians as judges. I cannot image a worse nightmare. Every decision they would make ultimately would be driven by an innate desire to pander to some inevitably small faction that the judge in question believes to be responsible for his or her tenure. The present system is most likely fairly low on the list of potential evils. If Swords' case is a wake-up call, so be it. Get to work, legislators! And don't drop your guard on existing judges. Justice Rodgers may be tilting at mentoring and monitoring new judges, but human nature is always corruptible and many times the corruption is subtle but still extremely dangerous. We are talking about huge amounts of power being entrusted to solitary individuals. Family cases are the most vulnerable given that the stakes are almost always higher than any civil case yet no possibility of jury.

[BLD]

It doesn't seem appropriate that a legislator who has a bone to pick with a judge should have a say in his or her reappointment. From the information here, two lawyers, both defense attorneys, have issues with this judge, and the juice to dismantle her. Otherwise, she is stellar. That doesn't appear judicial to me.

[ZENA AKAANGEL]

WHAT LAWLOR NEEDS IS A SIMPLE LITTLE REMINDER

of the night he stood, eyes cast to the floor, as he gave his word TO WILLIAM DYSON AND KEN GREEN........to do the best he could to LEVEL THE JUDICIAL SYSTEM OF DISCRIMINATION AGAINST BLACKS..........

CT-N BURN LAWLOR A DVD........SEND IT TO HIS PO BOX

cuz if THIS is the BEST HE CAN........the entire STATE OF CONNECTICUT IS IN FOR A LONG AND LISTLESS RULE of yet another.........TULISANO.

god save us!!!!!!!!!!

[ZENA AKAANGEL]

yes, DYSON, i remember it well.

[SWHosley]

ZENA AKAANGEL wrote:

yes, DYSON, i remember it well.

Zena, do everybody a favor and get rid of the Caps Lock.

You may have something to say, but why not make it easy for people to read it?

[Concerned]

It is difficult for attorneys to voice their concerns about any paritcular judge as they must face that person again. The questionnaires that are supposed to be given out are not done so consistently, thereby depriving counsel and pro se parties the opportunity to provide feedback without the fear of repercussions.

Electing judges will not solve this problem, and will render the Judiciary subject to popular opinion and sentiment.

Clearer standards and consistent opportunity for feedback is needed.

[Snerdley]

Sheep Dog wrote:

The pity is that the legislature is full of defense attorneys who don't like judges that hand down the law like it should be. Of course they arent going to let a tough on crime judge get reappointed easily.

Exactly. The lefties at the state house love criminals, and their wreckage is becoming plain for all to see. This one-party state is doomed.

[Richard]

The tone of the article seems to be that a close vote implies a kind of failure in the system. I don't see that as necessarily true.