A couple things. 1) He states that the months served was "plenty of punishment" and not "wrongful punishment", which implies he recognizes guilt by the accused. He's a judge, which means he'd have to recognize how words matter and are of utmost importance to be accurate. So him then concluding "not guilty" is a complete contradiction to his statement, as that implies no fault for the alleged crime. 2) If he truly did feel his decision initially was wrong, he could go to the appellate court to make his case. Instead, he just completely threw out potential justice because he had a change of heart (not a legally recognized medium to draw conclusion from). There's a lot of wrong that was committed by the judge and it does raise flags of corruption, almost certainly bribery if so.
He also said that he reviewed the evidence and said that there is a lack of evidence, which is a valid thing to do. While he did contradict himself, contradiction doesn't prove guilt of whatever the judge is being accused of. There is no reason he should be forced to do a appellate court to revise his decision if it is indeed valid. There isn't enough information to confirm nor deny whether he broke the law.
@@shotjohnny probably did but didn't realize his bias that there wasn't sufficient evidence it even happened since it requires DNA evidence to prove beyond a reasonable doubt(this is all speculation)
@foomp Bravo👏👏👏👏👏👏👏 Good observation! It stinks a bit ( like the scene from "Better off Dead" when Cusack falls into the trash truck. Judge thought the law (mandatory sentencing) didn't apply
And since a trial has a public record, anyone in the public, even that judge, could have pulled the record of the trial to support his new claim. Except he didn't, and you can guarantee that's because it doesn't.
Something to keep in mind... Judges arent the one making these calls. The D.As office/prosecutors office are the ones doing the leg work. Obtaining evidence. The judge pretty much imposes a sentence. If the d.a makes a deal with the defendant , they pretty much just roll with it
My guess from that is that he didn't think the boy was some sort of angel. We are not told any details at all but my interpretation of that is that he believed the girl in so far as that the boy did something wrong (gave her drinks? put a pillow to her head? Don't know)- just not that he SA her. So perhaps he didn't think it was inappropriate that the boy had some sort of lessor punishment, it was just wrong to convict him of SA. Although one could perhaps also argue that "punished enough" would also apply to a perfectly innocent person as well.
How do you not believe her, find him not guilty and at same time say his 5 months in jail is plenty of punishment? I mean if you think he's really innocent, wouldn't you say that 5 months for an innocent person is too much?
Hes telling the mob that its enough punnishment so they accept it. Hes not saying he believes he got the right amount of punnishment. He declared him innocent and did not deserve ANY punnishment.
Judges sometimes make decisions that are unpopular. It’s important that a judge is able to speak their mind freely, without bending to uneducated masses
Well, that's after she's given public interviews and gone on national TV. I don't believe the judge's reasoning, but I can't fault him for defending himself.
@@OmarOsman98 What do judges normally say about people flipflopping on their statements? If you constantly adapt your reasons to what you're asked, it is a lie.
It is beyond strange that this judge threw away his entire career for a single criminal that he ALREADY ruled against. This judge has done something BAD, and somebody is blackmailing him.
Possible. Even if he was right, he is still required to explain why because such a decision is considered unusual in a criminal trial. It doesn't matter if he doesn't want to say that she wasn't believable. He still needs to do so on top of saying why she's not believable for such unusual and extreme measures. He violated the code of ethics in this case and that's why he was removed from the bench. Had he lost the election or not run, the judicial disciplinary committee might have prohibited him from ever running again. The story doesn't say but usually when judges get removed from the bench they also lose their license to practice as lawyers.
@@o.b.7217 I don't have an exhaustive list but my experience is mainy with European ones, so that's what I meant. There are exceptions to this, of course.
@@hurtighansen1 Dude was elected. You DO know you can find a lot of this stuff out just by looking on the interwebz these days, right? (Though in this case they mention him running for reelection right in this story....)
@Stinkydonshatonawall thing is, you don’t have a legal education. Therefore, what you think about complex topics is not important. You’re not an expert and so your opinions don’t matter. Having an unsubstantiated opinion without proof is worse than having no opinion at all, and you lack the humility and respect for expertise to realize that.
It's disgusting to watch this judges arrogance during the interview, his actions show just how corrupt our judicial system truly is, I'm glad this creep was removed from the bench.
Who knows how many other times this judge has done something like this. Every person that had gone before this judge should be filing a motion for a new trial.
He was removed from the bench, i.e fired from judge position. He was not removed from the case. Idk if double jeopardy plays a role in the verdict, though. I hope something can be done.
According to the law, every single case a judge like this has presided in are reviewed again by someone else, and in case there are other cases of wrongful rulings. This also applies to people in similar positions of authority.
@@ThomasSawyers He was a judge since 2010. They need to go over *every* ruling he has made since then. There is no telling what other garbage this guy pulled.
Please tell me the facts of the case and specific details provided in testimony that makes you bold enough to speak garbage. I see his point quite clearly. You just have to look.
@@alexandradanieleand one of the judges on that court citied "the face of God," as a basis, which is not a basis, and blasphemous, but that's another story
You had 500 subs in January 2018. More than 6 years later, you're all the way up to 530. That's some going. At that rate, to get to 3k, you'll only have to live another 411 years.
@@m.k.8411 The US legislation basically built corruption into the political system. Corruption in courts is something completely different. We can only assume that he's corrupt, but it surely looks like it. Good thing he could be disbarred
Pay off from who? The suspect whose family couldn’t even afford the attorney to begin with and had to apply for state aid for a state issued counselor?? This is something else.
@@edwardgiovannelli5191 and I am, too but I say this judge got what he deserved for failing us so badly. Don't excoriate someone for being a Christian values Republican just because you saw a bad apple not living up to the Christian values. To be honest, I don't know if he just made a major mistake that cost him or was dishonest about being a Christian. Either way, it's still moot to the fact that he lost his job over a major ethics violation.
Absolutely correct. Dude is not poor in any sense of the word. I strongly suspect he was bought off, and they just didn't have enough evidence to charge him directly with bribery.
Portraying himself as the victim in this case is beyond galling. He's like Trump. "I'm THE VICTIM! I've been Put Upon!". Yeah, right. Go cry to Mr. Bubba when you're in prison, judge.
This reminds me of former Judge Aaron Persky and the Brock Turner case. What is it with these judges wanting to give light or no sentencing to these guys who have committed such terrible acts?
@@AlainnCorcaigh Are you arguing that the board that reviewed the case, determined he was in the wrong, and concluded that he should be removed didn't have all the facts? Please enlightens us, what do you know that no one else does?
Cases like this should NOT be decided by a judge on a bench trial. It should have went to a Jury Trial. Way too much power over the victim and defendant for one person to determine.
The right to a bench trial is a right the defense only gets to execute when the defense feels that the testimony or evidence may be too inflamatory, too prejudicial for laypersons to weigh fairly in the accused's favor. The prosecutor does not choose a bench trial, the accused does.
@@theofficialadhdteacher Yes He can vacate 'guilty' verdict but the legal standard is pretty high and its usually reserved for cases where there are multiple charges applied and the jury picks the higher one to convict with one element not proved, instead of a lesser standard that was proved, or where the judge looks at the entire case 'in most favorable light to Prosecutor', and still finds the evidence wanting the beyond a reasonable doubt standard.
@@BTURNER1961Is this a case where the girl could sue the judge for slander? Since he is now on national television calling her a liar? Sorry if I’m asking the wrong person. You seem educated on the legal system in the US and I am Irish. 🤷🏻♀️
@@Kenzalina_ Virtually impossible. 1. He was a public official who was performing his professional duties and they have very broad immunity. 2. He picked his words carefully. "I did not believe her' was the quote you heard. Anyone is entitled to express that opinion. that's not even close to calling her a liar. He could have said "I thought she was lying" and its still an expression of personal opinion.
This guy is a judge. So an intelligent man doesn’t need to look at the ceiling every 3-5 words to answer a question. People who are telling you the truth, look you in the eye.
Nah its that he keeps looking left, which usually means lying. Looking to the right happens when you are recalling a memory, left when you are being creative (making up stuff). Or so I've been told.
@@doublecrossedswine112 While that is old pseudoscience anyway you still got it wrong. Left is recalling memory and looking right is creative. It's debunked nonsense though either way.
@@Redbeardian Cute. I said, or so I've been told. You made a concrete statement and was wrong. Put this in your pipe and smoke it mom. "They claimed that a person who was pulling information from a memory would look toward the top right corner of their visual field. This is known as visual recall. Someone who’s constructing an idea not from memory would look toward the top left corner of their visual field. This is known as visual construct."
I have conducted over 7,000 interviews for broadcast as a television producer. I can tell you his eye contact gives him away. He is lying to the interviewer and his discomfort with what he's saying is clear. He tries to distance himself from his actions and that's why he won't make eye contact during the interview.
You can’t rationally make those conclusions. They are speculation. If you are a tv producer, why are you not asking why this story failed to review the evidence?
@@kevinhornbuckleWell, if a person with some expertise cannot make that conclusion, I wonder how the judge was able to determine the alleged victim was lying...🤔 'cause, you know, he went straight to "lying", not "insufficient evidence" or "beyond a reasonable doubt" or "a case of she says/he says"... But what do I know? Maybe they bestow special psychic powers to judges when they are nominated. 🤷🏼♂️
@@kevinhornbuckle Please, I'm not a TV producer by any stretch, and even I can tell he is lying through his toothless mouth. He is looking so far down his nose you can count the individual hairs. You can't tell me he isn't being condecending to the reporter. He doesn't look her in the eye because he thinks he is too far up the pecking order to care what she, or any 'common' person thinks. He is just doing the interview to humor the masses. I'm gonna call it 'Trump Syndrome'. He's convinced that the law is for everyone else and doesn't apply to someone as 'important' as him.
Yeaaaa . You need to understand how dangerous someone’s word is. Anyone could say I did something then I’m in jail for 4 years. I rather have some dna, witness , or text than just someone’s word …. I guess we haven’t leaned from amber heard that people lie
@@demonddearing6550that’s exactly what the job of the fact finder is dear. To evaluate the credibility of a witness. The problem here is that he did that, found the evidence sufficient to convict, then changed his mind saying that the punishment was enough. Those are inconsistent findings.
Interesting. Might be even more interesting if his financial records surface. Remember: this is Illinois, and we're #2...... ...in corruption after Louisiana. I also don't tend to trust people who can't look an interviewer in the eye during an interview about their actions. Further digging is probably necessary.
@@fremontpathfinder8463 Exactly. Plus, it's EXTREMELY unusual for a judge to reverse a verdict in that way. Normally, this requires new evidence, recanted testimony, and similar facts relative to a verdict. This wasn't that. It's very suspect...it's DOABLE, but without really, really, REALLY specific reasons to do so, it looks extremely suspicious.
@@lonewolf4429 Did you listen to the interview? Other judges and legal scholar’s said he was wrong, that’s how I developed my opinion not without thought.
Huh, so judge states he made a mistake originally? Sounds like he still should’ve been removed due to being incompetent? These r peoples lives/freedoms, no excuses judge, but u can’t make these mistakes!
Ya, brilliant, lets have a system where judges who realize they made a mistake have no way to correct it, and instead just let the wrongful conviction stand. You have made a compelling case against democracy.
@@idwtgymn Such as system already exists. There's several levels of appeal courts beyond the first trial court. If indeed the evidence was insufficient for a conviction then it would be thrown out by a higher court upon appeal.
@@idwtgymnProbably, I don't understand the American system. Was this conviction by jury? Or the judge alone? In my part of the world, if the judge feels that a mistake has been made, either by himself or by the jury, he could send it up to the appellate court for review. But he cannot reverse it himself.
@@idwtgymnexactly what I said. This is how innocent people end up spending decades in jail just to be exonerated and have to be compensated in the millions,
@@RedbeardianIt doesn't work that way. In order to appeal, you have to find something wrong with the original trial. Believe it or not, simply saying that the evidence doesn't support the verdict is not grounds for an appeal.
In America, you have this utterly bonkers system of electing your law enforcement and judicial officials, instead of having them qualify for the job. The result is this sort of thing, and they are not going to stop happening until your system changes.
ABSURDLY STUPID. I deal with judges around the country, including in Illinois. And including arbitrators (who basically function as judges in arbitration). The entire scheme of justice in America is FAILED. The corruption, nepotism, prejudice, bias and seclusion in who gets to be part of the decision making/control the function of "justice" has become a stinking cesspool.
There was not a single judge on that panel, that does not understand what it feels like to have second thoughts about a verdict they have announced, what is like to wonder or worry if they got it wrong. It comes with the territory, but they also know that this case with this judge did not look like or feel or smell anything like that. There is a stench about this 'change of heart. He's not telling us the whole truth here.
I would have liked to see them grill him about what exactly changed his mind about the case and why he ruled guilty in the first place if he claims the evidence doesn't indicate guilt.
Finally a community standing up for what’s right. This clown should never been a judge, since he figures he can just ignore the crimes someone committed and just set free the ones he likes, making up his own laws.
Hope one day the judge goes through the same experience as that poor girl in being helplessly taken advantage of, but can’t escape as she had. Let’s see him experience shame and see how he carry’s himself.
I'm all for removing this judge if they had proof he did this for personal gain BUT what exactly did he benefit from reversing his own decision?!? There has to be more to this case than meets the eye ffs. 👁
2:05 No. A mistake is when you buy the wrong toothpaste; a mistake is when you buy the wrong type of ingredient for a recipe; a MISTAKE is when you buy the wrong part for a car. That ruling should never have been overturned. Period! In my opinion, I think the judge needs to be investigated. This reeks of some backdoor deal.
He says he didn't want to explain why he reversed his own ruling because then he'd have to say he didn't believe her. As if reversing his own ruling doesn't say exactly that. What a coward.
She shouldn’t have been drinking in excess to the point of her passing out. There has to be some accountability on her part as well, no matter if she is a teen. The teenager boy is totally wrong for sexually assaulting her and should be held accountable as well.
I was going to say the exact same thing, but I didn't because of the potential backlash it could have prompted, but I appreciate your comments because it's absolutely spot on.
I dare anyone to read the actual court transcript....just do that. Everyone is responding to this report out of emotion and with A TOTAL DISREGARD OF THE FACTS PRESENTED IN THE CASE.
Why didn't she ask him what specifically he found in the evidence that made him change his mind? News reporters are so bad at their job nowadays. It was the MOST important question to determine if his story was credible and his reasoning made any sense at all.
