Hacker News Reader

Comment by jjulius | Hacker News Reader

Mistakes like this happen frequently whether the proceedings take place over Zoom, or in person in a courthouse. As multiple comments have pointed out, it's about showing a basic level of respect and awareness of your situation.

This would be akin to accidentally showing up to a courtroom in a suit and forgetting that there's a decorative penis pin on your jacket because the last time you wore it you were at some sort of party. You clearly didn't care enough about your situation to dot your i's and cross your t's, and it suggests to the judge that you think this is a farce, mistake or not.

View on HN

It's very easy to click a link and join a Zoom meeting without knowing what your screen name is set to ahead of time.

HN is an echo chamber of tech-savvy people (myself included), but for anyone who's job isn't to work on a computer for 8 hours a day, this type of mistake can happen completely without intent.

In regards to the "decorative penis pin" scenario. Benefit-of-the-doubt is a basic principle of the judicial system. It is completely feasible to do something like this unintentionally. A good judge should ask the pin be removed, and move on. If the defendant refuses to remove it, handle that situation appropriately.

In this same video, the judge asked someone to remove their hat. The hat was removed, and everyone moved on. This is how professionals do their jobs.

Sorry, but I still don’t see how it’s relevant. What’s the problem with having a decorative penis pin on your jacket? If that’s the way you like to dress, enjoy yourself! Why should we accept that a judge is letting themselves be so provoked by these insignificant things? That doesn’t sound to me like a person who is able to impartially evaluate the case based on the law.

Five responses to your question have all said it shows a lack of respect for the judicial system and the situation one is in, and you are essentially spitting in the face of the judge. I truly don't know how to make it any clearer to you than that.

But I must ask again; would you show up to any kind of disciplinary hearing for yourself with "Buttfucker 3000" showing on your name badge?

You really don’t have to ask, because what I personally would it wouldn’t do in various situations has nothing to do with what’s an appropriate response for someone who’s job it is to impartially evaluate evidence.

Even if the defendant literally did spit in the face of the judge, a good judge should not react in a way that would give anyone reason to think they let that affect their ruling.

>Even if the defendant literally did spit in the face of the judge, a good judge should not react in a way that would give anyone reason to think they let that affect their ruling.

uhh, depends on the case?

Can't help but agree.

There is no way to know that the defendant's Zoom screen-name was set intentionally, or even with his knowledge. Prior to showing up on the screen the judge was already leaking bias - "Then we'll bring this...fool in".

While I am inclined to "assume" that it was done intentionally, assumptions is not what the judicial system is about.

"Your name isn't Buttfucker 3000, you yol-hole" along with the initial remark are both incredibly unprofessional (and worrying) things to hear from a person who's literal job is to pass unbiased judgement. Name calling from a judge, really?

Yes, the dude was probably being an ass, but it doesn't matter. The judge judged the guy without concrete evidence and displayed a ton of personal distaste and bias against the defendant over the following minutes. He should asked the defendant to fix his screen name and moved on. This is not the kind of behavior you want to see in a judge who presides over cases of any real meaning.

You are focusing too much on the immediate context. Yes, the judge must remain impartial and resist being provoked, but the judicial system depends on people's respect. This being this case, their behavior isn't the only thing they must take into consideration. They must consider how this behavior will be interpreted by others. If they are the platonic ideal of impartiality but they are perceived as fools, this weakens the influence of their decisions. I'm not a lawyer and I'm not omniscient, so I'm not sure how accurate their assessment of things is, but this is certainly the reasoning. They need the court to be treated with respect, and to be perceived as respected and worthy of respect, so they don't brook people appearing before the court behaving in a way that they believe will be perceived as making fools of them.

The trial before them is not their only concern.

You're making the judge sound like an abusive spouse. Must be treated with respect!

Respect is earned, regardless of statute.

The judge could have simply asked the defendant to fix his screen name and moved on, and he would have had my respect for the professionalism. Instead, respect has been lost.

>If they are the platonic ideal of impartiality but they are perceived as fools, this weakens the influence of their decisions.

The charge is for a syringe found by some cop rifling around this guy's person/vehicle during a traffic stop. They are not only perceived as fools but they are fools, for facilitating the trying of this individual for such an unjust law for which there is no victim. The only lesson this man could possible learn from this judge sentencing him is to toss the syringe in a playground or something before driving off in his vehicle, since apparently having it in your car instead of wherever you used it is a big problem.

These tyrants deserve no respect, and I hope the entire system of trying people for the crime of owning an inanimate syringe collapses. The sooner we lose respect for all judges sentencing people for these crimes the better.

Perhaps for the exact reason you are implying - lack of respect for the judge and/or process.

People don't go to court because they "respect" the judicial process or the judge - they go because they are compelled by force or threats of force/imprisonment.

That said... it seems foolish to disrespect the judge, not because he/she deserves respect, but because they can abuse their power and punish you over slights to their ego. It's the same reason you don't run your mouth at a cop during a traffic stop - they would likely wield their small authority over you in a way that you found unpleasant.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com