WTF? Both the judge and reporter seem scarcely able to string a coherent sentence together. In the immortal words of Tony Soprano, this shit is unacceptable!
Certainly any judicial written judgement should be thoroughly checked.
P.S. I think it’s grammar Nazi.
I would wish to ventriculate my acumen that both of them the judge’s and reporter’s grammars be so much not so good that it literally bordered to be tootering on the laughable cliff brink of illiteracy nearly.
Each of the first two examples in OP was written by someone whose grammar is excellent, but who went back and edited a sentence without then rereading it to see if proper grammar was still intact. I do this myself sometimes, though usually catching the error on proofread.
Thus, these are not examples of grammatical ignorance, but rather symptoms of haste or overconfidence in present-day computer-based text typing.
It’s plausible in the case of the judge’s statement, though far from certain. Quite a bit less so in the second example. I don’t know how you would know this for sure, though certainly editing mistakes like that happen a lot and I’ve done it myself. I have also found inexcusably bad grammar and bad writing in general on major sites like cnn.com that doesn’t come from editing mistakes.
Or, maybe there was an administrator who specified that the judge had only five minutes to correct his mistakes.
The last sentence is bad enough that I’d be hesitant to trust the accuracy of the quotes before it.
That was my thought. The reporter probably got the Judge’s quotes wrong.
Hey… knock a self a pro, Slick! That gray matter backlot perform us DOWN, I take TCB-in’, man! 
(Eloquent, wolfpup, truly eloquent)
Thank you, Mrs. Palin.
I have no doubt this is what happened, but…
It’s curious that the first two errors are in direct quotes that originate from the transcription of an oral statement by the judge. It’s not credible that the judge made such jarring errors in speech. Perhaps an editor went through to edit the article for style, realized that they were editing direct quotes, then messed things up in trying to change them back.
You couldn’t resist, could you!
This is timely - apropos of our other conversation, any (descriptivist) linguist would agree that these are examples of objective errors rather than just poor style. They violate empirical rules of sentence construction, they are not grammatical in any dialect of English, formal or informal. And I have no doubt that the judge, the reporter and the editor would all agree that these are literally just mistakes. Anything does not go.