Mr. Bartlet you sir are a douche!

So I am killing time at work watching the Casey Anthony trial while babysitting some software installs. The defense has rested, a few things were happening and then all of the sudden they bring this pimply-faced 28 year-old TGIFridays employee to the podium to ask why he flipped off one of the lawyers while court was in session and the jury was present.

The judge completely embarrassed him by making him give his name, age, place of employment, annual salary, and place of residence; he even went so far as to ask the 28 year-old if he lived with his parents (hahaha). The kid was really scared and nervous. He was given the chance to explain himself. He was even shown a sign posted that said so gestures are to be made in the court room. He was asked what level of education he had and if he could read.

For the first time during this whole trial, I laughed my ass off at something that happened! The judge really stuck it to him too. He found him in contempt and gave him 6 days in county jail and a $400 fine plus $200+ in court costs.

So again, young Mr. Bartlet I believe you said your name was, you sir are a douche. Happy time in the pokey!

Respect mah authoritah! :wink:

What are the possible ramifications of the finger being seen by the jury? Are they going to be swayed into thinking the public (since they’ve been sequestered) is for aquitting the accused?

I don’t mind the Judge embarrassing the guy for a bit but six days seems kind of excessive.

But the real reason I posted is to say Fred Garven is a terrific user name.

For the record, I am no longer a male prostitute as my name would imply.

I believe six days is a little too easy on the guy for what he did. Just think about the jury for just a second and what they might have derived out of his gesture and why it is forbidden to make such a gesture. They are sequestered for a reason. They see this guy flipping off a prosecutor and no telling what thoughts go through their heads as to why. After all, they are just people. They know they are cut off from what the general public is seeing. I know that I can be unbiased, but I know many others that cannot. Even those who are perceived as being the worst of the worst deserve the best defense without interference from an outsider.

This is a lesson this punk will never forget. And because it is a simple contempt charge, it won’t even be an event that haunts him forever. He will serve his time and he may even gain a bit of celebrity status; even if it is something that labels him as infamous.

He got his fifteen minutes. His price wasn’t too high on a personal level. He could have cost everyone involved a great deal of pain and heartache had only one person on the jury seen it. I would have given him 6 months in jail. I am not a judge so I have no idea what the rules are in these sort of circumstances, but I believe that the longest sentence allowed in this case is the proper one to hand down simply because of the potential for disrupting everything that has taken place so far.

Maybe I am a bit Draconian, but I believe everyone deserves a fair trial no matter what. One douchebag like this can, on a very subtle level, taint the opinion of a jury.

Why is applause not allowed in the courtroom? Why, when a lawyer returns to his seat from shredding to bits a witness, is not a cry of “You da man!” allowed in the courtroom?

Mr. Bartlett doesn’t need to respect the authority of the judge; he needs to respect the authority of the courtroom, of the system. A trial is serious business.

I think six days is a bit much, but too bad.

Right. I wasn’t trying to imply that the kid (28 year old) is a hero. Just trying to interject an amusing turn of phrase.

I finally saw video of the judge chiding Mr. Bartlett. To paraphrase, he claims that Bartlett’s action could have derailed the trial and nullify all the hard work all of the various attornies and other agents of the court. I understand his point, I think. I didn’t realise that the bird can cause a jury to flip flop on the verdict. Seems juries are more delicate than I first assumed. :smiley:

Six days seems to be a lot. I am not a lawyer, nor do I pretend to be one. Is what Mr. Bartlett did a misdemeanor?

I don’t think you do understand his point. A jury is not supposed to be exposed to any outside influences during the trial. Normally, a jury is trusted to avoid such on their own. This particular jury, due to the heavy publicity of this case, is sequestered. What they watch on TV, what they read in the newspapers, is controlled.

A courtroom observer giving the finger to the prosecutor is an outside influence, and an egregious one. It very likely could have caused a mistrial, and not due to the thought that the jury might be swayed, but to avoid even the potential that one juror might have been swayed by that outside influence.

I said I understood it. :confused: ahhh fuck it: You’re right, Frank. Is that more clear now? :slight_smile:

I’m always in favor of watching some amusing smackdownery, so I was glad to find the clip of this numbnuts on YouTube.

I do agree that criminal contempt and a six-day sentence seems a bit harsh, though. A weekend in the pokey would have set him straight.

When did the term “kid” encompass 28 year olds? Guy got what he deserved.

The reason he was asked his salary and whether he lived with his parents, was to determine if he qualified for a public defender.

IIRC you don’t get a public defender against contempt. You don’t get squat. I think the judge was just trying to see if 6 days would place an undue hardship on the little twerp.

He was appointed one for his appeal. Not neccessarily the appeal of the 6 day sentence, but the fine.

I think six days was appropriate. Heck I saw a judge give a guy 10 days for driving on his second time suspended license. The knucklehead wanted to make himself part of the festivities… this is the price of admission…

Is there a link to be found to his flippage?

Exactly what I was going to say, 28 years oldis no kid.

I was surprised at his age. To me he looked, acted, and sounded like a teenager. It certainly looked like a teenager’s prank. He knew he was on camera-- I think he did it on a dare, thinking that out of all the people in TeeVeeLand only his pals would notice his prearranged, brilliantly subtle gesture.

Arrested development, say I. (Pun intended.)

Google News has lots of them.

Well, I did not see any of this, but on the account as given in the OP, this judge is a vicious, vindictive, power crazed bully of the worst sort, who, in a sane world, would be removed from the bench immediately and never let near a position where he has any power over other people’s lives ever again.

So do you think it’s acceptable for a spectator to flip off the prosecutor in the middle of a trial while the jury is present? If not, should the finger-giver not be punished for his action? How much, if so?

Pardon the question, but I’ve not been following this trial. What was he objecting to? Obviously he was dissatisfied with something the prosecutor or prosecution did, but what was the reason for his anger?