When I had jury duty the first stage of the selection process (where the 100+ people called gather) was in the courthouse’s main courtroom. It was a huge, beautiful, room, wood *everywhere *, barely changed from when it was built 150 yrs ago (it even still had a prisonor’s dock in the middle of the room). The actual trial I was assigned was in the more modern annex and the courtroom was just generic 20th century institutional bland style. 
I’m guessing they just didn’t want you taking any (unofficial) pictures of their documents, and collected your cell phone because of the high percentage of them that can take pictures.
(Examining each incoming cell phone to determine if it can take pictures - and arguing with cellphone owners about it - is probably a lot more time-consuming than just collecting them all.)
Sometimes the bitch IS lying and it never happened.
My ex was great with that, while she regularly smacked me and even assaulted me in my sleep. Because of course, who is going to believe the 6’ tall guy with the blackbelt and the weapons over the 5’ tall woman on disability, when she says she’s being abused? :dubious:
There is the case of Jacoby Smith.
He claims that his quadruple amputee girlfriend started it, beating him with “her nubs”. Oh, and she was cheating on him as well. So he beat her.
Well, she does admit that she has an anger management problem, so that’s pretty much an admission that she was smacking him “with her nubs”.
Does not excuse him punching her in the face 10 times.
He would be if he lived in Georgia, where children conceived during a marriage are legally assumed to be the husband’s unless the wife specifies otherwise.
And even if the child is proven not to be the husband’s he is still liable for child support, etc. on the grounds that regardless of the parentage the child still needs to be taken care of.
I personally know someone in this situation – he didn’t sire the child but paid child support and had shared custody.
Our bailiffs announce at the outset of most court sessions that all cellphones and pagers should be set in silent mode. If any then audibly go off, they’re confiscated until the end of the docket. Some hardass judges confiscate them for good, and they’re donated to local charities such as DV shelters after being reset.
There have been some stories lately of camera phones being used to take pictures of jurors or witnesses in gang-related criminal trials, and there’s a bit of concern about that, but it doesn’t seem to be much of an issue here in NE Ohio.
If you’re talking about the building on Commonwealth, it’s also where the complex panel sits (Central Civil West). Having appeared there a few times, I agree that there must be family law there, and I wonder if maybe some misdemeanors as well. But all of the complex panel judges sit there, too.
In most of the courts I’ve been in in California, they typically either have the bailiff announce, “Remain seated and come to order; this court is now in session, the Honorable Blah Blah presiding.” There was one judge who had everyone do the pledge of allegiance every morning. It was a bit jarring, since I haven’t had to do the pledge since elementary school.
Yep. One of the first cases I took on was someone who’d been arrested and criminally prosecuted for domestic violence, having been set up (was acquitted though, thanks to an awesome public defender). We handled the civil restraining order trial, and when we were done with trial, the person who’d been arrested as the purported abuser got a restraining order against the supposed “victim,” who was ordered into a 52-week batterer’s program. So, yes, sometimes the bitch is lying, and I do think that as lawyers we managed to do some things that the client could not have done in court very effectively. So sometimes good representation can make the difference.
I know for a fact that some family law resides there; I’ve had documents retrieved from there. I didn’t know about the others. But yes, we’re talking about the same place. I work in white collar criminal law for the most part, so I am not very familiar with what all goes on over yonder. 
What does “testify in the narrative” mean?
It means the guy is planning to perjure himself.
Since a lawyer is an officer of the court and can be disbarred for allowing perjury, that means the lawyer can’t allow the guy to testify. But the guy is also entitled to zealous advocacy. So the lawyer has to tell the judge that ethically he has to withdraw from the case. Except this could screw the client. And so the judge will allow the client to get up on the stand and tell his story without interuption, and the defense attorny will have no part of the perjured testimony.
So is this only used when the lawyer withdraws? Or does “testify in the narrative” simply mean to tell your tale without interruption"? Because it otherwise sound like the guy is testifying while everyone knows he’s lying.
I’ve never done this, but I don’t believe you need to withdraw to let your client testify in the narrative (at least in most jurisdictions), merely the court’s leave.
Correct – although if you have not withdrawn, and the narrative contained statements you know to be false, you may not argue them at your closing.
It’s a lot more common in legal ethical textbooks than in real life. I’ve never been involved in a case where it happened, or even heard of it happening in any court of which I’m aware… although I’m sure it has sometime, somewhere.