A judge in Fort Lauderdale may be disqualified for being Facebook friends with the prosecutor. Accept it or not, but Facebook has come into the lives of many. It seems as if EVERYONE these days has a Facebook account. I have mixed feelings about the whole possible disqualification of the judge due to Facebook. Now days, just because you are friends with someone on Facebook, does not mean you personally know them. People add random people they don't know mainly for networking purposes. In the business world, if you add people who work for different corporations or organizations, and a job opportunity comes up, nine times out of ten, you will be notified by a post a Facebook friend might have published. However, I also feel a bit uneasy that the judge and the prosecutor are Facebook friends, even though they might have never met face to face, they may have interacted on Facebook, and exchanged information at some point. The whole issue to me is unnecessary, but I understand why there is a concern.
I do not agree that a judge should be disqualified due to being facebook friends with a defendant. All judges are required to by law to be impartial. Many judges and lawyers socialise outside of work. How I see this situation is the judge did not make it clear he knew the individual. There was an appearance of impropriety which he did not make clear to all involved. It is my understanding that that if there is even an appearance of impropriety the judge is to state this and ask if it is ok to all involved. He did not do that in this particular case for whatever reason. He may not have even known he was friends with this individual on facebook. He should not be disqualified, rather, fined as he did not follow protocol regardless if it was an accident or not. It is a good thing this situation happened as it brings to light the issue of social media in a court of law. If I were a prosecutor, lawyer or any profession in the justice system, I would not have a facebook for many reasons. Maybe other prosecutors should take note of this situation and delete social media accounts to prevent any serious situations that could arise.
Ok so how many people do not know that many judges and attorneys are friends outside of the court room. Before becoming a judge most were attorneys and by making connections during their time as lawyers that is how they were able to become judges. Do I think the judge should have been disqualified yes. Why? For the simple fact that this information was not disclosed prior to the beginning of the trial. Had the defense been informed about this minuet fact this entire situation could have been avoided. If the defense was informed they would have been given the opportunity to make the decision if the fact that the judge and the prosecutor where Facebook friends had any baring’s on their case. Based on the crime that the defendant was tried for I do not think that changing the judge will have make any difference on the conviction that will take place.
When it comes to the debate about Facebook in the justice system I don’t believe that the judge should have to remove himself from this case. Just, because you are friends with somebody on Facebook doesn’t mean anything. In this setting it’s almost impossible for a judge and a lawyer not to become close with one another as much as they might see and spend time with each other. At one point the judge was a lawyer, so is he suppose to stop talking to all of his lawyer friends once he is promoted? Talking about Facebook this reminds of when I applied for a job as a deputy sheriff and they had to go and look at my Facebook and they asked me questioned about some of my friends on my page. Some of the people that I am friends with on Facebook I have known since I was in elementary, but it doesn’t mean that I hang out with them everyday or even talk to them for that matter. I don’t think that it is right that employers look at social networks to try and figure out who someone is just because a “friend” on Facebook does something doesn’t mean that you will. Then what if it a family member you can’t choose your family!
The society we live in today is a technology based society. Almost everyone uses a social media account in some shape, form, or fashion.Judges and Laywers already know each other in some way or another. They engage in parties, cocktails, golf games, and etc. together. A judge is suppposed to be fair and just regardless. The court of appeals took this too seriously. The man was charged with three accounts of lewd and lascivious behavior on a child. This charge in itself should show a red flag. The man wants off and to be set free. The judge should not have had to step down. The judge or even the lawyer could be using facebook for business, to enhance their campaign, or even to keep up with clients. Befriending someone on facebook is not going to affect their morals and ethics on what is right and what is wrong. On the other hand, if a lawyer was trying to persuade the judge to side with him, then thats an offense. Just being friends;however, is not a crime in itself and this was blown out of proportion.
well i think we all have different opinions about this issue. i personally think that yes this judge should've been disqualified from this case, of course there is a chance that the prosecutor attorney and the judge were friends before the judge got to be what he is now, and exactly because of that a different judge should be assigned to this case; a lot of feelings could be involved in the decision of the case due to this "friendship". it also have the other "face" or other version which could be that they didn't know each other and were only friends in Facebook and nothing else but that. to prevent problems like this judges and attorneys should have a very private social networking or not have one at all. nowadays we have to be very careful who we interact with because it can affect our working and business life. it is incredible the impact that social networks have produce in society.
I believe this story should be used as an example for other judges and attorneys. Social media is a big part of this generation, and expecting the judge to delete his account just seems absurd to me. Yes, if I was a judge I would not have an account just for the sake of issues arising like this. The only mistake this judge made was not clarifying with the defendant that he was familiar with the attorney and he knew he or she, whether it be close friends or just facebook friends. It would ease the defending sides nerves, or they would possibly request for a new judge. Either way this whole situation could have been avoided if proper precautions were taken. The man will be tried again and most likely be found guilty, that is not the issue. The issue is how to avoid this from happening again.
First of all in the society we live today practically everyone has a social media account. I do not think its right to tell someone they are not allowed to have any social media accounts or if they do they cannot have any of their co workers as friends. Not only because a judge and a lawyer are friends on facebook its going to mean that the judge it’s going to break the laws he knows he has to follow as a judge. Also as a judge I do not think you would want to lose your career for just one case, especially for a case like this that no matter who the judge is the defendant is still going to be punished for his charges. Another option can be just having a very personal facebook and only having your family members as friends and not accepting friends or co workers. I think at the end that will be the best choose for a judge and a lawyer, to avoid anything like this happened again. I still do not think its right, but sometimes you have to think of your career first.
The debate about Facebook in the justice system is a weird one because I don’t believe that the judge should have to remove himself from this case. Being friends with somebody on Facebook like that doesn’t mean the judge is going to take sides. Seeing they are Facebook friends means yes they probably do know each other and seeing that the judge had to be a lawyer at one time doesn't mean that now that he is a judge that he has to automatically have to stop conversing with other lawyers. In my opinion, Facebook friends should not be the deciding factor on whether or not someone gets a job or has to drop a case.
It appears to me that the defendant is looking for a reason to get out of the judgment. He is trying to avoid responsibility for what he did “lewd acts with a child”. Some individuals have thousands of friends on social media sites and few do they actually know and communicate with. FB friends shouldn’t be enough to recuse himself or be disqualified. He followed the law as far as the crime and punishment phase. I think this is just another example of a criminal trying to run from his responsibilities. I agree with the former prosecutor as well. The judges and lawyers all see each other at different events all the time. There isn’t much of a difference. If the judge and prosecutor had been related then it would have mattered. The felon needs to stop complaining and do his time. I’m hoping that if it is retried perhaps he will get a stiffer punishment than what he got originally. Now that would be justice!!!
I will have to play the fence on this topic, but I am leaning more towards the fact that we should trust the Judges with their social networking. People in the justice system have many connections and there is bound to be friends or acquaintances in the courtroom. I do not see what the problem with socializing on the internet is if they are able to socialize face to face. I think it is fair that the judge was disqualified, especially since it was not told beforehand that he was friends with the prosecutor. I believe that social networks are just another thing that adds to trouble, so people like this judge should be careful, especially since he was a friend with a person on the case he was with. Maybe people in this field should steer away from the social media, in order to cause less stirring up. I think it should all be a choice, though. The men and women should not be forced to not have a social network due to the ties it may create. They are trained to be fair and we should trust that a decision would be made justly regardless of the association between a judge and a prosecutor.
Well everyone has a different view on this issue. I’m not a criminal justice major so my take on this issue is going to be different. I’m a fraud/forensic accounting major and this would be a big NO-NO in the business world. With the fall of Enron, World Com, Author Anderson, and Tyco just to name a few. If an external auditor and the CEO of a company the auditor is working on are friends on Facebook this can be cause for trouble. The auditor may be acting in the up most ethical manner that is expected but it all comes down to perception. Most accountants, internal and external auditors run in the same circles as CEOs and CFOs and are friends, just like attorneys and judges. But the auditors could not audit a company his CFO friend works for. We are trying to keep things like Enron, WorldCom, Goldman Sachs, and Author Anderson from happening again. How would you like it if a family member was convicted of rape or murder because the judge and prosecutor were friends and discussed the case outside of the court room? Doesn’t seem fair now, does it? The person on trial may be guilty of his charges but if he does not receive a fair trial because of the friendship, isn’t this going against our rights? Don’t we have to right to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a group of our peers without any prejudice? The judge should have rescued himself from this case and then there would be no question of unfairness because the judge and prosecutor are friends.
Hasn’t this been a problem since the beginning of time? I think it’s crazy for judges not to have Facebook pages. The correct question to ask would be; what’s at stake? When I was in the military we were strongly urged to stay off of social networks while in country, that is if we came by a computer. Sometimes there is a certain duty to uphold and one must learn to deal with it. In my case, it kept information falling into the wrong hands. The only difference is, there was an immediate dangerous threat against a large number of people. I believe there should be a rule to tell the court whether or not there exists a friendship between judge and attorney. After this is brought to light, the court should go from there. Maybe this judge should be switched out. All people still deserve the right to be friends with whomever they want. There really is no immediate danger if someone were to communicate via Facebook here in the states. Humans are social people and should never have that right taken away. If you’re going to take away the right for judges to not have Facebook, you might as well tell them to live at the courthouse and no friends. I have always assumed it’s always been everyone (Judges, prosecution, witnesses, jury etc.) vs. the defense. The defense seems to always, lawfully, have less numbers. I know my friends would judge me harshly if I were in court for something, they would for sure punish me if I deserved it and vice versa.
This one is hard to call because facebook causes relationships problems all the time. Now that a judge befriended a prosecutor just brings fuel to the fire on the concept of problems with social networking. I do not take a side in this story because it all depends on who you asked. In the video, the prosecutor did not see any problem with them being friends because it wasn't clear if they even contacted each other during that case or not. Also prosecutor are socially friends with judges all the time, that doesn't mean that they will have one up on the case, according to the prosecutor in the story. The defender who was consulted in the video took the stand that it was a problem because the defendant didn't know that the prosecutor was friends with the judge. Of course the defendant took that position. When it comes down to it, I believe that if there is no proof that the prosecutor and judge were conversing about the case, then the judge should not be charged with anything. This is an unfair no matter how you look at it.
A situation like this is a judges worst nightmare. No judge wants to have his case retried. But on one hand he should have been upfront and told the defense if they had a problem with him being friends with the prosecution. So what is he suppose to do not have any friends? They could have just been networking friends. For the most part Facebook is a source of networking. On the other hand he should have recused himself or at least had a discussion with the defense to see if they had a problem with him being facebook friends. Be up front from the get go is the best way he should have gone about the whole situation.
I can understand the defendant’s point of view, when he says he will not have a fair trial. I see stories like this all the time on the news and on television shows like CSI and Criminal Minds. The judge and the prosecutor have an extra judicial relationship; which causes the defendant to think that they are being falsely accused. However, the decision of guilt or innocence is up to the jury. So why should it matter? It is hard to be a judge and not be friends with prosecutors. They attend many of the same social events. Federal judges hold their positions for life, state judges it depends on the state. If you have held this position for a number of years and so has the prosecutor, it is hard not to form a friendship. I do not think that the government should make it a law/rule, that judges and other court officials cannot be friends on social media sites or that they should not have an account to one. They are human beings like everyone else and should have the right to have one. We are in the era of technology and innovation. I understand why officials removed the judge from the case, but it still does not make it right or fair. This just shows another negative effect of Facebook. It should not matter who he is friends with on Facebook. This is why many people do not use social media sites, because of stories like this. I think the government is taking its powers a little too far. Facebook has over a billion users and the government uses it to find and track down criminals. Now, they are trying to tell officials who they can and cannot be friends with on social media sites.
The way that this is being handled I believe it a little to much, it really should not matter if a judge or lawyer is using social media websites, we are in the era of technology. After being in their type of work, of course friendships are going to be made. Judges became judges to help determine the rite choice in the end. The GOVERNMENT, I believe should have no say in who you are allowed to be friends with or if you can be involved in social media websites, judges and lawyers at the end of the day are all ordinary people like everyone else.
A judge in Fort Lauderdale may be disqualified for being Facebook friends with the prosecutor. Accept it or not, but Facebook has come into the lives of many. It seems as if EVERYONE these days has a Facebook account. I have mixed feelings about the whole possible disqualification of the judge due to Facebook. Now days, just because you are friends with someone on Facebook, does not mean you personally know them. People add random people they don't know mainly for networking purposes. In the business world, if you add people who work for different corporations or organizations, and a job opportunity comes up, nine times out of ten, you will be notified by a post a Facebook friend might have published. However, I also feel a bit uneasy that the judge and the prosecutor are Facebook friends, even though they might have never met face to face, they may have interacted on Facebook, and exchanged information at some point. The whole issue to me is unnecessary, but I understand why there is a concern.
ReplyDeleteI do not agree that a judge should be disqualified due to being facebook friends with a defendant.
ReplyDeleteAll judges are required to by law to be impartial. Many judges and lawyers socialise outside of work. How I see this situation is the judge did not make it clear he knew the individual. There was an appearance of impropriety which he did not make clear to all involved. It is my understanding that that if there is even an appearance of impropriety the judge is to state this and ask if it is ok to all involved.
He did not do that in this particular case for whatever reason. He may not have even known he was friends with this individual on facebook. He should not be disqualified, rather, fined as he did not follow protocol regardless if it was an accident or not.
It is a good thing this situation happened as it brings to light the issue of social media in a court of law. If I were a prosecutor, lawyer or any profession in the justice system, I would not have a facebook for many reasons. Maybe other prosecutors should take note of this situation and delete social media accounts to prevent any serious situations that could arise.
Ok so how many people do not know that many judges and attorneys are friends outside of the court room. Before becoming a judge most were attorneys and by making connections during their time as lawyers that is how they were able to become judges. Do I think the judge should have been disqualified yes. Why? For the simple fact that this information was not disclosed prior to the beginning of the trial. Had the defense been informed about this minuet fact this entire situation could have been avoided. If the defense was informed they would have been given the opportunity to make the decision if the fact that the judge and the prosecutor where Facebook friends had any baring’s on their case. Based on the crime that the defendant was tried for I do not think that changing the judge will have make any difference on the conviction that will take place.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to the debate about Facebook in the justice system I don’t believe that the judge should have to remove himself from this case. Just, because you are friends with somebody on Facebook doesn’t mean anything. In this setting it’s almost impossible for a judge and a lawyer not to become close with one another as much as they might see and spend time with each other. At one point the judge was a lawyer, so is he suppose to stop talking to all of his lawyer friends once he is promoted? Talking about Facebook this reminds of when I applied for a job as a deputy sheriff and they had to go and look at my Facebook and they asked me questioned about some of my friends on my page. Some of the people that I am friends with on Facebook I have known since I was in elementary, but it doesn’t mean that I hang out with them everyday or even talk to them for that matter. I don’t think that it is right that employers look at social networks to try and figure out who someone is just because a “friend” on Facebook does something doesn’t mean that you will. Then what if it a family member you can’t choose your family!
ReplyDeleteThe society we live in today is a technology based society. Almost everyone uses a social media account in some shape, form, or fashion.Judges and Laywers already know each other in some way or another. They engage in parties, cocktails, golf games, and etc. together. A judge is suppposed to be fair and just regardless. The court of appeals took this too seriously. The man was charged with three accounts of lewd and lascivious behavior on a child. This charge in itself should show a red flag. The man wants off and to be set free. The judge should not have had to step down. The judge or even the lawyer could be using facebook for business, to enhance their campaign, or even to keep up with clients. Befriending someone on facebook is not going to affect their morals and ethics on what is right and what is wrong. On the other hand, if a lawyer was trying to persuade the judge to side with him, then thats an offense. Just being friends;however, is not a crime in itself and this was blown out of proportion.
ReplyDeletewell i think we all have different opinions about this issue. i personally think that yes this judge should've been disqualified from this case, of course there is a chance that the prosecutor attorney and the judge were friends before the judge got to be what he is now, and exactly because of that a different judge should be assigned to this case; a lot of feelings could be involved in the decision of the case due to this "friendship". it also have the other "face" or other version which could be that they didn't know each other and were only friends in Facebook and nothing else but that. to prevent problems like this judges and attorneys should have a very private social networking or not have one at all.
ReplyDeletenowadays we have to be very careful who we interact with because it can affect our working and business life. it is incredible the impact that social networks have produce in society.
I believe this story should be used as an example for other judges and attorneys. Social media is a big part of this generation, and expecting the judge to delete his account just seems absurd to me. Yes, if I was a judge I would not have an account just for the sake of issues arising like this. The only mistake this judge made was not clarifying with the defendant that he was familiar with the attorney and he knew he or she, whether it be close friends or just facebook friends. It would ease the defending sides nerves, or they would possibly request for a new judge. Either way this whole situation could have been avoided if proper precautions were taken. The man will be tried again and most likely be found guilty, that is not the issue. The issue is how to avoid this from happening again.
ReplyDeleteFirst of all in the society we live today practically everyone has a social media account. I do not think its right to tell someone they are not allowed to have any social media accounts or if they do they cannot have any of their co workers as friends. Not only because a judge and a lawyer are friends on facebook its going to mean that the judge it’s going to break the laws he knows he has to follow as a judge. Also as a judge I do not think you would want to lose your career for just one case, especially for a case like this that no matter who the judge is the defendant is still going to be punished for his charges. Another option can be just having a very personal facebook and only having your family members as friends and not accepting friends or co workers. I think at the end that will be the best choose for a judge and a lawyer, to avoid anything like this happened again. I still do not think its right, but sometimes you have to think of your career first.
ReplyDeleteThe debate about Facebook in the justice system is a weird one because I don’t believe that the judge should have to remove himself from this case. Being friends with somebody on Facebook like that doesn’t mean the judge is going to take sides. Seeing they are Facebook friends means yes they probably do know each other and seeing that the judge had to be a lawyer at one time doesn't mean that now that he is a judge that he has to automatically have to stop conversing with other lawyers. In my opinion, Facebook friends should not be the deciding factor on whether or not someone gets a job or has to drop a case.
ReplyDeleteIt appears to me that the defendant is looking for a reason to get out of the judgment. He is trying to avoid responsibility for what he did “lewd acts with a child”. Some individuals have thousands of friends on social media sites and few do they actually know and communicate with. FB friends shouldn’t be enough to recuse himself or be disqualified. He followed the law as far as the crime and punishment phase. I think this is just another example of a criminal trying to run from his responsibilities. I agree with the former prosecutor as well. The judges and lawyers all see each other at different events all the time. There isn’t much of a difference. If the judge and prosecutor had been related then it would have mattered. The felon needs to stop complaining and do his time. I’m hoping that if it is retried perhaps he will get a stiffer punishment than what he got originally. Now that would be justice!!!
ReplyDeleteI will have to play the fence on this topic, but I am leaning more towards the fact that we should trust the Judges with their social networking. People in the justice system have many connections and there is bound to be friends or acquaintances in the courtroom. I do not see what the problem with socializing on the internet is if they are able to socialize face to face. I think it is fair that the judge was disqualified, especially since it was not told beforehand that he was friends with the prosecutor. I believe that social networks are just another thing that adds to trouble, so people like this judge should be careful, especially since he was a friend with a person on the case he was with. Maybe people in this field should steer away from the social media, in order to cause less stirring up. I think it should all be a choice, though. The men and women should not be forced to not have a social network due to the ties it may create. They are trained to be fair and we should trust that a decision would be made justly regardless of the association between a judge and a prosecutor.
ReplyDeleteWell everyone has a different view on this issue. I’m not a criminal justice major so my take on this issue is going to be different. I’m a fraud/forensic accounting major and this would be a big NO-NO in the business world. With the fall of Enron, World Com, Author Anderson, and Tyco just to name a few. If an external auditor and the CEO of a company the auditor is working on are friends on Facebook this can be cause for trouble. The auditor may be acting in the up most ethical manner that is expected but it all comes down to perception.
ReplyDeleteMost accountants, internal and external auditors run in the same circles as CEOs and CFOs and are friends, just like attorneys and judges. But the auditors could not audit a company his CFO friend works for. We are trying to keep things like Enron, WorldCom, Goldman Sachs, and Author Anderson from happening again.
How would you like it if a family member was convicted of rape or murder because the judge and prosecutor were friends and discussed the case outside of the court room? Doesn’t seem fair now, does it? The person on trial may be guilty of his charges but if he does not receive a fair trial because of the friendship, isn’t this going against our rights? Don’t we have to right to be innocent until proven guilty in a court of law by a group of our peers without any prejudice? The judge should have rescued himself from this case and then there would be no question of unfairness because the judge and prosecutor are friends.
Hasn’t this been a problem since the beginning of time? I think it’s crazy for judges not to have Facebook pages. The correct question to ask would be; what’s at stake? When I was in the military we were strongly urged to stay off of social networks while in country, that is if we came by a computer. Sometimes there is a certain duty to uphold and one must learn to deal with it. In my case, it kept information falling into the wrong hands. The only difference is, there was an immediate dangerous threat against a large number of people. I believe there should be a rule to tell the court whether or not there exists a friendship between judge and attorney. After this is brought to light, the court should go from there. Maybe this judge should be switched out. All people still deserve the right to be friends with whomever they want. There really is no immediate danger if someone were to communicate via Facebook here in the states. Humans are social people and should never have that right taken away. If you’re going to take away the right for judges to not have Facebook, you might as well tell them to live at the courthouse and no friends. I have always assumed it’s always been everyone (Judges, prosecution, witnesses, jury etc.) vs. the defense. The defense seems to always, lawfully, have less numbers. I know my friends would judge me harshly if I were in court for something, they would for sure punish me if I deserved it and vice versa.
ReplyDeleteThis one is hard to call because facebook causes relationships problems all the time. Now that a judge befriended a prosecutor just brings fuel to the fire on the concept of problems with social networking. I do not take a side in this story because it all depends on who you asked. In the video, the prosecutor did not see any problem with them being friends because it wasn't clear if they even contacted each other during that case or not. Also prosecutor are socially friends with judges all the time, that doesn't mean that they will have one up on the case, according to the prosecutor in the story. The defender who was consulted in the video took the stand that it was a problem because the defendant didn't know that the prosecutor was friends with the judge. Of course the defendant took that position. When it comes down to it, I believe that if there is no proof that the prosecutor and judge were conversing about the case, then the judge should not be charged with anything. This is an unfair no matter how you look at it.
ReplyDeleteA situation like this is a judges worst nightmare. No judge wants to have his case retried. But on one hand he should have been upfront and told the defense if they had a problem with him being friends with the prosecution. So what is he suppose to do not have any friends? They could have just been networking friends. For the most part Facebook is a source of networking. On the other hand he should have recused himself or at least had a discussion with the defense to see if they had a problem with him being facebook friends. Be up front from the get go is the best way he should have gone about the whole situation.
ReplyDeleteI can understand the defendant’s point of view, when he says he will not have a fair trial. I see stories like this all the time on the news and on television shows like CSI and Criminal Minds. The judge and the prosecutor have an extra judicial relationship; which causes the defendant to think that they are being falsely accused. However, the decision of guilt or innocence is up to the jury. So why should it matter? It is hard to be a judge and not be friends with prosecutors. They attend many of the same social events. Federal judges hold their positions for life, state judges it depends on the state. If you have held this position for a number of years and so has the prosecutor, it is hard not to form a friendship. I do not think that the government should make it a law/rule, that judges and other court officials cannot be friends on social media sites or that they should not have an account to one. They are human beings like everyone else and should have the right to have one. We are in the era of technology and innovation. I understand why officials removed the judge from the case, but it still does not make it right or fair. This just shows another negative effect of Facebook. It should not matter who he is friends with on Facebook. This is why many people do not use social media sites, because of stories like this. I think the government is taking its powers a little too far. Facebook has over a billion users and the government uses it to find and track down criminals. Now, they are trying to tell officials who they can and cannot be friends with on social media sites.
ReplyDeleteThe way that this is being handled I believe it a little to much, it really should not matter if a judge or lawyer is using social media websites, we are in the era of technology. After being in their type of work, of course friendships are going to be made. Judges became judges to help determine the rite choice in the end. The GOVERNMENT, I believe should have no say in who you are allowed to be friends with or if you can be involved in social media websites, judges and lawyers at the end of the day are all ordinary people like everyone else.
ReplyDelete