Humiliation as punishment - who wouldn't take that?
As you would expect, everyone is commenting on the Master's report on Sharon Keller. Judge David Berchelman found that Judge Keller's conduct was not exemplary, but she doesn't need to be sanctioned because of the humiliation she has been subjected to. At firtst I thought someone was joking - but sure enough that's what he found.
Others have already covered the bases on this, and there is no reason to say the same thing. I do have a couple of observations thought. The first is that he makes an assumption that I'm not sure is correct - he assumes Judge Keller has been humilated. I haven't seen any indication that she has an regrets about what she did - if fact, she has said she wouldn't change a thing (which Judge Berchelman's concludes can't be true). All she has done is attack everyone else. I always thought you at least had to feel some responsibility before you feel humiliated.
If you are a defense lawyer how many times have you made - or seen - this eame argument. My client is a good person who made a mistake, and has already been punished enough. It might be the executive caught with his hand in the till, or the young mother who takes a couple of pieces of jewelry. You know how often that is successful - try almost never. I'm sure Judge Berchelman has heard it thousand's of times - and probably this is this is the first time he has ever bought it. What's the difference between a judge and some other member of the society - doesn't that say something about how judges view themselves in relation to everyone else.
Judge Berchelman aslo says Judge Keller is not responsible for Michael Richards execution. To a certain extent that's true - he probably would have been executed anyway. But he wouldn't have been executed that day. Doesn't that tell you something else how judges view criminal defendants?
If God came down today and told you that technically today was your day, but he might be willing to give you a few more months, what you give for that opportunity? The problem with executions is that they terminate possibilities - we don't know what Michael Richards might have done with his extra time. Maybe he might have done something that impacted another and changed their life for their better. Instead, their life takes a different path. I've lived too long to not recognize the ripple effects we have on others - most of the time we never even know it.
Maybe the humiliation Judge Berchelman is referring to is the effect on the judiciary. There certainly could be some truth to that; but if that is what he was worried about he's made the problem worse.
As I said, others have already covered all the bases on this. My contribution to the debate is to collect those comments here:
Jeff Gamso - Still Fly Free: the Judge Sharon Keller story cont.
Jamie Spencer - "Judge Keller's conduct was not however exemplary of a public servant"
R.J. McReady - Judge Keller should not be punished
Scott Benson - Judge on Sharon Keller - Public Humiliation is Punishment enough
Dallas Criminal Lawyer - Judge Keller = Not exemplary
