More on the possible recusal of Walther

I've had time now, to review what happened today:

The San Angelo Standard-Times - "The hearing to quash the indictments, meanwhile, was fraught with confusion and tension.

The hearing began at 10 a.m., and Goldstein had barely finished saying the defense lawyers weren’t all present when the judge said the court would be in recess till 11 a.m.

One of the attorneys had car trouble outside of Sterling City, Goldstein said.

Walther walked to her chambers while Goldstein continued to ask about a previous motion for continuance, so the hearing could proceed at a later time.

His question went unanswered."

Walther is a rude autocratic unjust jurist. She's done this before, walking out on proceedings, usually on a Friday. Remember Memorial Day Weekend?

The San Angelo Standard-Times (May 30th, 2008) - "Judge Barbara Walther left the courtroom this evening without signing an order to restore custody of the children to their parents."

This brutal witch forces witnesses and attorneys and distressed plaintiffs up against a whole holiday weekend to deal with the consequences of her actions. Well it's about time someone started slapping back.

"Then Goldstein dismissed all of the defense’s witnesses until 2 p.m., much to Walther’s surprise.

'Who dismissed them?' she demanded to know when the hearing resumed at 11 a.m.

'Counsel,' Goldstein replied, referring to the defense."

The only phrase that comes to mind at the moment, is someone has grown a pair. The defense is tired of being shoved around, and has become aggressive and assertive. Translated this seems to be "I'm an officer of the court Judge Walther, you left the court room without dealing with my motion, I did as I saw fit, wanna make something of it? Hmmm?"

Of course you can't say it that way, but that would be my take on what he really meant. This is what he said though:

"Goldstein said he meant the court no disrespect but said he had no choice

He said he was ashamed of having called so many witnesses and then having them wait until 11 a.m. and then having them wait for the state to present its case, so he dismissed them until 2 p.m."

But let's hear what he really thought:

"I was goaded into excusing the witnesses," Goldstein said.

Now he goes for the "witch slap:"

"Just as the prosecution had begun to question its first witness, Goldstein stood and asked again whether the judge had heard his motion for continuance."

This is downright confrontational, and Walther says she did hear, and denied the motion.

Well Judge, if you deny a motion, you owe it to the person whose motion you denied, to TELL him. We all have had encounters with controlling depots who enforce power by turning away, mumbling something and walking out. Goldstein his having none of it:

"Goldstein approached the bench with his motion to disqualify the judge."

So basically, the defense says; "You wanna play rough? We're now playing rough.

"The judge who will hear the motion was not named during Friday’s hearing, but Walther told the defense 'in anticipation of your motion' another judge was on standby."

Ever the control freak, aren't we Judge? I don't know procedure, but I rather doubt a judge can pick the judge to judge her own recusal. She knows the name she says, but "won't tell." How petty.

Either that or she doesn't know the name and she's just being snippy and is taking shots on the way down, acting like she's in control of something, that she's not in control of, or at least, shouldn't be.

At one point Eric Nichols is quoted as saying "Oh give me a break."

What did these people expect? That this is a "slam dunk?" That the constitutional questions aren't real? That Walther's behavior isn't dictatorial and grounds possibly for dismissal from the case? That this wouldn't be asked, credibly, during the trial? That the defense wouldn't assert itself? Well, it's happened. Deal with it. It's not going to stop either.

Sphere: Related Content