However, this particular Judge got treated with contempt the old fashioned way — she earned it.

Reposa, in my opinion, should have made a record that the Court was ordering the prosecutor to speak directly to the client, not through counsel, and that the court was not allowing the client to hear from his counsel or communicate with his counsel during that procedure.

Then he should have filed a grievance against the judge and prosecutor.

NO MATTER HOW CORRECT WE ARE, when he let our emotions get the better of us, when we act out instead of speaking out, we generally end up hurting ourselves in the long run.

A person I knew used to say “don’t get ulcers — give them.” Reposa should have made a record that would give the judge and prosecutor ulcers, instead of acting like a jackass and leaving those who really deserved punishment for the jerk-off nature of the hearing unscathed.

Really, I should probably apologize. Having smug pompous views of the “dignity” of the court does not make one a smug pompous person.

I’ve just seen a lot of highly undignified behavior from the bench over the years.

In a perfect world, everyone would be dignified. However, if we’re going to punish those who act undignified, then let’s do it equally. I vote we start with those in the black robes.

I think you’ve nailed the personality of a whole lot of trial lawyers in your third paragraph. Clearly, Adam is trying to prove something to someone.

Can an intellectual abstraction even have dignity?

Adam, or for that matter any “gonzo”, robs his client of the dignity said defendant deserves when he behaves in such a manner.

This may be all about ego for the attorneys set on showing the world that they are the Legal World’s answer to Hawkeye Pierce, or the next Jerry Spence, or that Jami Boos was wrong to turn down their invitation to the prom back in 82; but for the guy sitting there in the orange jumpsuit and flip flops it is, as I said, a major and highly personal life changing event.

It is HIS day in court, NOT the attorneys. It is supposed to be all about the Defendant. Just as one does not attend a wedding and then go out of ones way to upstage the Bride, one conducts oneself in a professional manner in Court out of respect for the Defendant. It is simple respect.

At my Dad’s funeral some very nice guys from the VFW or ROTC or somewhere came out and did a 21 gun salute…what with Dad having been in WW2 and all. Out of respect they did NOT chew gum and listen on their I-Pods while doing so…even though they had no doubt been to many of these funerals before and no doubt find them rather dull. They were mature enough to understand that they were not the center of attention at that time…this is something we are supposed to pick up at about the same time we potty train.

Similarly, at a Criminal Proceeding it is the DEFENDANT that is the center of attention. What is going on is all about where the Defendant will be spending the next few months or years of his life. It is not about the Judge. It is not about the Prosecutor. It certianly not about giving the Defendan’s Attorney a chance to show that Yale, Harvard, U.T. and Mensa were all wrong when they turned down his applications, and he’s darn well going to show them that he’s smarter than the law, the process, and everyone else…regardless of if he calls himself a “gonzo” or not.

That is why attorneys are supposed to act like professionals and check their issues and their ego at the door. Not because of the process demands it (the process is an intelectual abstraction) but because of the DEFENDANT deserves people to carry out the process in an adult and professional manner, even if it is the 19th time that day they have carried out said process, and even if they are overdue for happy hour. By condcuting oneself in an adult and serious manner one shows to the Defendant that one takes his situation seriously. Doing so in not just respectful, but compassionate.

The Army says “You salute the rank, not the man.” This is just the opposite. Here you conduct yourself with dignity and decourm out of respect for the man who is going through the process.

Brendan, the “judicial process” in a criminal case begins with an arrest and ends (if Adam is to be believed) with the acquittal of Adam’s client. You can’t pretend that accused people appear magically in court. Adam’s client hired a gonzo lawyer; he was paying for gonzo; gonzo is what he got. I’m not saying that Adam exhibited good judgment or even behaved appropriately in the circumstances. I’m not surprised that he got whacked by the judge (Tarian’s right: it’s about dealing with the ego on the bench), but to pretend that it was because he “tarnished the dignity of the process” is laughable.

The law is a ass, and the emperor has no clothes. That the participants generally behave with some decorum, and that some of them treat the accused with some dignity, doesn’t impart any dignity to the process itself.

90 days is too much of course. But you can bet it isn’t 90 days for this incident alone, however slimy that scenario may be.

I’m not saying that dignity in a courtroom should be a two-way street between bench and bar. However, before all of you get up on your high and mighty dignity podium, you need to consider the practical realities.

90 days? I’m sorry folks but that’s BS. You’re talking about potentially ruining some guys life here. Should we do this in the name of this legal fiction called dignity?

I’m sorry Mark, I just want to vomit over these smug pompous people and their defense of “dignity.”