Federal Judicial Misconduct

 Shocked by the parochial and downright biased and unprofessional treatment of

foreign attorneys at the hand of federal judges in the State of Georgia, I began researching

the complaint process and came upon John Dean's 2004 article. His comments remain

accurate today--in the 12 months ending 9/05, 642 complaints were filed, 0 (yes, that's

a goose egg) resulted in any sort of action.

  Having an opportunity to frequently observe the conduct and rulings in the Northern

District of Georgia, I thought about writing the Senate Judicial Committee about the

conduct and rulings of Georgia District Court Judge Harold Murphy and Georgia

 Bankruptcy Judge Paul Bonapfel. But then again the costs of such an action

(damage to my career and practice) is more than enough deterrence to keep my

pen silent. An anonymous letter would likely be discarded and this seemed to be

a forum where some current or future decisionmaker might come across the comments.

  I recently watched in pain as Judge Bonapfel treated a foreign attorney with more

contempt than I could bear (I eventually left the court room for fear of speaking out

of turn and objecting from the seats). The man had a number of motions pending,

had apparently driven hundreds of miles and had been awake all night, only to meet

a judge (Bonapfel) who literally "pounced" on him (after being civil to other local

attorneys throughout the morning, tolerating varying degrees of competence and

boorish behavior) from the bench.

 Judge Bonapfel refused to give the man an in camera hearing on what sounded like

very sensitive matters, summarily denied every motion the man filed, including telling

the man he was giving the local yokel attorney (who had recently been convicted of a

 federal felony of a crime of dishonesty and 3 weeks away from prison--another subject)

a "do over" with respect to the foreign attorney's motions to compel discovery that had

 been pending for months.

 To implement the "do over", Judge Bonapfel invoked Rule 26.1 (regarding initial

disclosures, after admitting that he never enforced the rule). I had to leave at that

point for a moment.   I poked my head in at the end of the "hearing" (more aptly

described "skinning") of the foreign attorney, only to hear Judge Bonapfel chastising

the man for some type of communication with his law clerk (apparently the judge's

real reason for ranting and raving against the man), even after the attorney explained

that it was Judge Bonapfel's clerk who contacted him. 

  A jury watching Judge Bonapfel on that day (not a jury made of judges, but just every day

people with common sense and respect for humanity, you know, the kind with the mindset

"you would not behave that way in front of your mother") would have at least docked

Bonapfel's pay, if not suspended him. I could give too many more examples of this type

of behavior in the Northern District of Georgia and in the rulings of Judges Murphy and

Bonapfel, and in some other districts, but the limit on posts restrains me.

  My simple observation and suggestion to police federal judicial misconduct is to put a

camera in every federal courtroom and to appoint an independent "grand jury" for each

federal district. The grand jury should be comprised of only common every day "folk",

no lawyers and no judges.

  Complaints made against a judge should be accepted in confidence and discipline meted

 out by the grand jury in the form of a formal and public  complaint (like an indictment)

to which the judge could then respond. (Why should judges  be protected from public

charges of misconduct, regardless of the outcome, when "common" citizens are subjected

 to the public obliquy of indictments obtained in secret grand jury rooms? If it is good

 enough for the common man to be exposed to such charges with the opportunity to prove

 his innocence, it is good enough for federal judges.)

  I expect  that the conduct of federal judges who knew they were being videotaped, and

subject to  their pay being docked and other public action, would be markedly different

(even little things like the rolling of the eyes or the "staring down" might cease). Despite

the kneejerk response that secrecy of judicial complaint proceedings protects the integrity

of or increases public confidence in the judicial system, it actually breeds contempt for it

and lessens its integrity because of the lack of restraint on power created by the almost

 nonexistent check on its abuse.

  Punishment in this system I propose should include public censure, loss of pay,

suspension and removal from office (termination in most people's lives), all of which

should initially be and remain matters of public record. The complainant's name and

identity should be kept secret and the process organized so that each person on the

rotating "grand jury" would randomly select 1 day of video footage of hearings to review

so as to make the process more secret.