Public Defense

Down the judicial rabbit hole

By Gideon

CT is in the midst of judicial renominations, as I wrote about recently. So judges naturally are the center of attention, both in the legislature and the media. But perhaps no judge in recent months has received the scrutiny that Judge Curtissa Cofield, who is not up for renomination, has.

Judge Cofield was arrested several months ago for driving while intoxicated and hitting a parked cruiser. As if that wasn’t enough, stories started to circulate in the media that Judge Cofield had gone on a rant while being booked, using racial slurs and asserting her status as a judge.

Many articles were written, pillorying her and calling for her resignation. Inexcusable, her behavior was called. A stain on the judicial system, the incident was declared. There were a few articles written about her tremendous work in Hartford’s Community Court, but those were few and far between.

Just last week, the police department released portions of the booking video, which you can view below. You can decide for yourself how bad her actions were and what punishment, if any, they warrant. But the wheels of judicial review are churning.

State legislators had been hoping to view the video, and now will be able to do so and consider whatever decision the Judicial Review Council makes. Rep. Michael Lawlor, D-East Haven, co-chairman of the legislative judicial committee, has said that lawmakers could theoretically seek Cofield’s removal.

He said Monday he believes that the council “will consider whether to recommend that she be removed as a judge. … I think in many ways the ball is in Judge Cofield’s court to convince them that she deserves to remain on the bench. I think if any legislator, any judge, any prosecutor, any police officer, did the exact same thing … they probably would end up losing their job.”

I remember reading elsewhere that some finding of probable cause had been made and her case was referred to the Judicial Review council for punishment.

While all this was proceeding, Judge Patricia Swords was facing an early end to her judicial career. Not because of anything she did off the bench, but for her partisan behavior on the bench. One state Senator remarked during Judge Swords’ reconfirmation hearing that one incident should not be the undoing of a career and that her behavior should be weighed against her appellate record of reversals. She made it through by a whisker, and nary a whimper in the press questioning this re-appointment.

So while this one solitary incident (which it wasn’t really: it was representative of a pattern of behavior) wasn’t Judge Swords’ undoing, a single solitary incident may indeed unravel the career of Judge Cofield.

What do we, as a people, value in our Judges? What does the judicial system value in judges? Clearly, by these two accounts (and this third of Judge Thomas Miano), the answer is appearance.

One of the most famous canons of the Code of Judicial Conduct is to avoid the appearance of impropriety. There is no guidance in the Code about impropriety on the bench or off the bench and, thus, no weighing of factors. But this little dance in the legislature and the Review Council has laid bare one thing: as long as you don’t embarass the State by giving the media something juicy like a crime or a DUI, your career is safe. It has also become clear that the rights of individuals in state courst are by-products of the judicial system, not the focus. How else can one explain the fact that a DUI and some drunken ramblings will likely lead to the firing of a judge, whereas a blatant prosecutorial bent and disregard for the rule of law will get another confirmed?

Actually, I can: sensationalism, thou hast claimed another victim.

Video:

Full post as published by A Public Defender on February 04, 2009 (boomark / email).