← Autodidact Archive · Original Dissent · Gabrielle
Thread ID: 20471 | Posts: 9 | Started: 2005-10-01
2005-10-01 01:51 | User Profile
A judge in Sherman, Texas, prohibited a 17-year-old girl from having sex as part of her probation.
Texas state district Judge Lauri Blake ruled that one teenage drug offender was forbidden from having sex while living with her parents and attending school, the Dallas Morning News reported. But, this is not the first unorthodox ruling Blake has made in her 10 months as a judge in the district courts of Fannin and Grayson counties.
Blake has prohibited body piercings, tattoos, earrings and clothing associated with drugs from people on probation. There is question as to how she will go about enforcing rulings such as the sex ban.
Lawyers also have been subject to the rulings of Blake, who has told female lawyers not to wear sleeveless shirts or show cleavage in her courtroom, according to the Dallas paper.
Fred Moss, former federal prosecutor said that the conditions of some of her rulings can be seen as violations of someone's personal rights.
Dallas lawyer Steve Blackburn, who is involved with the American Civil Liberties Union, advised that conditions that violate a person's constitutional rights are best avoided.
[url]http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=46600[/url]
2005-10-01 03:15 | User Profile
That's pretty silly. What are they going to do, make her wear a chastity belt?
2005-10-01 03:35 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Angler]That's pretty silly. What are they going to do, make her wear a chastity belt?[/QUOTE] I suppose they could. But it strikes me that to make these kinds of rulings couldn't withstand much of the "right to privacy" type of legal scrutiny, if anyone pressed it.
I think it just shows how much more a woman judge can get away with.
2005-10-01 09:07 | User Profile
I think most creative punishments would be overturned if the convict has the will and means to fight it. Although, these punishments are usually voluntarily accepted as a lighter punishment than a traditional punishment.
2005-10-01 11:25 | User Profile
"Blake has prohibited body piercings, tattoos, earrings and clothing associated with drugs from people on probation. There is question as to how she will go about enforcing rulings such as the sex ban.
Lawyers also have been subject to the rulings of Blake, who has told female lawyers not to wear sleeveless shirts or show cleavage in her courtroom, according to the Dallas paper. "
I like the lady. :) I agree with Happy Hacker's assessment about her rulings.
2005-10-01 14:57 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Happy Hacker]I think most creative punishments would be overturned if the convict has the will and means to fight it. Although, these punishments are usually voluntarily accepted as a lighter punishment than a traditional punishment.[/QUOTE]
I know I'm supposed to see this stuff as corn-fed iron-fisted Reader's Digest-ready damn-straight, but mostly I think it's just power-tripping by judges who know well their "creative" sentences will make the news and get them positive attention. And I question their legality, or at least propriety. Judges should (and usually are) limited to exercising only certain powers, with remedies and punishments defined by statute or well-established under the common law: jail time, money awards, temporary orders of protection, forced sales, etc. I'm uncomfortable with judges being able to fashion their own "punishments," even in exchange for jail time, because they run the risk of mind control. Easy to see the eager Jewish judge sentencing a skinhead to Holocaust class for getting into a fight.
2005-10-01 22:14 | User Profile
A chastity belt might do some of these teenage girls a lot of good.
[QUOTE=Angler]That's pretty silly. What are they going to do, make her wear a chastity belt?[/QUOTE]
2005-10-02 16:16 | User Profile
[QUOTE=Faust]A chastity belt might do some of these teenage girls a lot of good.[/QUOTE] Hmm, all that chafing. If they don't wear dresses or skirts, I dont see it as a practical clothing solution. Better to have their heads screwed on right than to attempt to use mechanical means to deal with piss poor judgment.
AE
2005-10-03 02:21 | User Profile
Within anything-is-permitted America, a 17-year-old requires discipline and authority. Otherwise it may regret the lack of proper guidance. And may not live to have such regret.
If you fail to protect your young and vulnerable - then you are nothing.
If you fail to protect your elderly - then you are nothing.
Some are smart but many are not.
Your duty is to ensure a secure path for your own people.
Mentzer