Posted by wlansden |
Filed under general, technology, bad idea
By Brian Malcom
Every young lawyer questions a judge's decision at some point. There is an important distinction between a lawyer questioning a judicial decision in the back of his mind and blogging about the character and fitness of a judge, though. Florida seems to agree.
Way back in 2006, when Web 2.0 was still thought to be a bad title for a Spiderman sequel, Sean Conway found himself questioning the ability of a certain judge to judge fairly. A criminal defense attorney, Conway believed that a Florida circuit judge was seeking to deprive criminal defendants of their right to a speedy trial by allegedly systematically engineering the trial date so as to force the defendant to seek a continuance and waive his or her right to a speedy trial, according to the ABA Journal feature article on the matter. The problem, it seems, was that the judge was trying to be too speedy and set trials for within a week of arraignment, rather than the normal four or five weeks after arraignment.
Conway tried to report this perceived injustice to a judicial watchdog agency, but he was not satisfied with the result. So, Conway turned to the internet to publicize the allegedly improper actions of the judge. Conway submitted this 11-paragraph post to the JAABlog. In the post, Conway got a bit carried away--like giving the judge the nickname EUW, defined within the post as "EVIL, UNFAIR WITCH".
After unsuccessfully arguing that his post was protected First Amendment speech, Conway eventually agreed to a public reprimand and a fine of $1,250.
The ABA Journal article has many more tales and warnings about social media slip-ups by lawyers. Be sure to check it out and learn from the mistakes of others.
Currently rated 4.0 by 1 people
- Currently 4/5 Stars.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5