What’s up with my posts not appearing when I click the submit button? Is the system down, or…are have the thought police determined that my posts simply too damaging to the company line to be allowed to live?

It is a MUST that this judge Dale Hood is voted off the bench. He has serious issues both ethically and mentally. He is one of the most EVIL and sick individuals ever appointed to the bench and openly so. He is also corrupted.

Just go sit in his courtroom, Division 34 of the St. Louis Family Courts and witness this man, he can’t keep a demeanor of what appears to be sanity for too long. And take notice at how he treat certain people in his courtroom.

The sad thing is that people in the profession had to have know that this man is a very disturbed individual and he was appointed as one of the three choices. This says everything about St. Louis City and County system of appointing judges and, the judgment of those who forwarded this man’s name to Gov. Blunt and Blunt’s own judgment. I think that the people should really push for change and support election of our judges onto the bench from the people at the jump start via a vote by the people because that way we will learn about these characters such as Judge Dale Hood that sit in our courts.

There are a few of this ilk on our benches, not to mention Commissioners such as Victoria Mullen McKee an extremely corrupt Commissioner and unethical one who is just as bad as Dale Hood, but not so obvious as Dale Hood in view of everyone. But, unethical and incompetent Commissioners, the people do not even get the opportunity to remove from the bench because she is a Commissioner, not a real judge, but she has all the powers of a real judge.

It is all just so unreal and crazy what takes place in the St, Louis County Family Courts at the by this element of men and women who sit on the bench.

I am just happy for this new review process of our Judges, but it is not good enough because most people are still very uninformed because not much attention is given to these bad apples even after such report as the findings showing that Judge Hood is unfit for the bench.

Allowing lawyers to select our judges is like allowing the teachers to elect the school board. This is one third of our governmental system and everyone should be allowed to participate in the process, not lawyer clubs and only appointed members of the club, regardless of their party affiliations. As judges become more comfortable with legislating from the bench, it is important that a broader cross-section of society participate in their selection. Allowing lawyers to control the process is to allow them the opportunity to hijack one third of our government. I plan on voting no on Judge Hood, not because I know anything about him, but because since this system is so flawed, (nationally aclaimed by whom, a bunch of lawyers?), I, like most people vote against all of them.

What jjk just said. Except for one thing: Unfortunately, “most people” actually vote yes. I don’t remember a judge being turned out on a retention vote, though I’m sure it has happened some time. It’d be great if a majority voted no in every election. At that point, judges would have to actually have a campaign and tell us why they should keep their job.

jjk,

I agree with you the reason that you know nothing about Judge Hood or most other judges is because of this flawed process of them not being vented in the ways that an election would bring about within the public’s eye.

However, the new evaluation system consists of laymen also.

But this still is not good enough because this process does not reach the voters in time nor does it create any real interest in the public’s eye or reach enough people and is why most of these judges continue on the bench behaving as hoodlums in robes and suits such as Dale Hood.

The most ridiculous part concerning Judge Hood is that he was an assistant prosecutor in St. Louis County before being appointed to the bench, so there had to be much knowledge out there that this man is crazy and corrupt. Commissioner McKee was an assistant prosecutor in St. Louis County also before becoming a Commissioner also and her incompetence and unclean heart had to have been known by many in her profession also.

Every citizen within a county should have a part in the selection of the judges that we place on the bench. It is insulting that certain ones think that citizens are too stupid to take in the process in St. Louis, St. Louis County and I believe the Kansas City area. We will learn much about these individuals if they had to run for their seat on the bench.

Citizens choose our legislators and even President and judges in most other counties in parts of Missouri, why not in these Metro areas? My views on that is an entirely different subject. But, there is a reason for such madness.

This non-partisan plan process must be stopped and is a complete distortion because it is not at all non-partisan because they certainly have strong political bending, but more disturbing is that some many bad apples are not weeded out who have extreme corrupted intentions and bias behavior. Many of them are just plain sheepish lacking of any strong backbone that follow along like sheep inflicting extreme injustice upon those who appear before them because of fearing being thought about badly by attorneys. I think like Bush those who thought Hood was good for their bidding, did not realize that he had serious mental issues and is just openly out of control.

jjk, you have it exactly backward when you suggest giving lawyers a principal role in judicial selection is like allow teachers to select the school board.

Judicial *elections* is where special interests (like teachers unions) rule.

From Jan. 2002 to April 2008 I lived in Ohio, where all judges are elected.

Elections there were driven by trial lawyer, organized labor, and chamber of commerce money, and lots of it. The political advertising was a disgrace. Many candidates were chosen based on their capacity to raise money, or their place within a political organization, with little consideration of their qualifications to serve well as a judge.

In county in which I lived (Montgomery, in which Dayton is situated) the powers that be understood how destructive this was to the administration of justice, so the political parties mainly would not run a candidate against an incumbent doing good work. But this was a dramatic exception.

I practiced law in Missouri for 15 years, and what I learned about judicial selection here is that it works because real lawyers — whether they represent insurance companies, criminal defendants, injured workers, big companies in business disputes, families in the middle of divorces — want the same thing: a Judge who is smart, hardworking, patient, respectful, deliberate and most of all fair.

They understand that the vast majority of cases that come before the court — all but a tiny fraction — have nothing to do with ideology or politics and everything to do with due process and fundamental fairness.

For eight of the years I practiced law here, John Ashcroft was governor and made the judicial appointments. For almost eight years Mel Carnahan was governor.

These are two guys with pretty different political outlooks.

But you heard very little political complaining about appointments. That’s because the system forced both to choose among candidates who may have had some political steam — but they also had to be good lawyers, rather than just hacks.

> what I learned about judicial selection here is that
> it works because real lawyers … want the same thing: a Judge
> who is smart, hardworking, patient, respectful, deliberate and
> most of all fair.

Thanks for giving me my good laugh of the morning, Eddie. Most of all fair? Lawyers are just like the rest of us: We want the cop to give us a break when we’re speeding, we want the ref to turn a blind eye when our team fouls, and we want the judge to rule in our favor.

Eddie,

I see where you are coming from. But there must be someway even with this new system of evaluating judges that now include lay people, this information must get out to the public better than it is now currently and much sooner and often. In fact, it would be a good ideal to provide EVERY voter the evaluation on the judges that they will be voting on to retain a copy of their evaluations mailed to each voter’s address and to be handed to EACH voter at the polls before they cast their votes.

I still feel that this is not a large enough group of people to evaluate judges. I have very little trust of such a small groups of people who can be easily influenced by unethical and corrupted people. Just look at the City of St. Louis Police Board.

I believe in elections and that in addition to the election of judges that these EVALUATIONS should still take place and be provided on any judge running for re-election. I think this would certainly clean up the bench.

I also think that there should be NO SEALED FAMILY COURT CASES, INVOLVING MINORS or ANYONE in the Family Courts.

They should all be PUBLIC, but with all identifying elements of who the individuals and the minor(s) involved are, hidden by the use of initials so that people can have access to some of the corruption and incompetence that takes places in these cases.

One other thing,

In any election for judges, shouldn’t attorneys, law firms and special interest groups be banned from donating money in elections for judges. That would solve your concerns, wouldn’t it? And, then be offered only a public funding type deal.

I always vote no for Judges. I do this because they have had this position for too long and do not have a clear view of reality anymore. They do not follow the law and they start to make their own laws.
It is hard to get info on how they rule to make an informed decision on who to retain. Therefore, I vote NO.