Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Latter-day Saint
The Judge, Part 2: Silencing

The Judge, Part 2: Silencing

Last updated on: August 4, 2020 at 8:59 am by Margaret Blair Young

The Judge, Part 2: Silencing 2020-08-04T08:59:48-07:00 Margaret Blair Young

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

I knew her as a queen–a literal queen, a tiara on her head and roses in her arms, a member of university royalty. She usually wore extensions, make-up, fashionable clothes, heels. To see her in the orange jumpsuit, her hair uncoiffed, her body appallingly thin, her affect numb, was enough to bring me to tears.

I had just read the twenty-seven charges against her and was certain that the judge would dismiss them all. These were charges from her childhood! From when she was eight years old up until when she was seventeen!

Within the next five minutes, I heard the judge say, “In my court she is guilty.” I was stunned. I know the legal standard and was relieved that the public defender arose to say, “Your honor? Innocent until proven guilty?”

“Yes,” said the judge. “But in my court, she is guilty.”

Those words (the public defender’s and the judge’s) which I heard and documented in emails to others were deleted in the court recording.

These are the words which remain in the recording–which are damning enough.

The hearing was for bail reduction. A $50,000. bail had been set.

This is the transcription of relevant portions:

Public Defender: At first glance, $50,000 might seem reasonable, but looking closer, I think that it is an unreasonable amount in this case. The allegations stem from when [the defendant] was 8 years old until she was 17. She is now twenty-four. She has now gone to college, has spent time at the University where she was the president of some clubs… She transferred to the University… where she was enrolled for this semester.. She has been living a productive life. These allegations are a delayed report of seven years. She has been living a productive life for seven years. She has been a productive member of society, doing what we hope young people will do–going to college, etc. …We would ask that the court make the bail bondable and significantly reduced…”

(The prosecution takes the next five minutes to declare that the bail is reasonable because of the severity of the accusations.)

Now, read these next sentences carefully. Remember that the judge had said “In my court, she is guilty” and responded with those same words when challenged by the public defender.

Public Defender: “I think that basing the bail on the severity of the offenses… is punitive only and would be presuming guilt prior to her being tried.”

Judge: “Well, we do presume guilt based on a cause standard when we set bail. We–we don’t presume guilt but guilt is established by probable cause, so we’re not really dealing with the presumption of innocence at the bail stage. There’s probable cause to believe that she committed these offenses so we set bail based on whether she’s a flight risk or whether she’s a threat to the community. Those are the two primary factors.”

Public Defender: “I think I would disagree that guilt is presumed at any level. I think there is probable cause that a crime was committed, but that’s not at all guilt.”

Judge: “Well, as I said, we’re not presuming guilt–I changed my statement–but there is probable cause to believe that she committed these offenses. So that’s the standard on which we set bail. So the presumption of innocence does not apply when you’re setting bail. We see whether there’s probable cause and then you don’t wrestle with the question of whether she did it or not. You simply set bail if there is probable cause.”

Public Defender: “Because of the ease in which the court can place restrictions that would negate any risks to the community by putting in conditions on her release…”

Judge: “If people always obeyed the court’s restrictions–I mean, she very well may, but on the other hand, she’s kind of a victim of the company that she’s in right now. I mean, a lot of people who are–like we’ve seen today–they don’t want to follow the conditions the court places upon them.”

Take a breath and read those last two sentences. Note these words: “She’s kind of a victim of the company that she’s in right now.”

What company did he mean? What company did he imagine? He had no prior acquaintance with her and had just been told that she was a university student who was the president of several clubs.

The transcript continues:

Public Defender: “She has no prior criminal history. She has no allegations that are within the last seven years. So assuming that she’d violate any conditions–we have more evidence that she wouldn’t violate the conditions, that she would come back to court, and safety conditions could be placed upon her…”

Judge: “Thank you. At this point, the court set $50,000 bail, however… there is a very real possibility based on her criminal history here in terms of this offense, which stretched over a long period of time, that she would [violate restrictions]…”

Take a look at the last sentence. The judge has just referred to her “criminal history” even though he was told that she had no criminal history. He is treating the accustions as her “criminal history.” That violates the due process guarantees in the Constitution.

Judge (continued): I don’t know anything about her psychological make up and psychosexual tests… are not reliable anyway. At this point, we don’t know what she might do and we don’t know what she’s been doing the last few years…Had she taken responsibility for this upfront, before she became an adult, she would have been in the juvenile system…This didn’t stop when she was twelve years old, it kept going on until she was, I don’t know–

Once again, look at that sentence. The accusations are treated as proven facts.

Public Defender: “Allegedly it did.”

Judge: “Well, it kept going. There’s probable cause to believe it kept going. The court is not going to argue guilt or innocence. She is presumed–not presumed, but she has probable cause to believe that she–so I’m not going to say that we’ll release her because she maybe didn’t do it.”

I stared at this impossible reality, this white judge declaring the black defendant guilty in a PRELIMINARY hearing.

With one minute left, the public defender said, “Your honor, can she address the court?”
What follows is an exact transcription, with identities protected. Keep in mind that this is the first time she has spoken in court. The judge holds her fate in his hands. Put yourself in her place.

Judge: “Well, I’ve already spoken, but she can address the court, but I’ve already made my ruling, but you can address the court.”

Maye: “Your honor, as far as the allegations—they are just that. I–.”

JUDGE INTERRUPTS
Judge: “Well, there’s probable cause that you committed this.”

Maye: “I understand.:

Judge: “And you’re right. When you get to trial, you’re presumed innocent. Right now, the court does not regard you—does not apply the presumption of innocence when setting bail. The court has to state that there’s probable cause that you committed these offenses. That’s how we do things.”

Defendant: ” I—”

JUDGE INTERRUPTS AND RAISES HIS VOICE.

Judge: “I want to get away from this guilt and innocence argument; it’s not applicable here. For the fourth time, okay? Anything else?”

Defendant: “I was just going to say… as far as your comment–and as far as what I’ve been doing the past few years–I have been in rigorous therapy because of the abuse that I suffered as a child under the care of XXXXXXX and XXXXX. I’m not here to tell you who I am or what I am. I mean, I am innocent, but we’ll go through that at the trial. But I did want to let you know that it’s not—that I’m not a monster.”

Judge: “Well, I certainly hope that’s the case. I certainly hope that’s how things turn out, okay?”

Within the fourteen minutes and thirty-eight seconds of the preliminary hearing for bail reduction, I had heard the constitutional standard of presumed innocence overtly violated. (Actually, it was slightly longer than that, given that parts were deleted from the recording.)

When I met with the public defender later, I learned some more troubling things.

That will be in the next installment.

Uncategorized

Previous Post

August 3, 2020

The Judge (Part 1)

Next Post

August 5, 2020 The Judge - Part 3: Meeting with the Public Defender

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category Ancestors family conflict in the scriptures race and religion Uncategorized

Select a Month August 2026 March 2026 January 2026 December 2025 November 2025 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 April 2025 March 2025 January 2025 November 2024 May 2024 April 2024 November 2023 October 2023 September 2023 June 2023 September 2022 August 2022 July 2022 May 2022 April 2022 March 2022 January 2022 December 2021 October 2021 September 2021 July 2021 June 2021 October 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 March 2020 January 2020 December 2019 November 2019 October 2019 June 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 September 2018 August 2018 May 2018 March 2018 January 2018 November 2017 October 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 March 2017 February 2017 November 2016 October 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 November 2015 August 2015 July 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz

Which Orthodox celebration marks the resurrection of Christ?

Select your answer to see how you score.

Pentecost Transfiguration Epiphany Pascha