Wednesday, October 24, 2007

Broward state court

JAABlog, Rumpole, the Sun-Sentinel and others are covering a Broward state court story where a high-school football player was a victim of (corrected, the original post said defendant; that's what you get for relying on Rumpole) sexual battery. Judge Levenson (a former AUSA* and a good guy) asked what position the victim played. The prosecutor responded, Linebacker. The public defender imprudently responded, Tight-end. The judge then insensitively joked "Wide Receiver?"

To his credit, the prosecutor said the comments were inappropriate. And to the judge's credit, he immediately (and repeatedly) apologized.**

This is the great benefit of blogs -- and the big trouble with them. Stupid comments like this have been going on for a very long time. They obviously aren't right, but blogs make the reaction angrier and more volatile than probably necessary.

I agree with Rumpole that Levenson should be forgiven. (I took out my comment about the PD because it wasn't his client that he was talking about. Obviously still inappropriate, but not in the same way.)

*I have to justify the post on the "federal blog" or Rumpole gets all upset.
**We previously have commented on Judge Levenson's good acts as judge here.


South Florida Lawyers said...

In addition to being inappropriate, these jokes are incredibly lame. Who's writing their material -- Krusty the Clown?

Anonymous said...

Lost in all of the discussion about the inappropriate sexual comments is a much more important issue. Toward the end of the transcript, the judge and the prosecutor are discussing whether the defendant can read. The prosecutor says that she believes he has trouble reading. The PD then chimes in and says "I think he has trouble telling the truth."

This is an incredible statement and much worse then the sophomoric sexual banter. Has the PD offered an apology for this statement?

Anonymous said...


How about an update on the Liberty 7 case.

Anonymous said...

The football player was the victim, not the defendant.

Anonymous said...

10:41 - Looks like the jury and its verdict agreed with the PD about the alleged victim's inability to tell the truth: Not Guilty.

What bothers me is that the judge only corrected himself because he thought his comments were "politically incorrect," which is different than acknowledging the comments are wrong. Political correctness is what others think; knowing right from wrong is what the person thinks, himself. The comment is no more right if said in a room of bigots than in the political world of a state judges.

Rumpole said...

In Re: Rumpole's Errors:
Longtime and careful readers of our blog know our motto: SOMETIMES WRONG. NEVER IN DOUBT.

Defendant-Victim. Whats the diff? I wasn't there. I was reading from a transcript, and as a lawyer that is something I most definately am not used to doing. Research, case law, transcripts- makes me break out in hives. Give me a police report, a witness on the stand, and two tylenol to deal with the hangover, and I'm good.

PS Levenson is a good guy.

Anonymous said...

Levenson should resign