Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

Judge orders guy to drop his pants?

106 views
Skip to first unread message

gil...@my-dejanews.com

unread,
Apr 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/19/99
to
Could somebody perhaps explain how a judge has the power to order someone to
drop his pants in court and define it as contempt if he refuses? I loved the
scenario with this creep ... but wonder how true-to-life it is.

Bill

-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

To...@fred.net

unread,
Apr 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/19/99
to
Spoiler response for 4/18
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.


Posting to alt.tv.the-practice on Mon, 19 Apr 1999 14:36:45 GMT. And then gil...@my-dejanews.com saith:
: Could somebody perhaps explain how a judge has the power to order someone to


: drop his pants in court and define it as contempt if he refuses? I loved the
: scenario with this creep ... but wonder how true-to-life it is.

Probably as true to life as holding a defense lawyer in contempt just for
doing his job. He didn't get the words "Objection" out before she ordered
the baliff to haul him into jail.

And when will we see a balliff *not* respond to a judge's order. I know
probably never, but at what point does it become "I was just following
orders"?

: Bill

: -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
: http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own

--
To...@Fred.Net http://www.fred.net/tomr
The ship sank, the South lost, and the sled got tossed in the fire.
Get over it.
RIP Mr. Coffee - 1914-1999

Goldmarx

unread,
Apr 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/19/99
to
Tom writes:

>He didn't get the words "Objection" out before she ordered
>the baliff to haul him into jail.
>
>And when will we see a balliff *not* respond to a judge's order. I know
>probably never, but at what point does it become "I was just following
>orders"?

If the bailiff saw the web site, maybe he felt the judge would reward him
with a little "Jimmy action" as a boner bonus (assuming, of course, that he is
heterosexual).

By the way, I won't think of her as a psycho judge anymore. On the 4/18
episode, she showed a heroic side of herself that we did not know existed
(whether what she did was legal I don't know). As I was watching, I got the
distinct impression that millions of women were on their feet cheering and
wanting to write in Judge Roberta Kittleson's name for President!
[Then they woke up and realized it was just a TV show -- aw, shucks!].

Overall, the judge is a complicated person.

-->Phil Goldmarx

Natalie C. H. Tyler

unread,
Apr 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/19/99
to
I adore the older female judges and I will be heart-broken if Judge Roberta
turns out
to be a "psycho". I would like her to represent the open sexuality of older
woman as being
not ludicrous but "normal".
I liked the depiction of Jimmy's mother (I know it was a re-run) "marrying"
another
woman (the actress who plays Carol Hathaway's mother on ER) a few weeks ago.
I
liked the fact that although they were not glamourous, they certainly had a
sexual relationship.
And I think it would be great if Judge Zoe (Linda Hunt) has a serious
affair with someone like Elennor or
with Eugene.
Natalie Tyler

**** Posted from RemarQ - http://www.remarq.com - Discussions Start Here (tm) ****

g/d napoleon

unread,
Apr 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/19/99
to
After last night's episode, I'd call her a complicated wacko. Unless this show is
entering McBeal-reality, I would think she'd be disbarred.s

LNg5819986

unread,
Apr 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/19/99
to
>
>After last night's episode, I'd call her a complicated wacko. Unless this
>show is
>entering McBeal-reality, I would think she'd be disbarred.s
>
>Goldmarx wrote:
>
>

If you think that's worthy of disbarrment (for me, it's when Eugene beats up
his own client in the courtroom), then everybody should be off the show.

Lewis.

Radarcom

unread,
Apr 19, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/19/99
to
<<I adore the older female judges and I will be heart-broken if Judge Roberta
turns out to be a "psycho".>>

That was already established. Remember the scene where she doodled on Lindsay
in a picture with Bobby? She's, as Mel Brooks would say, N-V-T-S.

bet...@lms.kent.edu

unread,
Apr 23, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/23/99
to
In article <FAJL9...@world.std.com>,
che...@world.std.com (David S Chesler) wrote:
> In article <7fff1s$bc4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, <gil...@my-dejanews.com>
wrote:

> >Could somebody perhaps explain how a judge has the power to order someone to
> >drop his pants in court and define it as contempt if he refuses? I loved the
> >scenario with this creep ... but wonder how true-to-life it is.
>

> On the other hand, indecent exposure (what the super was ordered
> to do) is not a lawful act.
> --
> David Chesler


Had he been wearing drawers, as one would normally expect, it wouldn't have
been an order to commit indecent exposure. Of course, after seeing he wasn't
wearing any, she made him keep the pants down and shuffle out of the room in
full view (of at least his backside), so your point is taken. I agree with
another poster. Kittleson is a complicated character. Or at least a
character with complications. From most of the comments I've seen, this ep
has now shifted opinion of her from "all bad and dangerous" to either
"heroic", or "nuts but with redeeming instincts". I find that interesting.

- -
Elizabeth H.

Sun God Ra

unread,
Apr 23, 1999, 3:00:00 AM4/23/99
to
I seriously doubt that any judge would ever do something like that and get
away with it. However, a judge can site you for contempt for breathing
their air if they so desire.

Ra
<gil...@my-dejanews.com> wrote in message
news:7fff1s$bc4$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com...


> Could somebody perhaps explain how a judge has the power to order someone
to
> drop his pants in court and define it as contempt if he refuses? I loved
the
> scenario with this creep ... but wonder how true-to-life it is.
>

> Bill

0 new messages