 |
| Norman Douglas |
You will need to have part one of this series handy to follow the “correct” answers suggested here.
You should be aware that no human judge is perfect. If you are reading this from a jail library, then you might think some are actually idiots.
Or maybe you are married to one.
I had to deal with a lawyer once who yelled out that I was “nuts.”
“She’s on to me,” I whispered to the clerk.
The author as the wizard and his daughter Joanna as Dorothy about to board the balloon in The Wizard of Oz, Georgetown Globe Theatre, circa 2002
So here are the answers I would be looking for were I on a JAC committee:
I would lean to neither minimum nor maximum sentences. Nor would I be shy to impose the minimum or the maximum depending on the circumstance of each case.
Therefore, although I wouldn’t be bothered about my “reputation,” I would always try to be lenient when I could be, but tough when I had to be. Since the judge has the power and the final say, there is never a need to be a bully like the entertainer Judge Judy.
Have I ever lost my temper? Well, I guess that depends on how you define “lost.” I have raised my voice at home. I have broken my goalie stick at the rink. But there would be no excuse in a courtroom for the judge to display anger.
There will be times when the lawyers will irritate me personally, but my dad, who was a good poker player, showed me that keeping your emotions on the inside in certain venues is essential.
A lawyer who is late once should be asked politely for the reason. The second time they should be asked to turn to the gallery and explain to all these folks who have made sacrifices to be here on time why their time is less important than the lawyer’s.
My job will be to work hard to get through the cases fairly but also efficiently. Delay is the serpent in the garden. Its worst sting is to the civilian witnesses who wait all day in court and aren’t reached.
That is one reason judges should encourage lawyers to get their civilian witnesses called first, before police or experts or others who are being paid to be there.
Court will start on time. Although they should finish by 5 p.m. to accommodate the court staff who might have children to pick up at daycare, etc.
And recesses will be 15 minutes, not 16, lunch “hours” 75 minutes and adjournments will not come easily. I will at least start a case and encourage the Crown to call its civilian witnesses first so they don’t have to come back another day. Whatever people “say” about me really does not impact my duty — but I know they will say: You better be on time when THAT judge is sitting. And he won’t buy that your grandmother just died (for the fourth time).
In the vast majority of cases, the decision can be made as soon as the trial ends. On rare occasions in the more complex cases, perhaps the decision needs to be reserved for another day — but that day should be soon. Crafting a beautifully written judgment that no one will likely read is less valuable than having a home life.
And a judge should have a life in the community as well. We should not live in ivory towers. Now obviously our political or religious views should be held privately, and the correct answer to the question about my political or religious affiliation is “that’s irrelevant.”
Being a judge will mean we cannot participate in activities that might cause others to question our impartiality, but a judge’s job should not be their whole life.
I was waiting to sign in on a cruise ship and noticed the man ahead of me signed the register as “Judge Arthur White, BA, LLB.”
I registered as “Plumber Norm Douglas, Grade 12.”
Yes, there are groups of people I dislike (Nazis, for example), but who I like or dislike plays no part in my job.
I think the caution “Judge not, lest you be judged” refers to being judgmental. All of us make judgments daily — and all of us, especially judges, should discipline ourselves not to be judgmental as we do.
I believe that our Criminal Code should be amended when it comes to “life” sentences. There should be a path for a judge to impose a sentence “life without the possibility of parole.” This would be reserved for serial killers, child killers, contract killers, terrorist assassins — and would be eligible for automatic review by a higher court — but it should be an option.
And the homeowner shooting the intruder? The law as we have it is sufficient. It all depends on the circumstances of each case. Was this a home invasion or a drunk kicking in the door of what he thought was his own home?
And of course, people who are addicted or mentally ill should be sentenced with an understanding of their circumstances. That is why specialized courts for these people have been introduced and should be funded.
Judges in smaller towns often know the accused. As long as it is not a close relationship, and the judge alerts everyone in the courtroom, if the lawyers consent, the case can proceed. The test is: how do I know them?
The question, out of the blue: “How many people are in this room?” (there are usually at least 10-12) — if the candidate has been astute, they will have scanned the room as they came in and know. That is good. If the candidate wisely pauses and counts them, that is also good. If the candidate guesses and is wrong — not so good.
Court staff become the judge’s friends. They usually put the judge’s needs ahead of their own. They should be treated with respect and kindness. They should not be required to bring coffee or to wash the judge’s dishes. But there is an important caveat: the friendship should never be close.
Chambers are for court business — leave your door open.
When asked, “How would you run your court?” the right answer is always, “It’s not my court.” It belongs to the people — it is His Majesty’s court, and that sure ain’t me. And when someone asks me what I do for a living? I might tell them I work at the courthouse, or maybe “I sit on my butt all day” — but I will always be careful not to brag about what a privileged position I have been blessed with.
And because a judge does sit on their butts all day — and since most judges gain significant weight within the first few years on the bench — the bench in the gym should be part of your day.
The courtroom is a sad place. A judge must be sensitive to the agony many people before them are experiencing. Therefore, funny judges are not funny.
On rare occasions, a humorous comment from the bench might be appreciated to break some ice, but never humour at someone else’s expense. When in doubt, stifle the clever line that comes to mind.
And that gavel that on television gets banged as the judge yells “order in the court” is ornamental. Use it when hosting a classroom during breaks, but if a judge ever has to bang it or yell — they have lost control by their own shortcoming.
Citing someone for contempt might be necessary once in the lifetime of a judge. There are a myriad of ways to handle folks before that last resort.
(In my book, the chapter on “Controlling the Courtroom” relates a couple of alternatives.)
Crying in the courtroom? I could write a column or a song with that title.
This is part two of a three-part series. Part one: The wizard behind the curtain; the judge beneath the robe.
Norman Douglas is a retired criminal court judge with 27½ years of experience on the bench. His book, You Be the Judge, was published in December 2023.
The opinions expressed are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the author’s firm, its clients, Law360 Canada, LexisNexis Canada or any of its or their respective affiliates. This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal advice.
Interested in writing for us? To learn more about how you can add your voice to Law360 Canada, contact Analysis Editor Peter Carter at peter.carter@lexisnexis.ca or call 647-776-6740.