From: Anon Lawyer
Sent: Jul 13, 2016 11:16 AM
To: ‘SAM’ , ‘Harley Chick’ , ‘Gwendolyn Shavers’ , ‘JoAnne M Denison’
Subject: Linked is a article regarding ethics and judges/lawyers.
Here are a few of my favorite quotes from the lined article.
“those who want to be a judge can’t discuss most issues that voters are interested in.” So you are left with Bar Association reviews (those not “connected” do not get rated highly.
“There are also ethics rules that bar lawyers from besmirching other lawyers.” So much for freedom of speech. With no criticism, there is no way to fix (or identify) any problems with the system or profession. Speaking up is an ethics violation. And we complain about the police “code of silence.” Lawyers have a required code of silence to not besmirch other lawyers?
” So it’s a quid pro quo.” In other words, lawyers/judges help each other. You donate to my campaign, you can expect me to help you in court. Seems to me this is nothing but a system to ensure case fixing and continue the public’s low regard for lawyers.
“I’ve been applying for judicial positions for some time,” Reid said. “Frankly, I haven’t been successful. After this last go-around, I just decided, if I’m going to be a judge, I have to run for it.” In other words, judges are not appointed by quality, but by who they know. Ordinary people have to do it the correct way – by being elected by the people.
“in 2009, when she was initially appointed to the bench, she failed to get a 65-percent approval rating, the minimum needed to be considered a recommended choice for a judgeship.” Yet, “Illinois Supreme Court last year picked her over Reid and other candidates to fill the circuit court vacancy” Sounds like she has the qualities to be an Illinois judge – friends in high places.
“Those bar polls can have a lot of value, but I’d much rather have the approval of the Illinois Supreme Court.” While I think it is BS that voters must rely on attorneys to tell them who is qualified, it is even more BS that we discount people who may know the candidates, and instead, go strictly with those who have friends on the Supreme Court.
Question: Am I in violation of ethics rules by pointing out and commenting on the above. If so, then someone must have hacked my email, and this did not come from me.
Not so Deep Throat