A Quote by Steven Pacey

You want a judge who makes objective decisions, and that's why temperament is such an important component of being a judge. You have to earn people's respect, because they know that you are deciding the case based on the facts and the law, not because they're trying to be your friend.
I'm a common law judge. I believe in deciding every case on its facts, not on a legal philosophy. And I believe in deciding each case in the most limited way possible, because common law judges have a firm belief that the best development of the law is the one that lets society show you the next step, and that next step is in the new facts that each case presents.
You really don't want to go to court and have the judge decide based on whether or not they're your friend, because you don't want to be thinking that the (judge's) friend is on the other side (of the court case).
I certainly would not vote against a particular judge already in office because of a decision in a case. You may not agree with a judge's decision, but the judge must act within the law.
I think judicial temperament is a willingness to step back from your own committed views of the correct jurisprudential approach and evaluate those views in terms of your role as a judge. It's the difference between being a judge and being a law professor.
I am sure from my experience of juries that, in a criminal case especially, they will obey the law as declared by the Judge; they will take the law from the Judge, whether they like it or do not like it, and apply it honestly to the facts before them.
I don't judge people based on their religion. But I judge them based on how they respect the French constitution.
Being a judge is sometimes like raising children: litigants get the time they need, not necessarily the time they want, and you have to earn people's respect by communicating to them that you're going to listen, follow the law and make a fair decision.
People must be confident that a judge's decisions are determined by the law and only the law. He must be faithful to the Constitution and statutes passed by Congress. Fidelity to the Constitution and the law has been the cornerstone of my life and the hallmark of the kind of judge I have tried to be.
I have litigated in my private life, and I will say there are many reasons why a judge could be recused from a case that have nothing to do with their prior decisions or rulings on facts which may be relevant.
There was once a professor of law who said to his students. When you are fighting a case, if you have facts on your side hammer them into the jury, and if you have the law on your side hammer it into the judge. But if you have neither the facts nor the law, asked one of his listeners? Then hammer the hell into the table, answered the professor.
When I became a judge, I stopped being a practicing attorney. And that was a big change in role.The role of a practicing attorney is to achieve a desirable result for the client in the particular case at hand. But a judge can't think that way. A judge can't have any agenda, a judge can't have any preferred outcome in any particular case and a judge certainly doesn't have a client.
There is no quicker way to earn respect as a leader than being slow to speak. It is called listening and it plays a big role in what I call “The Law of Connection.” How will you know what is important to people unless you ask and listen to the answers? If you prove to be a leader who solicits feedback and pays attention to what’s being said, then you will earn your connection and your followers will respect the guidance you give.
I had a multicultural exposure; that's why I don't believe in a particular religion. I have respect for most because I grew up surrounded by so many. I don't judge people by that, and I feel extremely offended when people categorise based on race, religion, or gender.
I was among the people in the Superdome. I knew what was going on every minute. I did not have air conditioning nor shower facilities. I made decisions based upon facts and not what I thought was going to happen. So history will judge me based upon those actions.
My approach to deciding cases is I look at the law, I look at the facts, and I do my best to apply the law to the facts and make a decision based on the law and the facts.
In countries like Afghanistan, the corruption is in your face. In Nigeria, I heard of judges making sex the bargaining chip rather than money. Now let's put that in the context of an honor-based society. Imagine that you're the brother of a woman who got raped by a judge to have her case heard in court. What do you want to do? You want to kill the judge. So here is an insurgent movement that hands you a gun. You have rage, and they give you an outlet for your rage.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!