US Judge!

[Sriram]

Hi everyone,


Here is some news about a US judge...

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/california-judge-accused-killing-wife-dozens-weapons-home-rcna99480

**********

California judge accused of killing his wife had 47 weapons in his home

Orange County Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Ferguson, 72, was arrested last week after his son called 911 to report his mother, Sheryl Ferguson, had been shot at the family’s home.

A Southern California judge was charged Friday with murder in the shooting death of his wife and 47 weapons were seized from the house, authorities said.

Orange County Superior Court Judge Jeffrey Ferguson, 72, was arrested last week after his adult son called 911 to report his mother, Sheryl Ferguson, had been shot at the family’s home in the upscale neighborhood of Anaheim Hills, the district attorney’s office said in a statement. He was released a day later on $1 million bail.

Prosecutors want additional bail conditions because authorities recovered 47 weapons and more than 26,000 rounds of ammunition during a search of his home. A rifle registered in his name is not accounted for, the statement said.

***********

Can such people be relied upon to deliver wise and fair judgments?! 

Cheers.

Sriram

[Nearly Sane]

Not sure what you mean by 'such people'.

[jeremyp]

Not sure what you mean by 'such people'.

Alleged murderers.

[Aruntraveller]

The USA's judicial system is fucked up.*

Their approach to gun control is fucked up.

The two appear to have collided here. There is nothing surprising about this particular incident (if the facts are as reported) given those two factors.


* I am aware that other judicial systems fall short, not least our own here in the UK.

[SteveH]

Not sure what you mean by 'such people'.

Gun-obsessed, wife-murdering nut-jobs, obviously.

[Nearly Sane]

Gun-obsessed, wife-murdering nut-jobs, obviously.

I suspect that wife murdering is not taken as a job requirement for being a US judge.

[jeremyp]

Gun-obsessed, wife-murdering nut-jobs, obviously.

ahem

Alleged gun-obsessed, wife-murdering nut-jobs.

Unfortunately, when they appointed him, they weren't aware of any wife murdering tendencies, and it's possible that owning loads of guns was seen as a positive trait by those doing the appointment.

[Harrowby Hall]

Perhaps the guns were owned by his wife, and he was acting in self-defence.

... err apologies, that should be self-defense.

[Sriram]

Now that they know his tendencies...would they need to review his decisions and judgments...?!

[Nearly Sane]

Now that they know his tendencies...would they need to review his decisions and judgments...?!

What 'tendencies'? If he is found guilty of something, then it may be worth asking the question. Even then, I think the review would be narrowly defined. That someone breaks the law at some point does not mean that they are to be presumed to be at fault on everything.