265
submitted 10 months ago by MicroWave@lemmy.world to c/news@lemmy.world

A defendant who was captured in courtroom video leaping over a judge’s bench and attacking her, touching off a bloody brawl, is scheduled to appear before her again Monday morning.

In his Jan. 3 appearance before Clark County District Court Judge Mary Kay Holthus, Deobra Redden, who was facing prison time for a felony battery charge stemming from a baseball bat attack last year, tried to convince the judge that he was turning around his violent past.

Redden asked for leniency while describing himself as “a person who never stops trying to do the right thing no matter how hard it is.”

But when it became clear Holthus was going to sentence him to prison time, and as the court marshal moved to handcuff and take him into custody, Redden yelled expletives and charged forward. People in the courtroom audience, including his foster mother, began to scream.

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] sentient_loom@sh.itjust.works 77 points 10 months ago
[-] mp3@lemmy.ca 35 points 10 months ago
[-] Pistcow@lemm.ee 16 points 10 months ago
[-] PinkPanther@sh.itjust.works 9 points 10 months ago

Alright, Mike Tyson.

[-] Baahb@feddit.nl 16 points 10 months ago

And in Vegas! I'm so hyped!

[-] themeatbridge@lemmy.world 62 points 10 months ago

Fella forgot to quicksave.

[-] HejMedDig@feddit.dk 56 points 10 months ago

How can the judge who has been attached not be disqualified from ruling in that case?

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 109 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

She's not ruling on her own assault, she's finishing the original sentencing which was interrupted when he launched at her.

So her decision on sentencing was already decided, she just never got to announce what it was. His subsequent behavior proves that sentencing is the correct course of action.

Edit As expected:

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/08/us/las-vegas-judge-attacker-sentenced.html

"sentenced the man on Monday to 19 to 48 months in prison on a previous battery charge, emphasizing that his actions last week did not affect her sentencing decision."

and:

"On Monday, Mr. Redden returned to Judge Holthus’s courtroom to complete the sentencing hearing that his violent outburst had interrupted."

and:

"Judge Holthus emphasized that Mr. Redden was being sentenced solely on an April 2023 battery charge, to which he had previously pleaded guilty. She said any charges related to his attack last week would be handled by a different judge.

“For purposes of the record,” Judge Holthus said, “I want to make it clear that I am not changing or modifying the sentence I was in the process of imposing last week before I was interrupted by defendant’s actions.”"

[-] HejMedDig@feddit.dk 7 points 10 months ago

Ahh... I thought she would rule on his subsequent assault charge

[-] jordanlund@lemmy.world 14 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Too soon, it just happened. He still needs to get through being charged with it.

Keep in mind, the assault he was about to be charged with was from last August or something. That's how slow it moves.

load more comments (32 replies)
[-] mkwt@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago

You don't want people to be able to ditch judges they don't like through means of violence.

[-] PlasmaDistortion@lemm.ee 7 points 10 months ago

I think she deserves a rematch and the chance to teach this idiot a lesson.

[-] corus_kt@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Can't imagine another judge being excited to deal with this guy, maybe she's the only one with a score to settle

[-] Rognaut@lemmy.world 10 points 10 months ago

I score to settle means that she will most likely be unable to rule impartially. This increases the chances of her ruling being found cruel and unusual, thereby increasing the chances of a successful appeal.

[-] xhieron@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

Would it influence the judge? Maybe, but modern jurisprudence strongly disfavors anything that enables litigants to choose their own tribunal. The question of whether the American legal system does a good job of that notwithstanding, the problem is that if you enable a defendant to get another roll of the judge dice by assaulting the first assigned judge, you've created a perverse incentive to assault court personnel in a non-zero amount of cases. You don't want to allow for the possibility of rewarding a defendant for bad behavior. Consider:

Capital defendant is on trial for murder. The first judge they draw is strongly in favor of the extreme penalty. The alternative with a different judge would be life--maybe even with the possibility of parole, depending on the jurisdiction. If convicted, the sentence for assaulting a judge is always going to be less than death. Ergo, if you're the defendant in this case and have the opportunity to assault the judge, knowing that doing so gets you a new judge, then rationally you should assault the judge. Courts generally expect litigants to be rational. That is, if the penalty for x is less than the risk value of y, a reasonable litigant will do x, even if x is jumping over the bench to take a swing at the judge.

That's no good, and it's not a new phenomenon. Usually this kind of "forum selection legal game theory" applies in questions wherein a litigant has the choice to initiate an action before one of a number of courts, and forum (and judge) shopping is a major topic in legal academia. [It's not an accident that Aileen Cannon is Trump's judge of choice.]

All of that said, should this judge recuse herself? Personally I don't think so, for the aforesaid reasons, but I also don't want to give the impression that it's cut and dry. Being pragmatic, many judges wouldn't want the hassle of being personally invested in this kind of debate. Some might stand on the principle (and they would be right), but in my experience, most judges would rather take a punch in the face than be reversed on appeal.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] IHeartBadCode@kbin.social 5 points 10 months ago

Because that’s not what impartial means. Impartial doesn’t mean dispassionate, hardly any judge sits a bench and not feel something about at least ten percent of their cases.

Impartial means not allowing that emotion to be the main driver. Judges and juries are not robots and the Court system takes this facet into account in appeals.

load more comments (6 replies)
[-] Seasm0ke@lemmy.world 28 points 10 months ago

This headline reads like a fight card wtf lol

[-] bfg9k@lemmy.world 7 points 10 months ago

SUNDAY SUNDAY SUNDAY

GET READY FOR THE JUDGE TO LAW DOWN THE LAW

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] samus12345@lemmy.world 22 points 10 months ago

Him at his second court appearance:

[-] assassinatedbyCIA@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago
[-] ivanafterall@kbin.social 3 points 10 months ago

This is for the belt!

[-] herrwoland@lemmy.world 6 points 10 months ago
[-] Guest_User@lemmy.world 8 points 10 months ago

Lol no he failed and now has to do the boss fight again

[-] postmateDumbass@lemmy.world 5 points 10 months ago
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 08 Jan 2024
265 points (98.9% liked)

News

23305 readers
3821 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS