Wednesday, October 28, 2015

 
LATER THIS MORNING UPDATE ON TSC IMMUNITY HEARING CONCERNING THE SECURITY CONTRACT

The hearing is set for 10 a.m.  I will try and make it.  I'm in a lot of pain from the diaphragm spasms, but we shall see.

Sometime after I left the courthouse it was finally entered on the docket sheet the hearing was cancelled.

I spoke with Pearl the Court Administrator and she told Judge Betancourt on her own motion recused herself.  I do not know the reason. There is nothing in the system even at the courthouse.  It is just now while at home am I seeing the note - hearing cancelled.

I spoke with the Office of the Regional Administrative Judge and the clerk told me they have yet to receive a request for the assignment of a visiting judge or the order of recusal.  So for now, we sit and wait.

A SIDE NOTE:

I love watching active hearings.  Judge Betancourt was hearing a medical malpractice case.  The defense attorney was mildly aggressive to be heard.  He was okay, but not as polite as he should have been.  Judge Betancourt realizing he was just defending his client's interest very politely and professionally told him to proceed.  This is good judicial temperament. 

When you compare this to Judge Wittig yesterday you see the difference between a good and bad judge.

Yes it is true the Chambers trial was delayed because of the Motion to Recuse.  But Judge Wittig was fully aware the reason he was not more timely assigned to hear the Motion to Recuse so as to allow the trial to proceed assuming the Motion to Recuse was denied, was because we effectively had no Regional Administrative Judge to appoint him.  This was not a routine appointment.  There was an unfortunate situation intervening in his appointment and to take it out on Chambers attorney was unprofessional.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Judge Betancourt is a terrible judge. I will agree that she is nice and has good temperament, but she is professional politician always concerned about re-election. She has a reputation for never trying a case, unless its close to election time. She takes everything under advisement. Ive also noticed that she tends to treat out of town counsel better than local counsel.

BobbyWC said...

This is pure BS. I have spent more time in her court than anyone else's and she rules all of the time. Only once have I heard her say she would take a motion under advisement. She is polite to everyone who comes before her. She goes out of her way to make pro se's feel welcome and understand - in fact I saw that this morning.

Why would she treat out of town lawyers who do not donate to her campaign better than in town counsel? Just stupid.

Now I am very concerned she is not doing her job as to Ed Cyganiewicz and she knows it. So I do not just give her a pass

Bobby WC