She did a great job delivering justice and giving voice to the victims.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really did NOT like her. I thought she was very unprofessional. The judge became the story.

Agree with this. There are quite a few lawyers that think her conduct was unbecoming of a judge. It doesn't matter that the defendant is a total piece of shit.

What did she do that was "unbecoming?" I appreciated that she let all the victims speak. If you look at the justice system holistically, providing a voice to victims is part of the justice process. Are these criminal law attorneys that think this? I could see private sector, BIGLAW types that bearly see a courtroom thinking this.

NP. I thought it was wonderful that she let all the victims speak. But I did think she was drawing far too much attention to herself. After awhile, it became all about her, and not all about the victims and the scumbag doctor.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I really did NOT like her. I thought she was very unprofessional. The judge became the story.

Agree with this. There are quite a few lawyers that think her conduct was unbecoming of a judge. It doesn't matter that the defendant is a total piece of shit.

What did she do that was "unbecoming?" I appreciated that she let all the victims speak. If you look at the justice system holistically, providing a voice to victims is part of the justice process. Are these criminal law attorneys that think this? I could see private sector, BIGLAW types that bearly see a courtroom thinking this.

Anonymous wrote:I really did NOT like her. I thought she was very unprofessional. The judge became the story.

Agree with this. There are quite a few lawyers that think her conduct was unbecoming of a judge. It doesn't matter that the defendant is a total piece of shit.

Anonymous wrote:I really did NOT like her. I thought she was very unprofessional. The judge became the story.

Did you like the 156 women who were sexually abused? It was about them, no?

I really did NOT like her. I thought she was very unprofessional. The judge became the story.

What is more critical to know is where you went to LAW CENTER?

I don’t think that there are enough open seats on the bench to employ even 1 law graduate from every law school per year. I would not attend any law school betting on become a judge. What a silly post.

Anonymous wrote:Sure -- my dad went to a T100 law school, graduated with honors/law review/all that jazz, and now makes close to $1M/year and owns a sweet Manhattan apartment with my mom. What's your point? Of course it can be done.

Sure -- my dad went to a T100 law school, graduated with honors/law review/all that jazz, and now makes close to $1M/year and owns a sweet Manhattan apartment with my mom. What's your point? Of course it can be done.

Anonymous wrote:State judges often come from TTT’s. Not an outlier.

YES, lots of judges from schools outside T14. One would never know that from reading this cite. Shouldn't Judge Aquilina be unemployed or doing doc review? This is just a national example of how many lawyers are working in fulfilling careers.

Yeah, lots of state judges come from state law schools. Heck, when I lived in the PNW, I noticed that most of the federal judges in Idaho went to the University of Idaho for law school. They are often from that state, go to the state law school, and develop deep connections to the state bar community and develop good reputations.

If someone came to me and said that they wanted to practice in, say, Nebraska, I would strongly encourage them to consider the University of Nebraska's law school.

State judges often come from TTT’s. Not an outlier.

This is a super insecure post, even in the context of DCUM, a cesspool of insecurities.

It was nice to see some positive press about a legal professional that didn't go to a top law school. See DCUM, people really can have satisfying careers outside of T14.

https://heavy.com/news/2018/01/rosemarie-aquilina-larry-nassar-judge-bio/