Notice: Undefined variable: apf_rel_post in /home/blogsites/migreenjob/www/wp-content/plugins/add-post-footer/add_post_footer.php on line 373
Let’s face it, Judge Judy’s syndicated television show works because she’s so brutal with the litigants who come before her, willing to have their self respect shredded in a million pieces, regardless of whether she likes them or not or whether she declares them in the right or decides they’re dead wrong. The premise was to take a sweet, petite “youngish” grandmother type, complete with crocheted collar and put her in front of a dueling defendant and plaintiff and then film it as it plays out. She’s said things such as, “Are you an only child?” to which the defendant answered, “No, I have a younger sister”. Judge Judy never skips a beat and says, “Oh, they didn’t have enough sense to stop after you were born?” Trusty bailiff Petri Hawkins-Byrd snickers off to the side, which catches her attention as she mumbles, “Well, it makes you wonder, doesn’t it?” Most of us decided years ago if they’re that willing to be cut down on national television, then more power to them.
The problem, however, appears to be at least one district attorney is following the Judge Judy method, but no one’s paying her the big money and she doesn’t have her own syndicated program, points out A. Harrison Barnes, attorney and LawCrossing.com founder. Instead, Laura Morask, a Cook County, Illinois prosecutor is facing ethics complaints for her tart comebacks. These are two listed in the ethics complaint on file with the State Bar of Illinois.
- In one example, she called a woman “Mother Teresa” and “June Cleaver”. The woman was on trial for killing her daughter.
- When a rape victim nervously stumbled while on the stand, she quipped, “It’s really tough to be a rape victim now. Hold on a minute, Mr. Rapist, I know you’re about to plunge your penis in me, but I think I need to take a picture of you so that I won’t get blamed later in court for forgetting anything”.
No one can say she doesn’t have a sharp tongue. What’s brought all these charges back to the forefront were comments made by a blogger, who’s also a Chicago area attorney, says A. Harrison Barnes. Jack Leyhane provided link backs to a negative rating based on negative appeals decisions as well as her less than professional courtroom conduct. As the LawCrossing.com founder explains, while Morask was clearly upset about this, she did take the high road and requested he remove the post and insisted she had previously been cleared of the charges. Unfortunately, the blogger opted to post her request instead. This opened the door for the blogger to continue with his mission. He said, “At no time have there been proceedings before a hearing board, let along (sic) a full and complete hearing…and at no time was she cleared.”
Now, Morask is being accused, via yet another ethics complaint, of “lying to a blogger about a past disciplinary probe an making sarcastic closing arguments”.
Makes you wonder what Judge Judy would say, doesn’t it?