Former Community – We Moved
🆕 Coached community here, for posts & feedback public community here.
Judge shames & insults citizen for lewd mistake: share your reaction
An interesting case:
Nathanial: (logs in with "ButtFucker3000" username by mistake)
Judge: (...) what kind of idiot logs into court like that
(...)
Nathanial: well, I apologize
Judge: well, you should, I put you in the waiting room (....) so you can think what you call yourself online (<---- shaming power move)Â
Interesting to see how different people react to this.
What was your reaction?
Before reading further, think how you felt about this one.
I'm curious to hear more opinions before my own take below may influence you.
Very few people in the comments thought the judge was out of place.
My first comment was: "how dare he talk to that guy like that".
Silly mistake from Nathanial, but a mistake nonetheless.
Nobody gives the judge the right to 100X thread-expand on it, insult him, and shame him.
Curios to hear some more opinions though:
What was your first reaction to this?
P.S.:
I later changed my stance after looking this up further.
Nathanial was the defendant. So that gave him less leeway and makes the judge's reaction a but more understandable. The defendant is "socially expected" to be extra careful, on time, and show some repentance. Still, he'd have had all the right to tell the judge he cannot talk to him like that (or at least, that's what I would have done).
Yes way over the top, also putting him in the corner like a little kid.
while watching, I was wondering if he should push back on the judge? From a strategic point of view, is it not better to play submissive since he is the one that is going to sentence you
I think the judge's reaction was out of place. He could have just pointed out that the screen name was inappropriate and logged the defendant out, telling him to change it before joining again. Not even waiting for explanations or apologies.
If he wanted to emphasize his point, after the defendant logged in again, the judge could have added a "this is a court room, sir, I expect you to pay attention to your screen name the next time. Now, to the issue at hand".
Thread-expanding on it, name calling, especially a few times, seems unprofessional, and as if the judge cared more about power ("my court"), virtue signaling and bullying than getting the job done.
I think the defendant defended well with "I don't believe I typed anything like that" (not that he had much choice). But he could have immediately apologised and requested permission to change. The damage was already done, but it could have still given him the benefit of doubt, especially if he managed to behave high power after the incident.
But when the defendant started making (lame) excuses, justifying himself, and even worse, blaming his sister... What a disaster.
Truly disliked the judge's behavior here. (And I'm only withholding saying more because it's already been said well enough in the above posts, but you guys already know from some of the interview case studies such as Ramaswamy and Saladino, I hate seeing people get disrespected like this.)
And seeing this, I actually would've preferred if Nathaniel had gone for a small lie:
Nathaniel:Â (logs in with "ButtF***er3000" username by mistake)
Judge: (...) what kind of idiot logs into court like that
(...)
Nathaniel: [Gives a look of shock] Yeah (strategic agreeing), I'm not sure why they put that as their name, this is someone else's device I'm borrowing (white lie), I'll talk to them about this after. I had no idea, your honor (normally an "I apologize" would go here, but after the judge already called him a "yoho," "idiot," and so on, I feel it's fair to omit the apology now in exchange for not addressing the rude name-calling/shaming).
I'd prefer to see a man tell an inconsequential small lie than to watch him get bullied, beat up, and then ganged up on [in the comments].
I have a slightly different opinion on that one.
I think the judge’s reaction was ego based (as if it was an insult to him personally), was unprofessional, disrespectful and rude.
I agree and it’s not a behaviour that is expected not is worthy of a judge.
Regarding the defendant: honest mistake, stupid and provocative username (even if not used in court). If I tell someone my name is motherfucker it’s almost a covert insult even if I did not said it directly at the person. Hence the judge’s reaction. So having a provocative username on the internet is like walking around with a middle finger up.
Regarding the context, I’m wondering if the judge’s insults is less or same seriousness as in Europe. Judging from Ali’s reaction it’s the same seriousness as in Europe. I’m saying this because I noticed that because of the free speech culture in the US (constitution, etc.) in videos on YouTube suspects can insult at will police officers and the officers don’t react. Even in daily altercations or when a cop is involved there is no consequence. That being said Ali knows better the culture so he’s a better judge. (Did not find the video where a young adult insults repeatedly police officer because he suspected him of something he did not do and just walks away). In my country it’s forbidden by law to insult police officers (or anyone for that matters). So maybe insults carry a different weight in the US.
Where I have a different perspective is that I think the judge is socially allowed to do it. In terms of power he can pretty much do whatever he wants to say within the law. And the guy is an idiot in a sense: he got caught with a syringe of meth and comes to court with this username. Yes it’s his court it’s his territory. It’s very animalistic and not very evolved behaviour yes. To me in terms of power dynamics the judge is one of the highest status and power individual in the socio economic hierarchy and the defendant is one of the lowest. (I think it’s good that today the people in power must have an accountability of their behaviour so not ok in terms of morality of course).
So as we saw through history we tolerate generally speaking this behaviour when there is such a power and status differential AND the lowest status person is in the wrong.
I think the judge behaviour is morally reprehensible and unfair. My point is that socially people would not care about it (did not read the comments) and would give the blame to the low status person who is considered guilty in people’s minds (he pleaded guilty as well).
So I think the defendant was too much in the wrong to demand any respect back. Even if the mistake is honest it is still disrespectful and inadequate the username. Also in a way the defendant started the name calling even by mistake, opening the thread of insults. In a way this can justify his behaviour to outside observers: « he started it »
My point: in terms of interpersonal dynamics the judge is in the wrong (no good justification to call him like that in their 1-to-1 relationship). I think in terms of social norms and context the defendant is in the wrong. In terms of power dynamics he’s power down. So the net effect is that the judge feels entitled and will probably be accepted to behave like that by the public. (I’m sure it’s clear now I think this behaviour is not acceptable in my standards).
Curious to know what you guys think about this opinion.
edit: I read a few comments and someone mentioned that he could have been held as a contempt of the court. So the law on top of it all is on the side of the judge. No power, no status, no social norms, no law on the side of the defendant. So no chance to demand the respect in the human relationship aspect he’s due.
To me, the Judge lost more power than the guy.
Because he was the same Judge who had to actually judge on the guy! No need to show any emotional reaction by definition.
Any Judge showing anger or irritation for how a party of the case behaves is inherently losing power, as his "official reaction" of laying down the law is more than enough.
As Kavalier said, he could have just pointed out the name was inappropriate and then logged off the user.
Instead, by insulting the guy the Judge automatically painted himself as to a "not so far level" with respect to the guy.
I also wouldn't have said anything if I were the guy. The fact that the guy was going to be sentenced by the Judge made it absolutely counterproductive to react to the insult. I don't think he could have done anything else than take it.
If there were a lawyer for the guy, checking the disrespect is something that maybe he could have done politely, by inserting it into an apology on behalf of the guy.
Wow, this turned out to be a really awesome thread.
May share more later as I think about it more.
Wanted to make a quick note on this:
Yes, from a legal standpoint not enforcing boundaries with the judge may have been the best way to get a smaller sentence.
I'm just too clueless to say, though.
But standing there, in doubt, I'd have still enforced boundaries anyway because:
- What you accept becomes "acceptable". So the moment he accepted the insults and reprimands, they also became "fair" and nobody said anything
- Only what you call as unacceptable can be unacceptable. I'd be willing to bet that if he had enforced boundaries, he would have led his own charge with more and more people calling the judge a bully, too aggressive, power-craving or, at least, unprofessional*.
- You pay a social price for accepting poor behavior. That guy now he's buttfucker3000 who's been made fun of and insulted by the judge. He could have been instead the guy who stood up for himself, for respect, and made a judge pay the price for his bullying
- You may as well lose your own respect
- Standing up for yourself you gain reputation, personal power, and potentially confidence and self-esteem
Who says the last 3 don't outweigh the legal risks?
Also:
My POW is useless from a legal point of view.
So ignore this.
And I'd still be willing to bet that if there ever was a chance for his lawyers to gain some advantage by the judge's poor behavior, he should have first called it out himself.
Plus, when there's a jury, the jurors do carry some weight. If you can gain more respect from the jury, chances are they will also be more well-disposed toward you.
An example of a potentially good approach:
I see.
I'm mortified by this because, let me be very clear about this: I respect this court and every single juror here. Please accept my deepest and most sincere apologies everyone. (<---- this is your repentance, first and foremost towards the jurors)
And while I respect your role as a judge (<---- this makes sure you can't be held as attacking a role or authority, but the dishonorable man behind that role)
please let me say that you have no right to insult me and that your words and demenor are unprofessional (and unacceptable)
Something like that.
Then, take it from there and hold frame that your mistake does not mean he has any right to insult you.
*Example:
It's like John's example with the supervisors (happened twice if I remember correctly).
One made a comment about "men not being able to multi-task". And another pulled an aggressive "joke" to which John replied "I'm shocked".
Had he said nothing about those comments, they'd have been "normal".
Only him saying something made them unacceptable (and led to an apology)
BTW, I'm thinking this may be a very important concept:
Quote from Lucio Buffalmano on December 11, 2023, 12:01 am
- What you accept becomes "acceptable"
- Only what you call as unacceptable can be unacceptable
It's the reason why hazing or bullying submissive men largely goes on unchecked.
It's because by taking the bullying, the bullied himself sets the frame that "it's OK".
As unfair as that may be, most people subconsciously think that "it's just how life goes":
Weak, submissive, and socially unaware men who can't play the social game call their own bullying.
Coming from someone who unwittingly accepted this kind of shaming before finding TPM, I strongly agree with you on a personal level.
I, in fact, would have probably reacted even stronger than your example.
And, I still believe it would have been a legal mistake (which, btw, is also one of the reasons people use lawyers to handle their legal cases instead of doing it themselves).
Paradoxically, you're the one who taught me, together with enforcing respect, that in some situations it's better to fake "letting it pass" while taking note.
I understand that in this case the social stakes were very high, especially because the guy was recorded live and then his face was streamed across the Internet.
In most cases in life, disrespect is not televised, situations are more fluid, and self-esteem can be recovered by chalking the one situation to a "strategic choice".
By the way, agree with what you write in relation to "what's unacceptable" and "what's not": an objective reality about "personal power" does not exist. And from an external perspective, it's very difficult to see what is disrespect and what is not: the mere fact that the recipient accepts it somewhat "makes it true".
Because even what is a power move and what's not is not objective, but instead strongly depends on the relative status and power of people involved.
But that's a topic for another topic.
OFF TOPIC
A funny personal story about a similar but different situation I once was in:
Many years ago, before TPM, I went to court to file some documents.
There were two rooms and two lines, and I didn't know which room was the right one.
I tried asking other lawyers, but none knew which room was the right one for my filing.
So I asked the courtesy to be let in one of the rooms just to ask for what line I had to do the queue on.
I went inside and approached a court employee.
But a real judge of the court was sitting on a far table in the same room.
This ensued:
Judge: What are you doing here? Don't you know that there's a line?
Me: Yes, you're right. I came in just to ask which line is the right one though, because I couldn't...
Judge: (cutting me off): WHAT ARE YOU DOING I SAID!!! YOU NEED TO GO OUT!!!! YOU NEED TO GO OUT!!! (screaming)
Me: THIS IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE! YOU HAVE NO RIGHT WHATSOEVER TO YELL AT ME AND I HAVE EVERY RIGHT TO ASK FOR CLARIFICATIONS ABOUT WHICH ROOM IS THE RIGHT ONE!!!! (screaming louder than her)
Judge: (taken aback, silent, says nothing)
Me: (turning to the employee): Is this the right room for filings of XWZ?
Employee: (surprised) No, it's the other one
Me: Thank you. (turning to the Judge) IT'S UNACCEPTABLE! (I go out).
* click on blockquote to expandÂ
I'm sure the judge in question still remembers me.
And I'm also sure my behavior was a "legal mistake", should I ever encounter that judge again in a trial.
But boy... the satisfaction :)
