Tuesday, September 15, 2009

A League City war story

Tried an assault case down in League City this afternoon (perhaps y'all remember my last experience down there). Three people testified - the alleged victim, my client and my client's mother. All three stories were different. The only thing they all agreed on was that my client and the alleged victim had an argument.

The end result was a (somewhat) typical she said-she said swearing match. The judge found my client not guilty but then proceeded to berate her, saying she thought my client did assault the alleged victim but that because she had one little doubt, she couldn't find her guilty.

While I think the judge's final decision was the correct one, I do take offense at her comments to my client afterward. The comments weren't necessary, in fact, they were mean-spirited and the judge seemed to be aggravated that anyone would dare demand their day in court.

2 comments:

Cyn said...

I had a similar result in a trial in the Kemah area once - can't remember the name of the court. Anyway, jury found client NG of assaulting teacher but older man (70 - would not take his exemption) proceeded to chew my client's tail. Given that client was a high school student who did lay a hand on a teacher, I thought the comments appropriate & the outcome was worth it.

While it may be aggravating to be subjected to such, the judge could have found your client guilty & then made the comments - right? Instead, your client leaves with the ability to clean his/her record & possibily a recognition that s/he was lucky this time. : ) I'm just saying . . .

Houston DWI Attorney Paul B. Kennedy, said...

Thanks for the comment, Cynthia. It's kinda like Susan Sarandon in Bull Durham asking Nuke if he'd rather her make love to him calling out Crash's name or vice versa.

We were quite happy with the outcome.