Comment #: MD2266
Rating:5.0
Comments:
Judge Sherbin opened the trial yesterday by addressing the defendant and stating that the defendant's father had just called the judge and said that he was sorry he couldn't make it to the trial. This was absurd! It seemed as if the judge was the defendant's father's personal secretary by relaying that message. Why did Judge Sherbin even take that call? Is that not a conflict of interest? Then twice more during the trial the judge mentioned that he knew the defendant's father and grandfather and what a fine family he came from. It is unconscionable that Judge Sherbin did not recuse himself from this trial. Three times we had to hear the judge mention the defendant’s father, as if that had some bearing on this case. It didn’t. The young man’s criminal actions spoke for him -– he deserved no better treatment because his father and grandfather had a personal relationship with the judge. The plaintiff’s family had to endure hearing about the defendant’s father –- three times. Now there is absolutely no way to convince a reasonable person that this personal relationship that the judge had with the defendant’s family had no effect on his conduct of this trial. When it came to sentencing a twice-convicted criminal charged with second degree assault against two of his prior girlfriends, is there any question as to why the judge thought it sufficient enough punishment to not have the defendant spend one night in jail? He had to pay the court bills and received one year of probation, with all jail time suspended. I am appalled that in this day and age the "good old boy" network is alive and active in Garrett County. The plaintiff's family did not personally know the judge, and so had no favor from him, which is as it should be. The defendant was clearly guilty of second degree assault and was charged as such. What degree of confidence do you think the plaintiff's family has in this sentence? None. The judge got the charge correct, but failed miserably in sentencing due to his very evident lack of impartiality. The defendant lied to the court and appeared to be quite arrogant throughout the trial. He learned absolutely nothing, except that Daddy will help him get away with the least amount of punishment possible every time that he commits a crime. This was the defendant's second time being convicted of a violent act against a girlfriend and only receiving probation. Must a person commit three violent crimes in Garret County before being sent to jail?