Can a judge remove himself ?

hermadge

Hi, I don't know where to post this but hope someone can help, a relative sat for sentencing on a first offence at Crown Court 3 times, each time there was a problem one way or another, at last the judge said he would send the defendant down to the cells for 4 hours whilst he considered sentence, the Barrister said although of course could not give a guarantee it was very likely that the judge was doing that to give the defendant a taste of being locked up and then give a suspended sentence as that was his many many years of experience of such situations, half an hour later the Defendant was released and told that that the Judge had realised he knows the Victim and can not pass sentence and was passing it to another Judge the following day for Sentence, the next day the defendant who was of previous good character sat before the new Judge and was sent to prison.
Everyone was baffled as to why a Judge had sat through two previous hearings with all the evidence (including photos of the Victim) in front of him and then decides at the last hour he knows the Person? We felt that surely the new Judge would now feel duty bound to his fellow Judge to be harsh ? Our Barrister said it was very unprofessional of the Original Judge. Do we have any recourse ? Any help would be gratefully appreciated

spacey2012

To be jailed for a first offence well lets put it this way, they must have really gone to town on the "victim" .

hermadge

That is not what I am asking and no actually and therein lies my point

Battleaxe44

Your barrister will know if there is recourse for you. You might have a case for Judicial Review Board, if the Judge sat through two previous hearing and then excised himself because he realised he knew the victim. he might not have realised this during the earlier hearings and went to seek advice regarding his position.

Be guided by your Barrister and solicitor and ask if it is a case for the Judicial Review Board.

spacey2012

What was the offence ? without this knowledge we can not tell you if the sentence was unduly harsh.

kezzygirl

hermadge wrote: »

Hi, I don't know where to post this but hope someone can help, a relative sat for sentencing on a first offence at Crown Court 3 times, each time there was a problem one way or another, at last the judge said he would send the defendant down to the cells for 4 hours whilst he considered sentence, the Barrister said although of course could not give a guarantee it was very likely that the judge was doing that to give the defendant a taste of being locked up and then give a suspended sentence as that was his many many years of experience of such situations, half an hour later the Defendant was released and told that that the Judge had realised he knows the Victim and can not pass sentence and was passing it to another Judge the following day for Sentence, the next day the defendant who was of previous good character sat before the new Judge and was sent to prison.
Everyone was baffled as to why a Judge had sat through two previous hearings with all the evidence (including photos of the Victim) in front of him and then decides at the last hour he knows the Person? We felt that surely the new Judge would now feel duty bound to his fellow Judge to be harsh ? Our Barrister said it was very unprofessional of the Original Judge. Do we have any recourse ? Any help would be gratefully appreciated

Recourse?like what?releasing them from prison as the judge knew the victim regardless of the amount of times they had presided over proceedings?Nah, don't think so.or at least, I would damn well hope not!

Perhaps you would prefer for the judge to have kept quiet and passed sentence based upon their own pure potentially biased judgement?

hermadge

Battleaxe44 wrote: »

Your barrister will know if there is recourse for you. You might have a case for Judicial Review Board, if the Judge sat through two previous hearing and then excised himself because he realised he knew the victim. he might not have realised this during the earlier hearings and went to seek advice regarding his position.

Be guided by your Barrister and solicitor and ask if it is a case for the Judicial Review Board.

Thank you, we will.

hermadge

kezzygirl wrote: »

[/B]

Recourse?like what?releasing them from prison as the judge knew the victim regardless of the amount of times they had presided over proceedings?Nah, don't think so.or at least, I would damn well hope not!

Perhaps you would prefer for the judge to have kept quiet and passed sentence based upon their own pure potentially biased judgement?

Don't assume what I mean when I say recourse... damn well hope not ? You do not know anything other than what I have said about this case so you are not in a position to give opinions like that.

notanewuser

I frequently see people I know and can't remember where I know them from. For example, I don't know my window cleaners' names and their faces in a different context would have me wondering for hours (or days ) where I knew them from.

No reason this couldn't happen to a judge.

hermadge

I am not asking if People think the sentence is harsh.

browneyedbazzi

It is possible to appeal against a sentence if the offender feels it was unduly harsh. There are sentencing guidelines which judges must take into consideration when handing down a sentence - was the sentence in line with those guidelines?

I don't think that you'll get a sentence reduced because you think the original judge was going to be more lenient than the one who did pass sentence.

Also, I think it's entirely possible that the first judge didn't realise he had previous dealings with the offender until he sat down to read the pre-sentencing reports. Judges deal with an awful lot of people and won't recognise everyone, but details in the reports can trigger a memory. It's only right that judges step down if they have past involvement with an offender as otherwise it could look like they were biased. If he hadn't stepped down, had sent the offender to prison then you'd found out he had a history with the offender you'd be on here asking what you can do about the judge being overly harsh because of the history.

ETA: also, the barrister's comment sounds a bit like sour grapes or the barrister trying to weasel out of getting any flack for being wrong about the likely sentence or not having done enough to get the sentence down.