Judge Finds Himself In Contempt Of Court When His New Smartphone Interrupts Closing Arguments

from the the-Man-sticks-it-to...-the-Man dept

Having your cellphone go off during a movie or during your kid’s school concert is considered by many to be the penultimate act of rudeness. (Actually answering your phone in these locations is the ultimate act of rudeness, one many feel should be punished by immediate death.) Having your cellphone go off in court is not only considered rude, but (legally) contemptuous.

But, what’s the expected response if it’s a judge’s cellphone that starts making noise while court is in session? At most, we’d expect a brief and possibly brusque apology from the judge before returning to the case at hand. We’d expect nothing more because many authority figures have presented themselves as exempt from the rules they enforce for most of the past 20 50 100 years.

Judge Raymond Voet of Ionia County, Michigan is an exception. Rules are rules and should apply equally to everybody, no matter what position they hold.

A Michigan judge imposed a $25 contempt of court fine on himself after his cellphone made noise during closing arguments of a jury trial.

“I’m guessing I bumped it. It started talking really loud, saying ‘I can’t understand you. Say something like Mom,'” he said. “My face got as red as a beet.”

Voet, who said the phone is new and he is still learning how to work it, said he decided to hold himself in contempt of court and fine himself $25 because he wouldn’t accept excuses from anyone else whose phones caused disturbances in court.

“If I cannot live by the rules that I enforce, then I have no business enforcing these rules,” Voet said.

A new phone can have a steep learning curve and this one soundly defeated the judge’s embarrassed attempts to silence it. But rather than just dealing with the misbehaving phone and returning to work (actions no one would have questioned — after all, he is the judge), Judge Voet subjected himself to the same rules he holds everyone else to.

Sure, the fine is only $25, but the gesture is much, much bigger than that. Voet earned plenty of respect in return for a nominal cash outlay. While we can only speculate as to whether he would have subjected himself to a larger fine in order to set an example, the fact is he followed through on an action that wouldn’t have occurred to most of his peers, much less been considered (briefly) with any seriousness.

Filed Under: , , ,

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Judge Finds Himself In Contempt Of Court When His New Smartphone Interrupts Closing Arguments”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
49 Comments
Ninja (profile) says:

“If I cannot live by the rules that I enforce, then I have no business enforcing these rules,” Voet said.

Must have an uterus installed so I can have his babies.

I’m at a loss of words on how epically awesome this is and even more at a loss on the fact that I am amazed meaning this is not the norm but rather an exception.

I humbly salute this example of a judge.

Gothenem (profile) says:

Awesome

This is how all people in all walks of life should be treated. Equally. This judge obviously has the right idea. The law applies to everyone, rich or poor, judge or customer service representative, CEO or Wal-Mart Greeter. I would feel, after this, that I would be treated fairly by this judge.

Take note all you other judges out there. This is how it’s done!

out_of_the_blue says:

OR, it's just a publicity stunt. Geez, ONE data point,

and you fanboys just about literally orgasm:

Ninja (profile), Apr 16th, 2013 @ 7:36am

“If I cannot live by the rules that I enforce, then I have no business enforcing these rules,” Voet said.

Must have an uterus installed so I can have his babies.

I’m at a loss of words on how epically awesome this is and even more at a loss on the fact that I am amazed meaning this is not the norm but rather an exception.

I humbly salute this example of a judge.

Sheesh. Maybe “Ninja” is Japanese for “Ninny”.

Anyhoo, you can’t buy better publicity anywhere for $25. And it’s always the big criminals who are careful about minor points. — BUT, sure, on the face of it, FINE. Some judges actually are good… I’ve never run across one, but it’s possible.

Rikuo (profile) says:

Re: OR, it's just a publicity stunt. Geez, ONE data point,

Mike Masnick. Do us an experiment would you kindly? Write an article about how the sky is blue. Oh, and mention that water is wet and people get drunk imbibing alcohol.
We can start a betting pool on how long it takes for the trolls to turn up frothing at the mouth finding fault with everything you just wrote, even though they’re cold hard facts.

technomage (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re: OR, it's just a publicity stunt. Geez, ONE data point,

lol, you forgot ootb’s favorite rant: What does that have to do with technology or dirt for that matter…

A better bet would be something along the lines of why a computer has an on button; why keyboard keys press down, instead of up; etc.

but seriously, we need to stop feeding him after midnight, keep him in the sunlight, and prevent him from ever getting near water…

Gwiz (profile) says:

Re: Re: Re:3 OR, it's just a publicity stunt. Geez, ONE data point,

Or, Mike could just drop the banhammer on Blue, AJ, hurricane_head/googlypants, and darryl’s IP addresses…

AFAIK Mike has never banned anyone from commenting on Techdirt. That would kind of go against his stance on Free Speech – that ignorant or incorrect speech should be countered with more speech, not censored. That’s also why when the community down votes a comment it just hides it and it isn’t removed entirely.

You end up getting deeper, more involved conversations when there are dissenting views, instead of an echo chamber with everyone agreeing on everything.

As an added bonus, we (the community here at Techdirt) get to claim higher moral ground over the sites which moderate and choose which comments to allow. Like the websites of the RIAA and the MPAA, all the MSM sites and that silly blog of David Lowery’s.

Someone who works with the man says:

Re: How much does he fine anyone else?

He gave himself the same exact consequence that he gives anyone else…a $25 fine. It’s not a publicity stunt either. He is truly shocked by the publicity this has had. I assure you, he’s just that honest. It’s nice to be able to work with a man of true integrity.

Wally (profile) says:

Just wanting to point out that the learning curve is greater for the general public than it is for those of us whom are used to using technology on a regular basis. This judge is awesome for realizing what was going on and I think that this is probably the judge I would love to see in court if I ever get a subpena to the Ionia County Clerk of Courts in Michigan.

special-interesting (profile) says:

A good example of a good example. Shows style and humility. A man of some substance.

Stuff like that (forgot to turn off cell phone) just happens even in dire situations like a courtroom. The fine even sounds reasonable.

Hmmm. Fine sounds reasonable… (don’t get me goin now.)

This once and a while phone ringing occurrence normally happens when we rely on cell phone gadgets so much. They are everywhere and ubiquitous to everyday life. Similarly we have copy machines everywhere in our lives and sure enough every once and a while we photocopy a picture or two and post them on a bulletin board somewhere else. If you don’t then your kids will.

In real life what would be the maximum a judge could do to errant distractions? A few hundred dollars and confiscation of the phone for a while?

Lets compare the $25 serious contempt of court fine for a cell phone ringing in the courtroom to the potential statutory fines of 150,000 for copyright criminal violations. Why the discrepancy? Seems way out of line even to put into writing such a ridiculous amount.

So turn on the cellphones in the courtrooms but lock up that dangerous copy machine its a vice more dangerous than a Gutenberg press with the inquisition hunting you down. (for printing Bibles no less.)

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Ctrl-Alt-Speech

A weekly news podcast from
Mike Masnick & Ben Whitelaw

Subscribe now to Ctrl-Alt-Speech »
Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...
Loading...