Home Store In Memoriam Deborah Newsletter Forum Topics Blogfeed Blogroll Facebook MySpace Contact Us About

Ohio Judge Connor vindicated, no impeachment, O'Reilly wrong again!

Reported by Chrish - March 18, 2006

All this past week, FOX's Bill O'Reilly ranted and raved about "the worst judge ever", asking viewers to demand Democrat Ohio Judge Connor's ouster. The wheels of injustice were spinning furiously through the week, with a statement from Ohio's Republican Attorney General Petro saying the Republican-led legislature was working on resolutions to remove the judge, hopefully within a week. The whole process came to a screeching halt Friday as it was learned that plea deals and probation for sex offenders is fairly common across Ohio, imposed by both Democrat and Republican judges. In other words, if they impeached/removed Connor, they'd have to remove all the judges who did the same thing. Apparently Judge Connor is NOT the worst Judge in the world; think O'Reilly will apologize for the smears he broadcast all week?

According to The Columbus Dispatch,

More than 60,000 criminal cases are filed annually in Ohio, and plea deals are used to resolve the lion’s share. Remove the cases that are dismissed and more than 97 percent in Franklin County Common Pleas Court are resolved through deals rather than trials, figures kept by the Ohio Supreme Court show. "It’s a practical reality in virtually every court I’m aware of across this land," Common Pleas Judge Daniel T. Hogan said yesterday. "It does not take rocket science to see that if all those cases went to trial, we would grind to a halt."

Hogan, the administrative judge on the 17-member bench, noted that, "In sex cases, particularly those involving children, the overall sentiment of parents is that they don’t want their child to endure a jury trial. Prosecutors often offer pleas in the case just to spare the child."

The decision to halt actions against the judge was painted by Republican leaders in The Columbus Dispatch and other publications as a reaction to Democrat partisanship:


House Speaker Jon A. Husted backed away from an effort to oust Connor, which requires backing by two-thirds of the House and Senate. A lack of Democratic support was blamed for dooming the effort.

"We’re not going to put together any kangaroo court," said Scott Borgemenke, Husted’s chief of staff. "We are not going to introduce a resolution just to have a partisan debate on impeachment. Introducing a resolution on impeachment without having some bipartisan discussions first is irresponsible in this kind of statewide election year."

Joyce Beatty, House Democratic leader, said singling out Connor was little more than a political ploy.

"He is not the only judge who has given probation to someone doing the same thing with a minor," the Columbus lawmaker said. "I think we have to be very careful that this is not a political act."

Comment: It seems clear it IS a political act. This Democratic judge has won re-election several times so the Republican leadership (Ohio Governor Taft, AG Petro, and House Speaker John Husted) use their allies at FOX News to drum up national support to remove him through other channels. We've seen this undermining of democracy repeatedly through the last ten yearsor so; when Republicans don't win electons they resort to gerrymandering, recalls, impeachment, and election tampering.

When O'Reilly first started his crusade against Connor I wrote:

I am not commenting on the charges, the plea, the sentencing, or whether he should be removed: I don't have enough information. [...] My comment addresses the fact that O'Reilly presents his show as the "no-spin zone" and touts himself as a journalist when in reality he is an advocate who is anything but objective. There's nothing wrong with that in itself - it's the hypocrisy and false representation that need to be constantly documented. This show had three people piling on a judge without anyone to defend or explain his side. Of course viewers/listeners will say, what's to defend? That's my point: we don't have the other side, whether it will clear everything up or it's totally lame - we don't have the other side.

Later, after receiving comments attacking my character (and liberals in general since we're all alike) I reiterated:

For those of you with reading comprehension problems, I am not endorsing or defending the judge or the sentence. I am challenging O'Reilly's bogus claim to be fair and balanced. He is an advocate and there's nothing wrong with that. It's the denial, the living the lie, that I have an issue with.

O'Reilly's defenders left comment like:

"Any Judge who allows a convicted Child Molester off with probation should not sit on the bench. What is it about these facts don't you Libs get? But typically Libs don't believe anyone should be held accountable for their own actions and should not have to answer to the public."

"...And, most importantly, his beef is with a judge who let a known rapist(who admitted to raping a youngster) walk not about an unpopular ruling. Justice was denied to the kid and her family and that in itself is angering. How in the world can you try to change the subject from a judge who deserves to be impeach for letting a rapist off to stuff that has nothing to do with the debate. This is typical of liberals. Y'all lower the danger or crime of soemone and then try to change the subject. You are the enemy of this great country and that is a shame."

"Liberals think that it is okay to keep a judge in office who has a record like his because they want to attack the majority with their harmful agenda. This judge sent a message to rapists of all kinds which is that we will not go after you for your crimes. This is appeasement towards crimminals which is typical of liberalism. Liberals do not believe in strong punnishment towards crimmals because they believe that truth is relative which means that there is no rigght or wrong."

"I live in Ohio,and think Connor is a discrace to us.He not only sentences though BOOZE COLORED glasses,he has lost all sence of our system.He allowed a CHILD MOLESTER free,no punishment.Children were victomized.They are scared for life,where are their rights?There has to be some sort of prison time for the crimes he commited.If not,where is our protection?What are we telling these criminals,it okay to do this?I'm glad Bill O'Reily brought this public!!!"

But as I pointed out repeatedly, he only gave us the part of the story that supported the agenda behind it - removing a Democratic judge at the behest of Republicans. He abused his position and the trust of his viewers by sensationalist, selective reporting, targeting outrage at one judge unjustly, and in the process smearing the judge's reputation on international cable.

Bill O'Reilly is a venomous pompous hypocrite, a tool of Republicans, and anyone who continues to believe him is a fool. He owes Judge Connor an apology for singling him out, and HE, Bill O'Reilly, should resign.

NOT FAIR. NOT BALANCED. NOT JOURNALISM.

Comments
Post a comment




Remember Me?


We welcome your opinions and viewpoints. Comments must remain civil, on-topic and must not violate any copyright or other laws. We reserve the right to delete any comments we deem inappropriate or non-constructive to the discussion for any reason, and to block any commenter for repeated violations.

Your email address is required to post, but it will not be published on the site.