- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Louisiana Supreme Court letting Eboni Johnson Rose off with slap on the wrist
Posted on 4/23/25 at 6:19 pm to udtiger
Posted on 4/23/25 at 6:19 pm to udtiger
It's really disheartening to have to practice law in front of judges who are clearly incompetent and it's even worse for clients. Makes me not want to practice.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 6:35 pm to brewhan davey
quote:
I loathe that we elect judges in this state
So you’d prefer that they’d be appointed by the governor or Supreme Court? No thanks, we’d have a bench full of the highest bidder without a doubt.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 6:37 pm to grizzlylongcut
quote:
If I found out that my judge’s name was fricking Eboni I’m requesting a retrial
I wouldn't care about her name. If I found out my judge was on probation for making up charges like "Misdemeanor Malfeasance" I'd ask for a god damn mistrial. How the HELL do you make up fake charges in a district court and retain your seat? Every single case she hears should ask for a motion to disqualify simply because this woman has a record of making up fake charges.
This post was edited on 4/23/25 at 6:55 pm
Posted on 4/23/25 at 7:10 pm to udtiger
quote:
Read Cole's concurrence. He basically threw up his hands and said the only people being sanctioned were taxpayers but he was concurring because if it dragged out, her paid vacation would be longer.
Why not drag it out longer and inform the public about it? It's not a billion dollars.
She should absolutely be removed. I know Louisiana is a bit different in politics, but this is absurd.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 8:21 pm to Godfather1
Lawyers regulating lawyers =
Foxes guarding the Hen House!!
Wow, that is so lame of the Supreme Court Justices and a complete lack of fiduciary concern for taxpayer money. Or else, they are incompetent as she is and lacking in discipline.
Foxes guarding the Hen House!!
Wow, that is so lame of the Supreme Court Justices and a complete lack of fiduciary concern for taxpayer money. Or else, they are incompetent as she is and lacking in discipline.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 8:24 pm to TheSadvocate
It disgust me that our lives could be in the hands of a dumb, moody, racist, arrogant bitch like her.
Terrifying actually.
Terrifying actually.
This post was edited on 4/24/25 at 6:53 am
Posted on 4/23/25 at 8:40 pm to Zephyrius
quote:
3rd Cade Cole Republican Tulane
Wildly disappointed in Cade Cole's vote here.
Posted on 4/23/25 at 9:10 pm to BugAC
What a stupid thing to say. Even if 90% of graduates that went there might be bums, not one has ever been qualified to a be a judge?
Posted on 4/23/25 at 11:53 pm to MintBerry Crunch
quote:
Wildly disappointed in Cade Cole's vote here.
Why? The LASC cannot just come up with their own discipline at this stage in the proceeding because this was on a consent judgment- not a full recommendation. Recommendation of punishment must be meted out by Judiciary Commission and then approved by LASC. If he voted no, then they would have gone back to a full hearing at the commission, followed by an appeal to the LASC, likely another 8 months to a year.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 4:47 am to Stexas
quote:
So you’d prefer that they’d be appointed by the governor or Supreme Court? No thanks, we’d have a bench full of the highest bidder without a doubt.
Read the rest of my post.
But to further answer your question—I don’t think there is a perfect solution. However, there needs to be some type of vetting process in place for judges. The voting public typically is not going to know enough about any particular candidate’s legal acumen.
Currently, the only qualification criteria for judicial candidates is that they have to live in the district in which they are running and must have practiced law for 8 years (10 years for the courts of appeal and the Supreme Court). So if you meet those bare minimum qualifications and can win a popularity contest, you can sit in judgment over legal cases regardless of your actual legal experience.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 6:02 am to RunninReb
quote:
the 19th JDC is a complete dumpster fire
Over 3.5 years ago, my older, evil, and manipulative sister changed my mom’s will and power of attorney to allow her to become sole recipient and “provider” after her dementia diagnosis.
In that time, my mother has been living by herself (she now has late stage dementia), locked herself out of the house, broken glass windows, and finally was committed to a behavioral health center after I called the police and she could not orient herself. She finally has 24/7 care, although she recently was recommitted to a behavioral health hospital due to violent encounters with her caregivers. My mother has been basically regulated to die inside her home as she gets nothing but frozen dinners, processed foods, and has zero socialization or interactions with anyone when she used to be a social butterfly.
I have been the 19th JDC this entire time, and when I say it is an absolute joke of a”justice” I speak from experience. Nothing, and I mean, nothing has been done in terms of an interdiction. There are multiple Elderly Protective Service cases filed against my sister, including fraud, and when I say EPS provides no updates, I mean it. The whole system is flawed and broken.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 6:08 am to brewhan davey
quote:
I loathe that we elect judges in this state, but if we're going to stick with that process for our judiciary, we should at least expand the elections so that they aren't limited to a candidate's particular district. This is especially true for supreme court justices; they make decisions that impact the law in the entire state, yet only those who reside in a candidate's district can vote for that justice. Also, if we are going to stick with judicial elections, we must change the current law that exempts judges from recall (judges are the only elected officials in the state who are statutorily exempt from recall).
Bring back at large voting. Get rid of all minority sub districts in judicial districts.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 6:48 am to Demshoes
You should see urban courts in Texas. To be fair, Texas is doing something about it. The state has created business courts to take high dollar commercial cases from these judges and the legislature is looking at a massive pay hike to attract better candidates.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 6:49 am to Stexas
quote:
Highest bidder
Would be a massive improvement for Louisiana
Posted on 4/24/25 at 9:32 am to Godfather1
How much of her term is left? Hopefully, she won't be re-elected. This is truly terrible.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 9:38 am to Gris Gris
the elected term for state civil districts is six years. She was elected in Dec 2020. Next election will be Dec 2026
she will be re-elected in a landslide LOL
she will be re-elected in a landslide LOL
Posted on 4/24/25 at 9:40 am to Godfather1
She is a great example of the moron electorate.
Posted on 4/24/25 at 9:45 am to udtiger
quote:
was 4-3 and it was a consent discipline.
McCallum's dissent laid it out perfectly. She got a 9 month paid vacation plus a $15k bonus
Yep.. This is straight bullshite.
She should have never have been paid and she should lose her job
Posted on 4/24/25 at 9:48 am to Tarps99
quote:
Bring back at large voting. Get rid of all minority sub districts in judicial districts.
Amen. Even district court judges make rulings that can affect the entire state. It is totally ridiculous why judicial elections are run like legislative elections. Judges don't "represent" the people of their districts; their duty is to interpret the law in an impartial manner.
Popular
Back to top



1











