Judge Newman has threatened to have staff arrested, forcibly removed from the building, and fired. She accused staff of trickery, deceit, acting as her adversary, stealing her computer, stealing her files, and depriving her of secretarial support. Staff have described Judge Newman in their interactions with her as “aggressive, angry, combative, and intimidating”; “bizarre and unnecessarily hostile”; making “personal accusations”; “agitated, belligerent, and demonstratively angry”; and “ranting, rambling, and paranoid.” Indeed, interactions with Judge Newman have become so dysfunctional that the Clerk of the Court has advised staff to avoid interacting with her in person or, when they must, to bring a co-worker with them.

  • givesomefucks@lemmy.worldOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    124
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    This didn’t happen overnight, if it’s this bad now then her judgement has been compromised for a long time.

    We need term limits, because once these (completely normal) mental changes start happening, the person will almost always react with aggression and refuse to ever step down.

    • foggy@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      65
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      We have a thing called senior citizenry.

      It’s an age at which we decided old folks can start skimming funds off the top to make ends meet, because they are otherwise unable

      It is absolutely unconscionable to be collecting social security while simultaneously holding office.

      No one over the age of 65 should be allowed to hold any office. Ever.

      • toasteecup@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        I don’t think age needs to be the limiting factor. I’ve met plenty of 70+ year olds who are mentally capable of performing any job. My grandfather is in his 80’s and he’s a kick ass doctor.

        I strongly feel that it needs to be test and check up based. Something impartial treated with an air of dignity so that people are raised respecting that it’s perfectly alright to not pass it. That should help avoid stigma while ensuring people like that judge are a non-issue if not nearly a non-issue.

        • GreenMario@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t want an 80 year old as a doctor. My luck he’d be hit with Mega Alzheimer’s right in the operating room and rearrange my insides to look like a Christmas tree because he thought he was 25 again and decorating one with his first born son again.

          • toasteecup@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            10
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Given I just stated my grandfather is a doctor, who is not suffering from Alzheimer’s I can’t help but feel insulted by your comment.

            I can understand being concerned by the Elderly however given that age does not ensure someone will develop Alzheimer’s, I find your comment rude and offensive. I hope you’ll consider using some tact in expressing your concerns in the future.

            • GreenMario@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              10
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Lemme reword it a bit to be more respectful:

              I do not think anyone age 80 should have to work for a living. He should be chilling in an RV or something fishing or whatever he likes doing. Savvy?

            • XbSuper@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              I think they raise a perfectly reasonable point, despite your feelings.

              While it may not seem likely to occurr, I would also not allow an 80 year old doctor to care for me for very similar reasons.

              • KevonLooney@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                1 year ago

                Also because they learned medicine in the 60s. Would you trust your life to something built in the 60s if you had a choice?

      • ClockworkOtter@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        It should be easier to whistle blow if someone thinks a worker is losing capacity to do their job, but having an arbitrary age at which you’re no longer allowed to work in office doesn’t serve its purpose. Some people can have dementia starting in their 50s, and other people in their 70s are excellent in higher level positions due to how much experience they’ve amassed.

        If anything, there should just be better peer performance reviews across the board.

        • foggy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          So we shouldn’t give social security to people unless they have dementia?

          We already have an arbitrary age set. We should stick to it.

          I’m still game for removing someone earlier than that if they are unfit. But after 65? You’re not fit. Even if you “are.” You’re too far removed from the policies you’d be enacting. It’s just nonsense.

          • ClockworkOtter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            I think that’s a disservice to people who have intimate knowledge of how a service has developed over time, and common problems with change that younger people may not have experienced.

            I’m not saying that people should all be forced or unduly enabled to carry on working well into their seniority, but we’d be missing the opportunity to utilise skills and experience by enforcing a hard limit - certainly as young as 65!

  • dethb0y@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    63
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    We need a mandatory retirement age for federal appointees, fucking immediately.

  • Anonymousllama@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    46
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Imagine you go to court and this fossil at 96 is the one who determines your fate. Imagine if you catch her on an off day and she thinks you stole her computer, her files or other nonsense she’s accused court staff of doing (the only thing that’s been stolen is her marbles, and it looks like they went a few years back)

    Get these shocking people out of the courts and into the nursing home where they belong

  • UsernameIsTooLon@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    44
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Why do these old people constantly feel the need to work? I’m trying to retire the moment I can and enjoy the rest of my life.

    • KiloGex@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      26
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Power. The moment they retire they give up the ability to control people’s lives.

    • PoliticalAgitator@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      You ever heard the phrase “do what you love and you’ll never work a day in your life”?

      Well some people love being abusive pieces of shit.

    • Smoogs@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Then create a culture that isn’t reliant on working to make money just for basic necessities.

      It should be possible considering we have some money hoarders hoarding enough that we shouldn’t have people going hungry and enough houses that people shouldn’t be homeless.

      Yet we do.

      Tax the rich.

    • Vodik_VDK@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Part of it is because you still need a gig to keep the retirement funds rolling. You don’t want to live it out on pea soup and bread.

      Part of it is because after a certain point every bit of your body, from your bones to your brains, is only available on a Use It or Lose It basis with no warranty for service blackouts.

      And part of it is because, and l guess this is due to the collapse of the extended-family model, lots of people don’t have anyone or thing to go home to; they’re divorced or widowed, kids have moved out, and their social network has literally died out.

      Towards the end of his life my father only had ONE surviving peer from grade school. Imagine how it is to call your only surviving friend on a regular basis and to wonder, each time, if today’s the day you learn you’ve already heard their voice for the last time.

      • Smoogs@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Yup. A lot of people here don’t get that when you retire the funds are finite. And you could still live another 20 yrs, even up to 35 more years but completely alone and with no income. If you have someone telling you to quit as you round up to 65 when you have another good 20 yrs of cognizance to pull income, you won’t go quietly.

        And you shouldn’t.

        Retirement right now is still expecting you’re going to pay your way or live worse than prison conditions. Even worse if you’re a person with disabilities or early onset issues, diabetes along with other things from a lifestyle habit of consumerism pushed on all of us by capitalists that don’t give a shit what happens to you down the line.

        it’s not to say someone shouldn’t retire eventually when they can no longer work. It’s to say that assuming you’re as incompetent at 60 as if you’re 96 is just plain refusal to recognize the human condition and it’s ageism. The article is about a 96 yr old. That’s past 30 yrs retirement age. It’s only in her recent years this is happening so the fact she made it to 90 cognizant is actually very impressive either way. So just saying yeah, she should retire now. But blaming her for not retiring at 65 when she’s 30+ past that age is a misnomer argument at this stage. If anything we should all be so lucky to make it past 70 with our cognitive abilities with the current American diet slowly killing our organ function.

  • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    10
    ·
    1 year ago

    How many people have been wrongly convicted or harshly sentenced because of this woman’s dementia?

  • Poppa_Mo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Should just make the retirement age for these people 65. Everyone. Senators. Presidents. Want to get a job in an advisory role after that? Cool, at least then we have a filter for the madness and your dementia can’t fuck anyone over directly.

  • GenXcisguy@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    Is the occupation of judge so badly compensated, that you can’t retire? What the fuck is wrong with this lady?

  • OldQWERTYbastard@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Technology is allowing us to live “longer,” but not necessarily “better.”

    We shouldn’t be ruled by geriatrics. Age limits need to be a thing.

  • Moyer1666@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    There needs to be an age limit for these positions. Sounds like she should have retired 25 years ago.

  • Omega_Haxors@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    23
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    1 year ago

    People don’t realize that Judge Judy isn’t even a caricature. It is shockingly easy to just up and up become a judge.

  • Pistcow@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    1 year ago

    Sounds like dementia. My father in law has dementia and all of a sudden started accusing me of stealing his $5 sunglasses and being super aggressive at my mother in laws birthday party. Shit sucks when it progresses to this stage and someone in charge of people’s lives should definitely call it a day.

  • uis@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    You don’t need to be 96 years old to become a Putin and invade a Ukraine

  • 【J】【u】【s】【t】【Z】@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    I don’t get the outrage.

    This is law. It takes ten years of practice just to really scratch the surface in one small area of law. Arbitrary compulsive retirements (such freedom) serve only to cause brain and experience drain that cannot be easily made up.

    Add to that, most people retire when they should all on their own. Maybe sometimes they need a little push from colleagues. Very rarely does it rise to the level of publis inquest and a forced competency exam.

    This time it seems it did, and look! It’s happening. What’s the real problem? Why is throwing the baby out with the bath water seen as a legit solution?

    I prefer government officials, and especially judges and senators, to have real experience. Most elders are not senile old coots, especially not those who spent their lifetime in a career that by nature is as daily taxing on memory and recall as is the law. Some say the law is a study and a practice in memory. The best trial lawyers usually have the best memory. Add to that the extensive amount of reading and writing trial attorneys and judges do. It’s not like this judge has been clocking out from a show-up job every day at 5 pm and then doom scrolling or binging Netflix.

    I would say of the judges I’ve been before including some elderly federal judges in a senior or retired judge, or magistrate sort of role, have been some of the most knowledgeable, most efficient judges I’ve argued to, especially at the appellate level, where all they do (in theory) is jurisprudence, logical and policy reasoning, and interpretation, the most mentally demanding sort of law practice.

    • Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      She’s 96 and has paranoid persecutory delusions. Supporting her role as a judge is a bizarre take on your part

          • slipperydippery@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            He literally says:

            Very rarely does it rise to the level of publis inquest and a forced competency exam.

            This time it seems it did, and look! It’s happening. What’s the real problem? Why is throwing the baby out with the bath water seen as a legit solution?

            He states that it went wrong this time and that the system in place is correcting the problem. How is that in support of the judge?

            • Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              The rest of his comment is in support of no age limit for judges. He states in no uncertain terms that the older the judge, the better. His thinking is the cause for a slew of arguably poor decisions made from out of touch geriatric people who overwhelmingly rule over this country.

              I’m in support of age limits for people who can directly and insurmountably affect my life. He is not. Therein lies the rub.

                • Nurse_Robot@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  I prefer government officials, and especially judges and senators, to have real experience. Most elders are not senile old coots, especially not those who spent their lifetime in a career that by nature is as daily taxing on memory and recall as is the law.

                  I would say of the judges I’ve been before including some elderly federal judges in a senior or retired judge…

                  Using context clues, I think it’s fair to say I’m not the one being obtuse with my interpretation of OPs comment. Also, there’s a typo in your quote of me.