(no subject)

Date: 2005-01-05 05:52 am (UTC)
I didn't think it looked all that bad. Sort of that whole Usenet-y style of combative rhetoric that most of us wouldn't do if our co-discussor were in the room with us.

To attack your basic question (as I, too, am a Rochestarian), Judge O'Connor is not a kook, just someone who has to face this problem of people using the safety net like a trampoline in an atmosphere of shrinking federal, state, and county support for foster care. I get the impression that she was just tired of suffering in silence on what she felt to be an important but underreported crisis. I think she understands that she is not finishing a conversation but only starting it, and that appeals courts and the legislature will do what they get paid to do.

I'm also not 100% clear that she can't enforce the ruling. We could probably track down the ruling itself instead of trusting the digested report, but one might assume that if the defendant had been found guilty of all of the various charges of being a negligent crack-whore mommy, the judge could sentence her to prison for the rest of her childbearing years and then suspend that sentence on the terms that she meet qualifications A through J.
This account has disabled anonymous posting.
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
HTML doesn't work in the subject.
More info about formatting

November 2018

S M T W T F S
     123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930 

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags