Keep Politics Out of the Courtroom
Recently a group of 18 state legislators wrote Judge Philip Scarpellino urging him to take tough action against a 24-year old New Haven man alleged to have stabbed a young pit bull mix 29 times.
Alexander P. Bernard was charged with one count of misdemeanor animal cruelty, which is punishable with up to a year in jail, rather than a more serious felony animal cruelty charge, which could have rendered punishment of up to five years in prison and a $5,000 fine.
According to published reports the legislators’ letter emphasized the link between animal cruelty and violence against people, and urged the judge not to go easy on the defendant by nolling the charge or granting Accelerated Rehabilitation (AR).
The letter by the legislators states that “It is time we took animal cruelty seriously and approach it as an opportunity to interrupt the cycle of violence,” and “[T]he sheer violence of his attack is enormously worrisome and the fact that the court doesn’t appear to take what he did seriously is also distressing.”
Judge Scarpellino continued the case and said the letter could be viewed as “intimidation” towards him and
that he was “upset” by the letter but not influenced by it.
Animal cruelty is a terrible crime. As a pet lover and owner as well as an attorney that donates legal services to a local animal group I am 100% behind the spirit and intent of the letter.
However, as an officer of the court and attorney at law that fights for my clients in a courtroom I feel strongly that this letter by group of legislators to a Superior Court Judge is improper and sets a bad precedent.
State judges are selected, in part, by the state legislature. A judge receiving such a letter while a case is pending is being improperly influenced or at least the appearance of improper influence is present. While I do not have any sympathy for the accused he is entitled to due process and freedom from interference from the legislative (or executive) branch of government.
The state legislators, some who are attorneys, can “judge the judge” when he is up for re-appointment looking at the body of his work, including how he handles animal cruelty cases. They know that. The judge knows that.
Additionally, the legislators can pass tougher laws for animal cruelty or eliminate that crime from eligibility for AR if they feel so strongly about it. However, their letter as a group attempting to influence a judge during a pending case was improper.
We have plenty of politics in society already; let’s try to leave them out of the courtroom.
James R. Miron, Esq.
Jim Miron is the former mayor of Stratford, Connecticut and is currently an attorney at Trantolo & Trantolo, LLC in their Waterbury office
Steve Alexander
The defendant’s name in this case is Alexander P. Bernard, not Andrew Bernard and I am following this case as a journalist for Examiner.com, and I link one article here. Judge Scarpellino’s tyrade from the bench on July 22nd was something I’d never imagined seeing from any Superior Court ‘Judge’ and is evidence enough that he has no moral standards to ‘judge’ anyone’s actions or interpret law. Period. I have further information on the case, have spoken with the States’ Attorney’s office, attempted to acquire the rights to tape Bernard’s next appearance and am eager and willing to share any and all notes and information I have with you or any member of the media or anyone at all. I totally agree with the piece you’ve penned here, just offer the clarification regarding the defendant’s name, however, for your edification. Great blog, btw, and great tenure as mayor as well, and certainly a highly successful employer at present in Trantolo and Trantolo.
Posted 7-31-2011
Jim Miron
Appreicate the correction and the kind comments, Steve.
Check out my blog: http://www.JimMironBlog.com
Posted 7-31-2011