Judge sentences man to 6 months in jail for yawning

[johnrocks]

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-jailed-for-yawning-10-aug10,0,3679452.story
Clifton Williams arrived at the Will County Courthouse in Joliet and sat in the fourth-floor courtroom where his cousin was pleading guilty to a felony drug charge.

As Circuit Judge Daniel Rozak handed down the cousin's sentence -- 2 years' probation -- Williams, 33, stretched and let out a very ill-timed yawn.

Williams' sentence? Six months in jail -- the maximum penalty for criminal contempt without a jury trial. The Richton Park man was locked up July 23 and will serve at least 21 days.

"I was flabbergasted because I didn't realize a judge could do that," said Williams' father, Clifton Williams Sr. "It seems to me like a yawn is an involuntary action."

Chuck Pelkie, a spokesman for the state's attorney's office, said the prosecutor in the courtroom that day told him that "it was not a simple yawn -- it was a loud and boisterous attempt to disrupt the proceedings."

Jason Mayfield, the cousin of Williams who was pleading guilty at the time, said it was "not an outrageous yawn."

A Tribune review of a decade's worth of contempt-of-court charges reveals that Rozak jails people -- typically spectators whose cell phones go off or who scream or shout profanity during sentencing -- at a far higher rate than any other judge in the county. There are now 30 judges in the 12th Judicial Circuit, but since 1999, Rozak has brought more than a third of all the contempt charges, records show.

And while it is not uncommon for judges to jail people for ignoring subpoenas or court orders or appearing in court drunk or under the influence of drugs, Rozak's charges tend to involve behavior that would not otherwise be criminal.
Good night! 125281

[ThrowCop]

I bet the judge has a pretty well-behaved courtroom after this incident. :lol:

[Dual867PowerMac]

I bet the judge has a pretty well-behaved courtroom after this incident. :lol:
I don't see this not being overturned.

Of course, in this messed up and deteriorating nation, I would not be shocked if the guy was forced to serve the entire sentence.

[ThrowCop]

I don't see this not being overturned.

Of course, in this messed up and deteriorating nation, I would not be shocked if the guy was forced to serve the entire sentence.Yeah, one yawn is not cause for this.

Repeated interruptions, sure - give him some time to think about his lack of respect.

[Ninjacorpse]

Power trip lol

[DLaw911]

I don't see this not being overturned.

Of course, in this messed up and deteriorating nation, I would not be shocked if the guy was forced to serve the entire sentence.It's not going to be overturned. The judge had to make a factual finding that the act was intentionally disruptive. The "record" is the judge's description of what happened. A factual finding cannot be overturned on appeal unless it is contrary to law.

By the way I know a federal judge who gave a man 90 days for farting. And while I did not see it, the judge's clerk described it this way --- the defendant was sentenced, he turned his back to the judge, bent over and let off the loudest and longest fart humanly possible. The judge put all of this on the record and, as far as I know, it was never appealed.

[DLaw911]

Yeah, one yawn is not cause for this.

Repeated interruptions, sure - give him some time to think about his lack of respect.A yawn can be intentional or unintentional. If a person comes to court half asleep and lets loose with a quiet yawn, rather than an recreation of a the yawn at first awakening at dawn, there could never be a violation. But stretching the arms out and being intentionally disruptive, which appears to be the case here, is MORE than sufficient grounds for contempt. Now the fact that SOME judges might ignore it, or simply eject the "yawner" does not diminish the contempt power of less patient judges.

I'm confident there is more to this story than reported.

[King Cantona]

Well 16 years ago I had an accident that results in my involuntary yawning, in college one of the things I made a point of telling my teacher was "I may yawn, this is an involuntary action and does not mean I am bored"...

Better keep out of that courthouse then.........:))..........

[johnrocks]

6 months just seems excessive to me,especially if it was his first run in with the law,considering this judge has given more of these type sentences than anyone in the country and he gave a woman only 7 days for cursing and shouting. I could see a few days but 6 months,at taxpayer expense for yawning! Plus the guy may have lost a job because of this,who knows.

[Pudge]

This judge should be thrown off the bench for this gross abuse of power. The only exception I'd make is if the yawn was intended to disrupt the proceedings, and even then, six months?

Abuse of power.

[DLaw911]

This judge should be thrown off the bench for this gross abuse of power. The only exception I'd make is if the yawn was intended to disrupt the proceedings, and even then, six months?

Abuse of power.The judge did it because he can.

Besides, as I said, I'm sure there is more to this story. If I had the time I would call the prosecutor and find out.

[Sinister Rouge]

Yawning is a dangerous activity. One guy does it, and then the whole courtroom needs to yawn.

[gdoane]

From the accounts I've read, the "yawner" was the brother of the convicted man being sentenced and the "yawn" was purposely exaggerated, quite loud and showed disrespect towards the court of law.

This was no accidental yawn, but an attack on the court for sentencing his brother to jail. I think the guy deserved it.

[RogerDodger]

From the accounts I've read, the "yawner" was the brother of the convicted man being sentenced and the "yawn" was purposely exaggerated, quite loud and showed disrespect towards the court of law.

This was no accidental yawn, but an attack on the court for sentencing his brother to jail. I think the guy deserved it.

Even if this is correct, 6 months seems excessive. I wouldn't have a problem with a day or two, but 6 moths for an "exaggerated" yawn shouldn't happen.

[gb2004]

He won't serve the whole six months.

[smyrna]

Maybe he'll catch up on his sleep.:mrgreen:

[gdoane]

Even if this is correct, 6 months seems excessive. I wouldn't have a problem with a day or two, but 6 moths for an "exaggerated" yawn shouldn't happen.

I think it's fairly common knowledge that only a tenth of sentences are actually served, especially for non-violent offenses. The Judge knows that giving a 180-day (six month) sentence won't result in more than 18 days (two weeks) of actual time served.

[RogerDodger]

I think it's fairly common knowledge that only a tenth of sentences are actually served, especially for non-violent offenses. The Judge knows that giving a 180-day (six month) sentence won't result in more than 18 days (two weeks) of actual time served.

That might be the practice in some jurisdictions, but I'm fairly certain it is not that way everywhere. I have no idea what the law is where this occurred.

[NascarGirl2448]

6 months for YAWNING??? Even if the guy did exaggerate, that sentence is excessive. I could see 24-48 hours, possibly, but 6 months? Come on! Paris Hilton got less time than that for a lot more criminal offense than a loud yawn would ever be!!!!!

[Kegler300]

He was intentionally being disruptive and disrespectful to the court. Now he can sit and yawn all day in a jail cell for six months. He's a turd and will most likely be back in front of a judge for some future offense.

[johnrocks]

See, I never got it,that I should have to do things like rise when a judge walks into the room even though I understand respect and civility, there was a woman that got 7 days for screaming and cursing this same judge and then he lays down 6 months! If the guy is a hoodlum with a rap sheet, I concede I can see more than 7 days but the judge wouldn't know that at time of yawn.

[CaughtInTheMiddle]

I wonder what a cough is going for these days?

[gdoane]

That might be the practice in some jurisdictions, but I'm fairly certain it is not that way everywhere. I have no idea what the law is where this occurred.

http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2009/08/13/20090813jailedforyawn13-ON.html

I was pretty well right. The slimeball didn't do any 180 days, he did a crummy three weeks, not even 20% of the sentence. That's common and standard practice which is why we need mandatory sentencing to take the ability to set people free out of the hands of these idiot judges.

Once a person is sentenced, they should have to do the ENTIRE SENTENCE, every last SECOND of it without exception or mercy. I don't care if they DIE in jail, they should still have to stay there until the sentence is carried out in full.

[DLaw911]

http://www.azcentral.com/offbeat/articles/2009/08/13/20090813jailedforyawn13-ON.html

I was pretty well right. The slimeball didn't do any 180 days, he did a crummy three weeks, not even 20% of the sentence. That's common and standard practice which is why we need mandatory sentencing to take the ability to set people free out of the hands of these idiot judges.

Once a person is sentenced, they should have to do the ENTIRE SENTENCE, every last SECOND of it without exception or mercy. I don't care if they DIE in jail, they should still have to stay there until the sentence is carried out in full.The law provides for good time/work time for a reason. The legislative intent is that they get time off for good behavior. That is written into the law of all states. The only exception is life without parole.

Now, that being said, come on out to Los Angeles County someday. Want to know how much a one year jail sentence is? Here is the CURRENT state of the overcrowded Los Angeles County jail --

Women - sentence of 270 days or less = TIME SERVED. Anything more is served at 10%.

Men - sentence of 90 days or less = TIME SERVED. However, depeinding on the level of overcrowding, I have seen persons with a YEAR sentence get summarily released.

It has reached the point that I tell all my Los Angeles County clients about to serve jail time to convert their fines into jail since they will serve no more time.

EVEN WORSE is the time inmates now wait in Los Angeles County jail after sentencing awaiting transfer to prison. Because of no room in California prisons, some inmates take up to a year to get to prison and many justr serve out their prison time in county jail and get summarily released on parole.

Orange County is now feeling the heat. It prided itself on inmates serving their entire sentence (less good time/work time = about 70%). Well those days are over and judges are now endorsing electronic monitoring on misdmeanor offenses. Defendants often times never see the inside of a jail cell.

What you propose, Gene, costs money. And depending on the size and croded level of the jail it could invite the building of new facilities, the hiring of new jail personnel, etc. Then there are the security risks (as seen recently in the destruction of part of the Chino Men's prison) when you house different races together. The courts say you cannot have a blankete policy of segregation, therefore, these riots are predictable. So your solution, while not a bad idea, is going to cost states and counties mega-bucks, and will require the change in laws so that good time/work time is eliminated as a basis for early release.

NOW - All of the above being said some judges are thwarting the early release policy by (with the consent of the defendant) locking him up on "no bail" and bringing him back to be sentenced and released after a fixed numbver of days. For example, a judge might want a person to serve 90 days so he will set bail on the defendant at "no bail", remand him into custody and have him return to be released in 90 days. The Sheriff has protested this because he is under federal mandate to depopulate his jail. The presiding judge of the Superior Court has ordered his judges not to use this tactic but they ignore him. Yes it is perfectly legal. The downside is that when you lock up someone for 90, 180, 1 year on a misdmeanor charge, you are freeing felons at the other end due to overcrowding.

[gdoane]

The law provides for good time/work time for a reason. The legislative intent is that they get time off for good behavior. That is written into the law of all states. The only exception is life without parole.

Now, that being said, come on out to Los Angeles County someday. Want to know how much a one year jail sentence is? Here is the CURRENT state of the overcrowded Los Angeles County jail --

Women - sentence of 270 days or less = TIME SERVED. Anything more is served at 10%.

Men - sentence of 90 days or less = TIME SERVED. However, depeinding on the level of overcrowding, I have seen persons with a YEAR sentence get summarily released.

The only reason overcrowding is a problem is because stupid Judges say so. If 40 college students can fit into a Volkswagen then you can get 80 inmates in a prison cell no problem. I really couldn't care less about their miserable living conditions. If jail sucked more then maybe criminals wouldn't do the things that get them locked away.

It has reached the point that I tell all my Los Angeles County clients about to serve jail time to convert their fines into jail since they will serve no more time.

I'd never do that because jail time on one's record is leaps and bounds worse than a fine on record. A guy can still get a job with an offense that simply results in a fine. A guy with jail time is absolutely unemployable because no decent employer would touch a felon with a ten foot pole.

EVEN WORSE is the time inmates now wait in Los Angeles County jail after sentencing awaiting transfer to prison. Because of no room in California prisons, some inmates take up to a year to get to prison and many justr serve out their prison time in county jail and get summarily released on parole.

There's plenty of room in California prisons if the liberal judges would just stop being so concerned about the creature comforts for the inmates. My living conditions in the United States Navy would have been deemed unacceptable by a liberal California Judge. We had 60 men living 3 bunks high in a space no bigger than 200 square feet. If it's good enough for sailors, then it's MORE than good enough for felons.

Orange County is now feeling the heat. It prided itself on inmates serving their entire sentence (less good time/work time = about 70%). Well those days are over and judges are now endorsing electronic monitoring on misdmeanor offenses. Defendants often times never see the inside of a jail cell.

Combine electronic monitoring with automatic taser enforcement embedded in the device and I'd be okay with that. Crook steps out of line... ZAP!!

What you propose, Gene, costs money. And depending on the size and croded level of the jail it could invite the building of new facilities, the hiring of new jail personnel, etc. Then there are the security risks (as seen recently in the destruction of part of the Chino Men's prison) when you house different races together. The courts say you cannot have a blankete policy of segregation, therefore, these riots are predictable. So your solution, while not a bad idea, is going to cost states and counties mega-bucks, and will require the change in laws so that good time/work time is eliminated as a basis for early release.

It doesn't have to cost money if Judges are taken out of the loop on how, where and under what conditions these animals are housed. I never hear about overcrowding at the dog pound, after all. Mainly because Judges have no oversight of them, which is an ideal solution for jail overcrowding as well.


NOW - All of the above being said some judges are thwarting the early release policy by (with the consent of the defendant) locking him up on "no bail" and bringing him back to be sentenced and released after a fixed numbver of days. For example, a judge might want a person to serve 90 days so he will set bail on the defendant at "no bail", remand him into custody and have him return to be released in 90 days. The Sheriff has protested this because he is under federal mandate to depopulate his jail. The presiding judge of the Superior Court has ordered his judges not to use this tactic but they ignore him. Yes it is perfectly legal. The downside is that when you lock up someone for 90, 180, 1 year on a misdmeanor charge, you are freeing felons at the other end due to overcrowding.

Get the Feds out of the loop too. This human rights touchy-feely liberal garbage is what costs the big bucks. Start running the jails like a proper concentration camp and all the problems go away.

[DLaw911]

The only reason overcrowding is a problem is because stupid Judges say so. If 40 college students can fit into a Volkswagen then you can get 80 inmates in a prison cell no problem. I really couldn't care less about their miserable living conditions. If jail sucked more then maybe criminals wouldn't do the things that get them locked away.Gene, the jails are not only for "criminals." They are also for people ACCUSED of crimes, people who are PRESUMED by the law to be innocent. Many are charged with unbelievably minor offenses and are in cells with robbers, rapists and murderers. And let's be frank. The only reason that some of the guilty ones are there is that they were unlucky enough to get caught. Most "criminals" are walking the streets.

And then let's not forget the unknown percentage who were arrested for suspicion and would later be deemed to be factually innocent. In other words probable cause arrests in which the arrestee is later exonerated. Don't you have any feeling, any compassion for THEM being in the same 80 man cell where they are likely to get raped, hurt or killed?
I'd never do that because jail time on one's record is leaps and bounds worse than a fine on record. A guy can still get a job with an offense that simply results in a fine. A guy with jail time is absolutely unemployable because no decent employer would touch a felon with a ten foot pole.Actually there is hardly a case that does not have some jail time attached to it. When the person is arrested and is released OR or bails out, he has credit for the jail time served before release. And when he's sentenced he gets that credit. But I do agree with you. I had a client lose her massage license in your state due to having served jail time on a misdemeanor in which I was her attorney. I appeared at a licensing board hearing in Phoenix with a copy of her sentencing sheet which read: "24 months summary probation, fine of $150 credit $30 for one day in custody, obey all laws." The Board ruled that was "jail time" and under their regulations denied the license. Maybe it would have been better to waive the credit against the fine, but the AZ board really stretched the law to their favor. The appeal was lost as well.
There's plenty of room in California prisons if the liberal judges would just stop being so concerned about the creature comforts for the inmates. My living conditions in the United States Navy would have been deemed unacceptable by a liberal California Judge. We had 60 men living 3 bunks high in a space no bigger than 200 square feet. If it's good enough for sailors, then it's MORE than good enough for felons.CA and AZ have distinct differences in prison population problems. And the liberal judges you mention are federal appeals court justices. This has been a long standing lawsuit getting worse every year by no money for new prison and guards, yet more and more laws putting people away forever. There have to be provisions for separating inmates bent on killing each other. Are you familiar with "green lights", orders given a prison gang member to kill a specific member of another gang? If he does not carry out the order he is going to be killed by his own gang. Prison riots destroy property and cost millions. Inmates end up in hospitals being treated for major injuries and stabbings and guess who pays those bills. And for those who want child molesters in general pop that is not the way it works unless the prison/State is asking for a lawsuit they are going to lose.
Combine electronic monitoring with automatic taser enforcement embedded in the device and I'd be okay with that. Crook steps out of line... ZAP!!I would hope the person is not a sleepwalker!
It doesn't have to cost money if Judges are taken out of the loop on how, where and under what conditions these animals are housed. I never hear about overcrowding at the dog pound, after all. Mainly because Judges have no oversight of them, which is an ideal solution for jail overcrowding as well. There's no overcrowding at the dog pound because the unclaimed dogs are euthanized.
Get the Feds out of the loop too. This human rights touchy-feely liberal garbage is what costs the big bucks. Start running the jails like a proper concentration camp and all the problems go away.Gene, trust me. It would not solve anything.

[sgtmac_46]

It's not going to be overturned. The judge had to make a factual finding that the act was intentionally disruptive. The "record" is the judge's description of what happened. A factual finding cannot be overturned on appeal unless it is contrary to law.

By the way I know a federal judge who gave a man 90 days for farting. And while I did not see it, the judge's clerk described it this way --- the defendant was sentenced, he turned his back to the judge, bent over and let off the loudest and longest fart humanly possible. The judge put all of this on the record and, as far as I know, it was never appealed.

Exactly.......I seriously doubt this was 'just a yawn'.......this clowns was being a jackass and suffered for it.

Because of the unique nature of courtrooms, judges need wide latitude in controlling behavior within them.

[sgtmac_46]

I wonder what a cough is going for these days?

Make a big show of it to disrupt the court and it's likely going for 180 days.

[johnrocks]

I wonder what a cough is going for these days?

Cursing and screaming is seven days, a yawn is six months so it could be anything from a stern look to lethal injection I guess since the judge has such wide latitude.

[sgtmac_46]

Cursing and screaming is seven days, a yawn is six months so it could be anything from a stern look to lethal injection I guess since the judge has such wide latitude.

Probably should just save the shows of defiance for outside the courtroom and be on the safe side.

[johnrocks]

Probably should just save the shows of defiance for outside the courtroom and be on the safe side.

Like stated, I know nothing more about this case but the article states that he gives out more of these type sentences than any judge in the country yet only gave a screamer/curser 7 days, I'd like to know more and I'd like to know about this guy who got 6 months,his background.

[gdoane]

Gene, the jails are not only for "criminals." They are also for people ACCUSED of crimes, people who are PRESUMED by the law to be innocent.

I said PRISONER, and there's a big difference between Prison and Jail, at least in Arizona. Prison is for those convicted of felonies (crimes with sentences of a year or longer) and everyone in prison deserves to be there. There are no innocent prisoners, presumed or otherwise.

Many are charged with unbelievably minor offenses and are in cells with robbers, rapists and murderers. And let's be frank. The only reason that some of the guilty ones are there is that they were unlucky enough to get caught. Most "criminals" are walking the streets.

So, if they're walking the streets then I condemn the "innocent" to be with the rapists, robbers and killers and they suffer no worse company than I do on the street anyway.

And then let's not forget the unknown percentage who were arrested for suspicion and would later be deemed to be factually innocent. In other words probable cause arrests in which the arrestee is later exonerated. Don't you have any feeling, any compassion for THEM being in the same 80 man cell where they are likely to get raped, hurt or killed?

It takes acting pretty bad to get arrested. I see probably a dozen cops a day and not one has ever tried to arrest me. Cops only arrest people who act like jerks. Jerks deserve the misfortunes that come their way.

Actually there is hardly a case that does not have some jail time attached to it. When the person is arrested and is released OR or bails out, he has credit for the jail time served before release. And when he's sentenced he gets that credit.

I don't think they should get any credit for time served. Those found innocent don't get any credit for time served so why should some guilty bastard enjoy a benefit that an innocent man doesn't get?

If anything, they ought to have their time served TACKED ONTO their sentences for being jerks and fighting the charges instead of being honest and pleading guilty. There should be a punishment for lying to the court. Pleading innocent when you're guilty is an act of perjury.


But I do agree with you. I had a client lose her massage license in your state due to having served jail time on a misdemeanor in which I was her attorney. I appeared at a licensing board hearing in Phoenix with a copy of her sentencing sheet which read: "24 months summary probation, fine of $150 credit $30 for one day in custody, obey all laws." The Board ruled that was "jail time" and under their regulations denied the license. Maybe it would have been better to waive the credit against the fine, but the AZ board really stretched the law to their favor. The appeal was lost as well.

Jail time closes a lot of doors. I know you can't be a lawyer in Arizona with prison time on your record because the Arizona Bar won't license a convicted felon. Positions of trust (bank teller, armored car driver, day care work, etc.) are off limits to convicted felons. A felony is a life sentence. As the saying goes, you'll never work in this town again. With a 10% unemployment rate and felons at the back of the line, having a felony conviction can mean you starve to death, especially with welfare programs cutting off convicted felons too.



CA and AZ have distinct differences in prison population problems. And the liberal judges you mention are federal appeals court justices.

They're still California judges. I have NEVER agreed with any decision made by the Ninth Circus Court of Ape Eels. They get everything wrong, all the time every time which is why liberal lawyers flock to them like moths to a flame.

This has been a long standing lawsuit getting worse every year by no money for new prison and guards, yet more and more laws putting people away forever. There have to be provisions for separating inmates bent on killing each other.

Seems to me like the two problems would solve themselves if we'd just let them. Prison overcrowding wouldn't be much of an issue if the inmates were allowed to kill each other and we'd save lots of money.




Are you familiar with "green lights", orders given a prison gang member to kill a specific member of another gang? If he does not carry out the order he is going to be killed by his own gang.

Excuse me while I try to find an ounce of compassion for the fate of a poor gangbanger... looking... looking... dang. Fresh out. Gangbangers can go straight to Hell. The death of a gangster is not a moment for sorrow but rather for celebration.




Prison riots destroy property and cost millions. Inmates end up in hospitals being treated for major injuries and stabbings and guess who pays those bills.

So don't take them to hospitals. Inmates stabbed each other, so they should treat each other. They don't deserve a good hospital bed that might be better serving a law abiding citizen.


And for those who want child molesters in general pop that is not the way it works unless the prison/State is asking for a lawsuit they are going to lose.

Convicted felons should be barred from filing lawsuits for the same reasons they're barred from carrying guns. They abused the law so the law should be denied to them.

I would hope the person is not a sleepwalker!
There's no overcrowding at the dog pound because the unclaimed dogs are euthanized.
Gene, trust me. It would not solve anything.

There's nothing wrong with euthanizing prisoners. That's how it was done in the good old days. A tree and a rope goes a long way towards reducing recidivism rates.

[Pudge]

He was intentionally being disruptive and disrespectful to the court. Now he can sit and yawn all day in a jail cell for six months. He's a turd and will most likely be back in front of a judge for some future offense.

This sentence actually makes more people hold contempt for this judge. It's an overreaction, plain and simple. You don't use a nuclear bomb to kill a field mouse.

[gdoane]

This sentence actually makes more people hold contempt for this judge. It's an overreaction, plain and simple. You don't use a nuclear bomb to kill a field mouse.

This was no field mouse, it was an infestation. This yawning man was a RELATIVE of the punk getting sentenced at the time, his cousin. While the Judge was taking one of these vermin off of the street, he may as well take his vermin relative off the street too.

I have no doubt that crime runs in families and that there are good families and bad families. As with any rule, there are of course exceptions but the apples really never do fall far from the tree. Especially not the bad apples.

Clifton Williams (the yawner) was at the sentencing hearing for his cousin Jason Mayfield, who had struck a plea deal to a felony drug charge for 2 years of probation. The yawn showed contempt for the probation sentence, as if it weren't a real sentence.

I actually know a lot about probation and it's no light matter. One of the public safety dispatch agencies I maintain is all about probation and their setup is every bit as good as any 911 dispatch emergency center I work on. It's every bit as serious as a 911 PSAP (Public Safety Access Point) because those probation officers deal with known bad hombres. It's not like a cop who has a pretty good chance of dealing with a nice guy, because probation officers NEVER deal with nice guys. Every client is a bad guy with a rap sheet to prove it.

Like most people, I used to think that probation was nothing but a slap on the wrist but after a few ride-alongs to see how the communications systems were being used in the field and how to improve them, my perception of probation has been forever changed. Probation officers are some unsung heroes in my opinion and a sentence of probation is not a cakewalk slap on the wrist either.

[Dual867PowerMac]

this country is descending into a fascist hellhole. Things like this don't even happen in china. scary.
The first sentence I totally agree with.

But have you been to China? Here's a sample of life in the communist PRC paradise (http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2005/10/31/china-political-prisoner-exposes-brutality-police-run-mental-hospital).

[OldSchoolConservative]

If it was a deliberate yawn I can understand the six months although it is not taxpayor friendly. If it was an accidental yawn IMHO the judge should have gave a warning. I understand judges should be able to have maximum control over courtroom decorum but maybe the legislative branch needs to enact laws specifying what kind of contempt of court would carry the maximum sentence.

[DLaw911]

There's nothing wrong with euthanizing prisoners. That's how it was done in the good old days. A tree and a rope goes a long way towards reducing recidivism rates.hehehe
I can always count on a fun debate with you.

[DLaw911]

If it was a deliberate yawn I can understand the six months although it is not taxpayor friendly. If it was an accidental yawn IMHO the judge should have gave a warning. I understand judges should be able to have maximum control over courtroom decorum but maybe the legislative branch needs to enact laws specifying what kind of contempt of court would carry the maximum sentence.An unconscious act cannot be punished by contempt. Take for example an explosive vomit, sneeze or hiccup. A person can only be found in contempt for a volitional act.

[gdoane]

hehehe
I can always count on a fun debate with you.

The way I look at it, all sentences are death sentences in one way or another.

The cousin in this case, Jayson Mayfield, getting sentenced to two years of probation, would he be eligible to do your job? They wouldn't even let Bill Clinton be a lawyer after he got a rap sheet.

He definitely couldn't do your job, or my job either because I kind of have to pass background checks every now and again. A rap sheet would seriously impair my ability to get a clean bill of health and I'd probably wind up slinging burgers at some McJob if I had a nasty rap sheet.

What happened here to Jayson Mayfield is the end of the road. He's never going to work in this town or any town again. His cousin Clifton Williams (the yawner) pretty much assured that any employer who Googles our intrepid Mr. Mayfield as a preliminary check is going to come up with this story and say "OH HELL NO!"

We live today in a time and place where reputations mean something again. I kind of freaked myself out when I was given a name and state of a cousin by a retired old gentleman to whom I was showing off what my laptop could do. With an aircard and a quick internet search, I had his cousin's address and phone number and had the lady on my cell inside of ten minutes flat.

They were thrilled. I was scared. If I can do that, it means everything we do is a matter of record in the digital age and there's no hiding from the Internet. So your reputation, once trashed, is pretty much gone for good. A death sentence for a dead man walking.

I don't envy Mr. Jayson Mayfield. He's got a rap sheet on Google now. He's dead meat on any serious employment circuit.

There's more than one kind of death penalty. Death by Google is real. A bad reputation matters again.

[Pudge]

I don't know, Gene, a guy who got a six-month sentence for a yawn might get sympathy from many who think that this judge overreacted. Cuts both ways. People in power who abuse that power create sympathetic victims of that abuse. Had the judge merely fined him for contempt we never would have heard about it.