Do laywers and judges ever have picnics?
928230
yes! they share a cup of tea also, and have biscuits, sandwiches, among other stuff.
213039
You can't remove a seated judge unless you can prove something so scandelous that the public outcry forces a recall.  This is fairly rare.
668730
No, but I had one filed on me, along with a Psyd, my supervisor and the state.  Never went to trial!\n\nI sat on a jury in a civil case.
3655
As the above answerers indicate, judges and lawyers are called to jury duty, but they rarely end up on a jury since the lawyers in the case generally don't want an "expert" on the jury (same reason why physicians rarely end up on juries in malpractice cases).  A recent example of a judge being called for jury duty is US Supreme Court Justice Stephen Breyer (see Source #1).\n\nYet lawyers and judges sometimes DO end up on juries.  One recent example is Nassau County, NY District Judge William J. O'Brien, who served on a jury hearing a medical malpractice case. The plaintiff's lawyer thought the judge would possibly be "a little more savvy to defense tricks," while the defense attorney said for a medical malpractice case, he wanted "jurors who are intelligent and analytical" (See Source #2).\n\nAs you can see, it is not unheard of to have lawyers or judges sit on a jury, but it is certainly rare.  Hope this helps :-)
927230
I wouldn't really on a caterer that was late to our meeting, and had no time to talk, to cater my most important event.  If the caterer is not organized and professional enough to arrange a simple tasting, I don't think he could be counted on for a full wedding party.\n\nBesides, instant potatoes.... blah!!!
674738
usually plea bargains takes place between a D and the defense attorney n the judge's role is different, so i am pretty sure its a no!!
635763
Casual. People lay in the grass in places like a picnic. Enjoy!!!! It's great!!
940060
No\n\nThey Cannot Serve On A Jury Either
154417
Considering that judges are either elected or appointed by elected officials, I do not see how, even if they were all recalled, they could possibly all be replaced by judges who think the "right" way;  since people in states, counties, districts, etc., all over the US, have different criteria in voting for one person or another.  In order for the wishes of those who attended this rally/meeting to be observed in the appointing of judges, democracy would have to be abolished, and a totalitarian state set up in its place.\n\nSince I am against totalitarian states, I would have to say no, all US judges should not be recalled.
395829
The judge can get tired of you. It's commonly done with children.  Some famous people have been married over a dozen times (some because their husbands/wives died).
768985
Cannibalism cases, discussed in first year classes at law school, are designed primarily to test your powers of legal analysis. There is no right or wrong answer - the questions are designed to get you to think about each of the possible arguments for and against either side, and choose the ones you think are best - then make them.
450036
MOST "open container laws are on the books as a tool for law enforecment to use if they feel that someone is going to be a "problem" I don't know what part of Chicago you are in, but i would go ahead with it, if an officer does come up to you just appologie, explain you were trying to have a romantic picnic. Most of the time they will let it slde, worst case they may confiscate the wine, but it is unlikely if you're have a quiet picnic that they will hassle you.
510515
Yes, but only on Tuesdays and Thursdays. And you have to put ketchup on it first.\n\nJersey
810998
NO! Are you kidding? A judge cannot be running around in fear that his decisions might be the basis for a criminal charge.  Who would ever be a judge then?\nJudges are required to make decisions based upon the evidence that comes before them, the law, and their wisdom and common sense.  That's why they're judges.   There are times when judges can be prosecuted -- if they take bribes or commit other criminal acts, for example.  But what you're asking is, essentially, to charge judges with crimes if they make rulings that are (eventually) determined to be incorrect that would have let in exculpatory evidence.  Then, in fear of their own lives or freedom, every judge would let in every piece of evidence proffered by a defense attorney, and capital cases would become absolute circuses.\n\nThe reason we have judicial gatekeepers to determine relevance and other rules of evidence is to ensure that the jurors hear only proper evidence--that their minds aren't tainted by prejudicial evidence, unreliable evidence, or red herring evidence introduced solely to confuse or inflame the jurors.  If you're so concerned about that, then you should allow BOTH sides to introduce whatever evidence they want.  That could include information about the defendant's predilections, his character, some other acts, unreliable hearsay evidence, junk science, and gruesome details about the death that would just enrage the jurors to convict.
1143294
Yes.\nThey cut the food and then change hands with the fork to get it in their mouths.
995138
A court trial which is tried to a judge instead of a jury (assuming that is what you are asking) can be any length, depending on the crime and the issues involved.\n\nThey usually take less time than a jury since judges tend to know more about the law and generally are fair and impartial in their rulings, so the games that are played for jurors sake don't happen as much.\n\nIf it goes all day, courts will usually take a break every two hours or so (maybe a little longer) for the court staff to have a well deserved break.  Jury trials take the breaks more often in a day since part of the idea is to not lose them and keep them awake.  Including lunch breaks, I'd say at least 3, maybe four.
220116
Although rare, the jury can pose questions. However, the questions have to be addressed to the judge. The judge will ask the appropriate person.