Remember how I said that the Howard v. White case would only get better if it were to be broadcast on Judge Judy? I guess someone else thought it would make good tv as well…Defendant Knox White over at Stop, Drop and Roll disclosed that he received a letter from one of those daytime court shows offering to arbitrate the show on the air! Sweet! This has now moved from the realm of the absurd to the ridiculous.
So, the show that is offering is not Judge Judy, but rather Judge Alex (who is Floridian, not Texan) and according to the opening sequence on his show a former cop, prosecuter and criminal judge…although I can’t seem to find reference to his prosecutor status on his bio online. Judge Alex is a lot nicer than say, a Judge Judy. I personally think that Defendant Knox White should take them up on their offer (free trip to sunny Houston!), let’s all try to pressure him into doing it. I personally would love to see this on any of the court show, the only one that I would have absolutely said, you shouldn’t do it would be Judge Mathis (”Justice that Makes a Difference”), because sometimes I think that Judge Mathis is too quick to “judge” before he even begins listening. Psst…John….Texas Justice is another court show abitrated over by Judge Larry Joe. Judge Larry Joe brings “Texas Justice” to the airwaves, I can’t precisely remember Judge Alex’s tagline, I think it is something about “Real Life Justice” or something like that.
Now that this has piqued the interest of a nationally syndicated television show, I imagine that the courtroom will be full when this comes before Commissioner Rasch (April 18, 2007, 8:45 a.m.). Maybe it will just be reporters from the local media (et tu Don Roberts?) and family and friends, but it is going to be quite a show, even if it’s not being aired in front of x million viewers. Will you be there?
Today’s post brought to you in part by parentheses, because sometimes you just like to enclose phrases in them.
Here’s a random question since the court is NOT in California — what sort of law/blog standard would be applied? State? Federal?
I know there’s a standard held by the California Supreme court on blog issues, but would the law in California be applied or the Texan/wherever-else-this-is-filmed would be?
(It’s been a WHILE since I’ve watched “real life” court drama TV.)
That said, I gotta say, Lauren — I disagree with you here even if it would make for amusing TV.
The matter should be discussed, solved, and ruled on locally.
But that’s just me.
Comment by Dave S. — March 23, 2007 @ 8:44 am
I’ve never heard of Judge Alex, but I am the defendant in a comically absurd small claims case in Alameda. I actually thought for a moment of calling the show’s rep to see if they were interested, but I’ve been to Houston. Let’s just say a free trip there is NO incentive for anything….
Comment by dave — March 23, 2007 @ 8:49 am
And absurd though the Howard/White case seems, it is an important free speech issue. It should be heard in a real court, though venue shouldn’t matter. Free speech is the same in TX as here (at least it oughtta be).
Comment by dave — March 23, 2007 @ 8:54 am
Dave S.
You can be pretty good at putting tongue in cheek, I kinda thought Lauren was playing with the sideshow aspect of the case and wasn’t serious about the free trip to lovely Houston (under Gov. Bush, worst air in the nation, or was that Dallas?).
Dave is right that the apparent absurdity doesn’t trump the importance of the free speech aspect. Somebody ought to SLAPP some sense into Howard.
Comment by Mark — March 23, 2007 @ 9:05 am
It’s a free speech issue because each side has a case — yes even Howard, this blog’s 2nd or 3rd favorite punching bag.
White’s case is pretty obvious, and if I were to bet, I’d probably bet on him to win.
But Howard’s case is legit. With blogging growing to be major media, it’s well beyond the chat room phase. This particular blog can fairly claim status on par with the local newspapers. Would it be kosher to write what JKW did on the front page or editorial page, of the local rags? Not so sure.
This cae DOES resemble a playground pissing contest at first look, but look deeper. It is a real issue and does need some case law about it.
Comment by dave — March 23, 2007 @ 9:33 am
One of my friends was hired to do costume design on Judge Joe Brown…and he was told he would have to shop at thrift stores and local K-Marts (in order to make them as much trailer trashy as possible)…I just thought I would add a little humor to a ridiculous case (as anyone who was around when Howard was pushing his opinions around).
Second point, with Howard as a big part of Action Alameda….how do they expect to get any credibility.
Comment by Joel — March 24, 2007 @ 2:06 pm
Dave,
I think of this blog as a running series of editorials, with a good deal of factual journalistic content much of the time, as opposed to pure opinion sharing.
The comments are like people sitting in a cafe having philosophical debates, or an accelerated and extended series of letters to the editor exchanges.
I have had a couple letters which didn’t get printed, without explanation, I think do to statements which verged on libel, like calling somebody racist. You’ll notice that there are letters printed in which people are characterized as racist, so it must depend on how one puts one’s point across, as well as the point itself. And then there is the ever important context. In Howard v. White I think context is where we will really see the floor mopped with Mr. Howard.
So, in terms of the front page of most newspapers, I can’t compare this blog. There was a recent Frontline segment on KQED about cyber-journalism which I watched fleetingly as I flipped back and forth to a Planning Board meeting. It discussed the role of blogging, and the internet in modern media. I hope to try to track it down and watch it again and recommend it (very current).
Comment by Mark — March 26, 2007 @ 8:18 am