The one game is basically an "our bad" by the league as it was their fault that he wasn't caught until they saw it on the news after the game. Even if Brash had been properly removed, had Colton Orr been playing you can be sure Brash wouldn't have just gone after any Ranger jersey and instead gone looking to get retribution against the guy who has handed him his lunch before. Or, more likely, gone after the guy who's job would have been to be around him and keep him in line. Regardless, Brashear made the hit and he has to pay the piper to the tune of five games for it. There are several ways that you have to look at it. Brashear is a prior offender who often attempts to injure his opponents. He is not a skill player, his lone job is to play enforcer for a guy who doesn't need a bodyguard so he doesn't even play night in and night out. (Colton Orr did play every game, until Tortorella's Game 6 folly but we won't go there.)
Chris Simon was a prior offender and a useless goon who 'lost his mind' and hit the first person he saw. Ryan Hollweg took some stitches and was able to play, while Bettsy is done for the year (and perhaps has played his last game as a Ranger, given Sather's stupidity). So you can say that what Brashear did was comparable to, if not worse than, what Simon did and he got a lesser sentence.
The other Chris - Pronger - was also a regular offender and he unleashed a clearer, more vicious elbow at the head of Dean McCammond. That hit was in the playoffs and Pronger got one game for it. At the time they said the length was because of the gravity of the lost game - a Stanley Cup Final. This incident was in the opening round and it was done by someone who wasn't as important to his team and not a superstar. So six games for Brashear seems on the money in comparison to that.
But the final verdict is that you can't compare the events. Puck Daddy believes that the league got it right and that it is a fair ruling because it essentially knocks the role player out for a full series. I personally disagree as it put a player's livelihood at risk with an intentional high hit. If someone decides to play Tim "Dr. Hook" McCracken and chops at a head, you can believe that there will be more than a six game suspension. How is this any different? An intent to injure is an intent to injure. Brashear got hit and he wanted to lash out and hurt someone. And he did.There has never been a clear-cut ruling to base future events upon. Politics, profile and the personal opinion of the judge all play into the equation. Considering that the track record of said judge is quite dubious, perhaps it is time for a new judge? As that isn't likely to happen, what will occur is that the Caps will get their captain back in the lineup, the Rangers lost their top penalty killer and likely the series and the NHL could very well get the dream matchup of Crosby v. Ovie. I don't subscribe to the conspiracy theory that this was intended from the start - there is still a little integrity left in the front office ... somewhere - but I certainly don't think the league minds.
Judging The Judgment: Understanding the Role of Judges in the Legal System
Judges are often described as the backbone of the legal system, wielding immense power and responsibility. They play a pivotal role in interpreting and applying the law, ensuring justice is served, and upholding the rule of law. In this article, we will dive deep into the world of judges, exploring their functions, the qualities that make a good judge, and the frequently asked questions surrounding the judicial system.
The Role of Judges
Interpreting the Law: One of the primary functions of a judge is to interpret the law. This involves reviewing the statutes, regulations, and legal precedents relevant to a case and determining how they apply.
Impartiality: Judges are expected to be impartial and unbiased. They must set aside personal beliefs and opinions to ensure that every litigant is treated fairly and equally under the law.
Making Legal Decisions: Judges make legal decisions, including rulings on motions, evidentiary issues, and the admissibility of evidence. They also render final judgments in cases, deciding the outcome and any penalties or remedies.
Sentencing: In criminal cases, judges have the authority to determine the appropriate punishment for defendants who have been found guilty. This may include fines, probation, or imprisonment.
Presiding Over Trials: Judges preside over trials, ensuring that proceedings are conducted fairly and according to established legal procedures. They may also provide guidance to juries and rule on objections raised by attorneys.
Qualities of a Good Judge
What makes a good judge? While there is no one-size-fits-all answer, certain qualities are universally valued in the judicial profession:
Impartiality: A good judge must be neutral and unbiased, treating all parties in a case with equal respect and fairness.
Legal Knowledge: Judges must have a deep understanding of the law and its nuances to make informed decisions.
Integrity: Upholding the highest ethical standards is crucial. Judges must act with integrity and avoid any impropriety.
Decisiveness: Timely decision-making is essential in the legal system. Judges must be able to render clear, well-reasoned judgments.
Patience: Trials can be lengthy and complex. Patience is key when listening to arguments, reviewing evidence, and presiding over proceedings.
Good Communication: Judges need strong communication skills to explain legal concepts to juries, attorneys, and litigants.
Judicial Temperament: Maintaining composure and a calm demeanor, even in the face of pressure or contentious proceedings, is vital.
Frequently Asked Questions About Judges
Can judges be removed from office?
Yes, judges can be removed through various mechanisms, including impeachment (in the case of federal judges in the United States), disciplinary actions by judicial conduct boards, or through elections in some jurisdictions.
Do judges always follow the law?
Judges are expected to follow the law, but interpretation can vary. Judges may have different views on how statutes and precedents should be applied, leading to differing rulings.
How are judges selected or appointed?
The process for selecting or appointing judges varies by jurisdiction. It can involve election by the public, appointment by an executive authority, or a combination of both.
Can judges make decisions based on personal beliefs?
Judges are expected to set aside personal beliefs and make decisions based on the law. Rulings that are influenced by personal beliefs or biases can be grounds for appeal or disciplinary action.
What is judicial activism?
Judicial activism refers to judges interpreting and applying the law in a way that advances their own policy preferences or beliefs, rather than strictly adhering to the text and intent of the law. It is a subject of debate and controversy.
The Importance of an Independent Judiciary
An independent judiciary is a cornerstone of a democratic society. It ensures that the rule of law is upheld, and individuals' rights are protected. Judges must be insulated from political pressures and external influences to make impartial decisions.
Checks and Balances: The judiciary acts as a check on the power of the legislative and executive branches of government. It ensures that laws are consistent with the constitution and that government actions are lawful.
Protection of Rights: Judges safeguard individual rights and liberties. They make rulings that protect free speech, due process, equal protection, and other fundamental rights.
Legal Precedent: Judicial decisions create legal precedent, guiding future cases and helping to maintain consistency and predictability in the legal system.
Public Trust: An independent judiciary fosters public trust in the legal system. When people believe they will receive a fair hearing in court, they are more likely to respect and comply with the law.
Judges are the unsung heroes of the legal system, working diligently to ensure justice is served and the rule of law prevails. Their role is multifaceted, encompassing legal interpretation, impartiality, and decision-making. Qualities such as integrity, knowledge, and patience are essential in the pursuit of justice. Understanding the importance of judges and their role in maintaining a just society is crucial for upholding the principles of democracy and the rule of law.
No comments:
Post a Comment