Order in the Court

Ritual, costume, odd layout, specialized jargon — the courtroom would mystify highly educated people, very few of whom are herded through our overloaded urban courts as defendants. This mystification seems outrageous on its face, but there are purposes involved other than intimidating criminal defendants.

After I was appointed but before I was sworn in, I went to visit with a municipal court judge who held my admiration for being open to persuasion that, in a particular case, a police officer might have been mistaken. The municipal court is the domain of petty misdemeanors, and most trials involve two witnesses: the accused and a police officer.

What if, he wanted to know, I was hearing a “swearing match” case and I found both the officer and the citizen accused to be credible?

After a long pause, I ventured that I would have a problem with that.

“Problem?” he roared. “It’s the clearest case you’ll ever see! A swearing match between two credible witnesses is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt!”

Having lost points on that exchange, I offered up some observations of how the courtroom mystifies the average citizen and announced my intention not to wear a robe, a decision further complicated by never having learned to tie a necktie. That deficiency in my education continues to this day. I inquired whether it would be a great deal of trouble to preside from a desk instead of a bench.