Norfolk's Judge Griffith won't be reappointed

I don't know what age group most of you are but I'm gonna give you an opinion from a young persons point of view. I myself was in Griffith's court room and thank GOD he was not to judge my case. I have had a couple different friends stand before him and get hit with the maximum for their first offense. Griffith to me seems to not care about the impact he has on people's lives by his unfair and ridiculous rulings. Why should he? When he leaves court he's going to his big house, wife, and family living the life that some of the people coming before him are out here trying to give to their own families. People don't seem to realize that that's why alot of the "criminals" are out here doing these things some people call "bad" or "illegal". They are trying to provide for families too. Some of them can't go out here and get these top paying jobs to make enough to even live a descent life, so they do what they can. Some of y

I was in Judge Griffith's court on quite a few occasions while he heard a case and was not impressed by his demeanor. I believe in this case he came to court with his mind made up and nothing would sway him. He may be wearing a judges' robe now but he is also still wearing a prosecutor's hat. He himself commented on the fact that there was no hard evidence to convict but proceeded to do so anyway. It would seem innocent until "proven" guilty is a thing of the past.

That the one judge who actually does what he's paid to do will no longer be serving in Norfolk's courts! I hope they re-consider not reappointing Judge Griffith. He actually gave criminals what they were supposed to get...TIME IN JAIL!

I guess jail overcrowding will now drop due to the failure to reappoint judges who actually still believe that criminals belong in jail!

I hate to respond to this, because it really has nothing to do with the removal of Judge Griffith from the bench, but I have to. It is simply the individuals who make statements, referring to the "victims" of a Judge, or our Judicial system, that help me to understand the success of asinine TV shows like Springer. To make the argument that a person who beat another person with a baseball bat, should not get the maximum allowable punishment under our law, defines the basic problems with our society. "But I said I was sorry" just should not ever cut it, and yet there are individuals who believe that this should be, and is, enough. It is one thing to say you are sorry, and admit guilt when you have stolen a Snickers Bar, and another when you attack another human being. More importantly, our laws define the appropriate sentences for such convictions, and Judges (Judge Griffith included) are bound by law

I don't know where some of you people are getting your material, but you ought to become fiction writers! Face it, the case against Judge Griffith was the word of a sleeze-bag lawyer, who even disregarded the rules of the committee he testified before, and some professor who earns his keep trying to save the lives of capital murderers! Way to go General Assembly! And whoever says not to blame Northam obviously doesn't understand how the judicial nomination system works (ie if a Senator from the judge's city supports them, the committee members leave them alone). Obviously Yvonne Miller wasn't going to do it because she's still peeved about Jones, and frankly, she has constituents to please. So does Northam. He failed to do it, and he'll answer for it when he's up for re-election. So scrawny Ralphy from the Eastern Shore is so gonna be gone in 4!

The democratic party, i.e., most notably Yvonne Miller, has made a complete and total mockery of the judicial system in Virginia with her evil, deceitful, treacherous, racist filth and in the process took out a good, honest, hardworking, decent man, who has served Norfolk and served it well for many years. Politicians in Virginia are now nothing more than the likes of the corrupt rancid filth seen in politicians from some of the most corrupt cities in this country, New Orleans, Chicago and New York. The citizens of Norfolk can count on all future judicial appointments to be based, not on the best legal minds the city has to offer for those judicial appointments, but instead will be based on back room deals, deceit and treachery. The democratic party and pantywaist republicans have single handedly managed to besmirch the entire judicial process. I believe Judge Griffith will rise like th

I was the Lead Juror on a 1st-Degree Murder trial a few years back where a 17 year old drug dealer shot a 42 year old in the back over a $10 dispute. Because of the limits of our judicial system and because this man had pleaded innocent, requiring a trial-by-jury, the jury was only able to convict him of 2nd Degree Murder and the use of a handgun in a felony. He received 12 years mandatory. That's it! And please understand that this person showed no remorse!

In contrast, a humble man, who was very sorrowful and fully admitted his guilt in the attack of his neighbor with a baseball bat because that person was sleeping with his wife, received a life sentence from our good judge with no chance of parole. No one was seriously injured in this attack and he got a LIFE sentence for being honest! It seems apparent that the judge should be ousted and every prison sentence he "administered" without a trial-by-jury

He could have been an outstanding Judge. Smart and hardworking. He could take five slugs to the head and still be smarter than Rutherford, his predecessor.Unfortunately, lack of self control was his downfall.Once Rerras lost,he was finished.

A lawyer represents clients. They often have to do things someone will not care for to do it well. Unlike many Judges, Griffith was a trial lawyer, and a very good one. Instead of melting down when Zaleski advised his client to request a jury, Judge Griffith should have said "Okay, if we do not have one here, we will do the case tomorrow in my court." The Judge's tirade shows that waiving a jury before this Judge was not in the defendant's best interest.

He had a long time after the WILSON case to settle down. He was warned. If one of his goals was to be "tough" on criminal defendants and "discipline" attorneys, well, he won't have any opportunity to do that no

How ironic that today, when many other Norfolk Circuit Courtrooms were
tied up with jury trials, Judge Griffith handled one of the
heaviest docket that many of us have seen in years with ease and totally appropriate demeanor at all times.
Judge Griffith is one of the best judges in the area whose main "flaws" are his idealism and refusal to bend his principles. It's actually a sad day all across the state as sitting judges are carrying the load of other absent judges while the Gen. Assembly takes its own sweet time. How ironic that Judge Griffith is carrying the load of two absent judges in the City of Norfolk while the General Assembly continues spending taxpayer dollars to get their act together - and to remove him.

Frankly, Mr. Zaleski's "whining" really had nothing to do with the real reason that Judge Griffith is not being reappointed. The transparency of what has happened here is so clear, it is shameful. Anyone who was at the hearing, and listened to Zaleski's complaint quickly realized that his inadequate preparation for a committee hearing was exactly why Judge Griffith removed him from the court appointed list. Mr. Zaleski simply helped prove Judge Griffith's point that Mr. Zaleski's demeanor and lack of work ethic and preparation, were unacceptable in the criminal system, and incapable of providing adequate defense to defendants. He made the argument that a lawyer such as this could not help instill in the public the necessary Faith in our judicial system, which we all need. His poor performance in the hearing, and the committee’s total disregard for the history involved in everythin

And humans are not perfect. In fact, all have biases. Furthermore, judges are also attorneys, and everyone knows that they are a special breed. There are bad judges just like there are bad cooks, bad car salesmen and bad writers. The only thing surprising about this is that the politicians actually had enough guts to do it--unlike last year with Judge Sword in Portsmouth. The real problem with our judiciary is that ordinarily the only people who oversee them are other judges. And they usually stick together. As a landlord, I have appeared before judges in several cities throughout the area. Those who were biased in my favor have helped me--those biased against me have not. But all have been biased. There needs to be more oversight of judges by someone other than judges and they need to be able to remove them immediately rather than waiting for their appointments to end. Anytime there is enoug

The Senate Courts of Justice Committee voted 12-0 NOT to certify Griffith. That means neither Democrats OR REPUBLICANS supported his reappointment. Also, keep in mind that Griffith was overturned by BOTH the State Supreme Court and the Appeals Court -- very unusual.

Ask anyone involved with these courts and they will tell you -- being overturned because the court finds you guilty of bias is considered the number one cardinal sin to the courts. Griffith was cited for bias by the State Supreme Court and was why he was overturned.

Dry those hankies -- Griffith tied the noose that hung him.

Atty. Zaleski got hammered by the judge so he seeks retribution at the legislature - what a guy??? Actually, I hope the state bar keeps a very close eye on Mr. Zaleski and the first time he steps out out of bounds he needs to be smacked with the same stick that he stuck in Judge Griffith. It takes years of training to be a good judge; Judge Griffith always has one of the highest case loads in the circuit court and did a fantastic job. Almost every judge in spite of their care has a case overturned for a technicality. That's what the appellate system is for anyway. Zaleski is just a big whiner who goes to Richmond and stirs the pot. Judge Griffith didn't get reappointed only because the Senate made it a political issue not a judicial issue. When the city leaders of Norfolk and the Norfolk legislative delegation go to bat for someone, that should carry some weight. Hopefully, they can return the favor for some of the Senate/House democrats who made a mess of Judge Griffith's reappointment.

cant't expect everyone to know the inside, however, judge kathryn jones was kicked off the bench in 2000 by thelma drake with griffith's help to give norman thomas a job, like a district court judgeship after losing to jack doyle.
drake and sen. nick rerras were not (and are still not) lawyers so most folks around the courthouse know that griffith helped pick judges for drake and rerras over the past 8 years.

judge jones (b/f) NEVER had a judicial complaint against her. Griffith has had several and has been overturned 4 times in last 5 years. Every judge gets overturned in their careers however the point is that griffith had more OFFICIAL baggage than the black female judge who got bounced after ONE YEAR!

now for republicans to act as though politics should never come into the selection of judges - boy some have short memories.
what goes around comes around!!!!!!!!!!! this is will be a non story

I read some of the blogs on the topic of Judge Griffith not being reappointed with a great measure of concern. Many of the forces for and against the reappointment of Judge Griffith had no problem engaging in exaggerations in an attempt to validate their opinions. I note comments that engage in race baiting, fear mongering and lies. While there is perhaps no doubt that politics played a role in the judges' removal. It however cannot be ignored that he remained political after becoming a judge and that his intemperate and bias conduct as a jurist is what put him in the cross-hairs of the powers that be. The Senate Courts of Justice Committee (democrats and republicans) voted 15-0 to not recommend Judge Griffith for reappointment. While I regret the loss of Judge Griffith, I can understand why it happened.

I hope this is not over. Why is it when you have a person who loves his job,Shows up to work,Has experience,Does his best to run a courtroom in a business like fashion and ticks off an attorney and does not get reappointed . What does this say for the whole process. Seems to me if there was a real problem some sort of warning slap on the hand etc would be issued not just pull his name from reappointment.

To OrfAtty. I did spend many years with the Norfolk court system and do know what I'm talking about. Probably know more about the corruption and unfairness in the Norfolk judicial that you and most other people commenting on this issue. Again, the justice system will survive despite it many shortcomings.

Don't you get the real issue? The problem here is not your racist issues, those who even discuss Griffith and Affirmative action. Actually, Griffith does not like criminal attorney's who exploit the defendants they represent. Simply put, the two complaints came from lawyers who were exploiting the court whereby, they had no mountable defense and what they were trying to do was put off the inevitable and makes extra dollars by logging more billable hours. These defendants have their life in this attorney’s hand and so their lawyers use the court to exploit the client who they cannot reasonably defend. That makes Griffith, not an upholder of Right wing ideals but fair and democratic ones. Though he may be a republican, simply put, it never entered into his judgment and that is what makes the hypocrisy of both sides of the political aisle blind and with ulterior motives. Virginia’s politicians need their citizens to hold them accountable

It is quite ironic that the new Grisham book, "The Appeal" just came out. The subject is the appointment and election of judges-- a great read and it goes to show you the power struggle goes all the way to the top.

(To continue -- sorry for the error) -- There was not enough Republican support to get him through. None. So don't pick on Ralph Northem for voting his conscience and doing what he thought was right. Even in February, Ken Stolle was quoted in the Pilot saying that Griffith would get a hearing, but he would have to explain his responses to their concerns if he wanted to be reappointed. Obviously he didn't.

Several of the comments have also mentioned that he was tough on defendants as a judge and showed them he "meant business." That's nice. A judge with grapefruits. But that's not the role of judges. Judges are not supposed to prosecute from the bench. That's what you have Commonwealth Attorneys for. Judges are supposed to be fair and impartial and see to it that BOTH sides do their jobs and dispense justice. Bullying a defendant into firing their attorney while in court and trying to get even with