Judge Traci Soderstrom out of Oklahoma has shown us exactly how much respect she has for the legal process or the people she is there to judge. What could be more important than justice for a slain child or possibly sending an innocent man to jail? Downloading a GIF. Checking social media. Texting. When those who deem your competence to administer life altering decisions are your very peers, the odds of a proper sanction is highly unlikely. In this case we have yet to see what kind of verdict we will see with her misconduct. But as it stands the tax payer will almost certainly be footing the bill for the appeal of this trial.
https://www.courttv.com/news/ethics-panel-investigating-judge-using-cellphone-during-murder-trial/
“Jari Askins, Oklahoma’s administrative director of the courts, declined to comment on the specifics of the case but said the conduct of judges is governed by the Code of Judicial Conduct, which states: ‘A judge shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the independence, integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.’ The code does not specifically mention the use of mobile phones.”
The reality is that judges have immunity, meaning they cannot be prosecuted for conduct on the job, no matter how egregious. Since the standards for judges (as set by other judges) are the only way to ensure fairness and justice, to have no accountability from the public means they are free to operate without any restraint. How many judges, prosecutors, and other immune officials ever actually answer for their misconduct?