What Kind of Judge Would You Be?

 Judges are people like you and me, but they have a lot of power in their hands to affect people's lives and futures. That said. What would you do with that power in YOUR hands? Answer our questions and find out...
 
You are a judge. A woman is accused (and confessed) of stealing a necklace from a shop. She has no priors. In court, she weeps and says she only wanted to pay for her son's tuition one day since they are very poor. What do you do?
I give her the lightest sentence I can, as I feel for her predicament.
I give her the harshest sentence. Pull the other one...
I give the lightest sentence or community service, and try to find a way for social services to lend her a hand.
I give her an average sentence, since her excuse doesn't make up for breaking the law.
 
A wife is suing her rich husband for divorce after 15 years of marriage. They have a prenuptial agreement that she gets nothing of his money. However, she maintains he has cheated on her many times, which breaks the conditions of the agreement. What do you do?
I ask for proof of the cheating. If she doesn't have any then I must rule against her.
I rule in her favor. He should not be allowed to leave her with nothing after 15 years, agreement or not.
I rule in his favor. If she is the one asking for divorce she should face the consequences.
Since there are no children, she should take care of herself and not rely on another person. I will rule against her.
 
A man is accused of resisting arrest and hitting a police officer. He maintains he was violently attacked and was just trying to defend himself as they were hurting him. There is no police cam footage. What do you do?
Without footage, I will have to take the word of the police officers since there are more of them.
Without footage, I will take the word of the citizen, since cops should know better than to have them turned off.
I will rule against the man. You NEVER put your hands on a cop.
I will rule against the cops, there must never be even a hint of impropriety attached to the police force.
 
A child custody case is brought before you, dealing with an 8 year old girl. She really wants to live with her father, but he is very poor and has a hard time holding a job. The mother is a successful banker, but the girl seems to loathe her. What do you do?
Rule in favor of the mother. The girl is too young to know what's good for her and she'll need resources.
Rule in favor of the mother. It's a shame they don't get along but she should go to the richer home.
Rule in favor of the father. Money comes and goes, but the girl should live with the parent she prefers.
Rule in favor of the father but give it a test year, if he has not improved his situation she will be given to the mother.
 
A man is suing his wife for not telling him (knowingly) his son wasn't his. The son is 12 and he has been paying for his expenses. He is suing her for all the money he has spent on the child. What do you do?
If she is rich enough to repay him, I will rule she does so. If not, she should use payments.
She shouldn't have to pay. This is an emotional issue, and as tragic as that may be, I will not make her pay him.
The man has chosen, even if unknowingly, to support the child as a father. If he chooses to stop that's up to him but he will receive nothing.
He should be paid, at the very least for the pain and suffering inflicted on him by the lie.
 
A man is suing another man for assaulting him. The second man alleges that he was insulting his wife, spilling drinks on them and threatening them. He hit him as a defensive measure. What do you do?
IF there are eyewitnesses I will rule in favor of the hitter. The victim had it coming for his behavior.
I rule against the aggressor. It doesn't matter what he did, the first person to use real violence is the guilty party.
I rule against both of them, giving them similar punishments for their childish behavior.
I throw them both out of court. We have more important cases than this childish story.
 
A woman is charged with being drunk and disorderly, wrecking a bar in a drunken stupor. She tells you her daughter died a few days before, and she was grieving. What do you do?
It doesn't matter. The bar has to be compensated and she must be punished. I give her an average penalty.
My heart goes out to her. Grief is a terrible thing. I will try to get her the easiest penalty, maybe just to pay for the damage.
I feel for her, but unfortunately I must do my job. She will pay back and get community service.
A poor excuse for bad behavior. People feel grief all the time without wrecking property. I give her the maximum penalty.
 
Your best friend of 20 years is another judge. One day, he reveals to you he once took a bribe to find someone innocent guilty. What do you do?
Ask him never to tell me such things. I don't want to know.
Stay silent but later I will report him. He's my best friend but justice isn't a game.
Stay silent but later break off our friendship. I don't want to be friends with someone like that.
Tell him off and warn him never to do something like that again or I will report him.
 
A husband is suing his wife for having an abortion without telling him. He claims they got married for the baby and he wouldn't be here now if he knew she was going to do this. She provides no explanation other than she was not ready for motherhood. What do you do?
I feel for the man but my hands are tied. She hasn't broken the law.
I rule that she must pay him for the pain and suffering, as he has clearly went through hell over this.
I rule against the husband. The wife's body is her own and she has every right to do as she likes.
I throw the case out. This is between man and wife and of no relevance to the law.
 
A woman is suing her neighbor for killing her dog when the dog went over to their yard. The dog is harmless and of medium size, but the man maintains he was scared and so he shot it. What do you do?
Rule in his favor. It was the woman's responsibility to make sure the dog doesn't get out.
Rule in her favor. He should pay and be punished. There are many ways to deal with such a thing without shooting.
Rule in his favor. He was panicking and may have a phobia. He's not responsible for his actions.
Rule in her favor and make him pay a high fine but no criminal charges. Still just a dog.
Throw the book at him, there is NO reason to shoot a dog on sight like that.
You'd Be an Emotional Judge
The balance of your judgment seems to tend towards the emotional. There is nothing wrong with that. Your emotions are what guides you in this morally gray world. You know the law and how to enforce it, of course, and you do. <br><br> However, you allow yourself to seek ways to lessen harm to those you feel deserve a break in their lives and increase the punishment to those you feel are getting off easy. Of course, the risk is that you let the emotional overweigh the letter of the law. The law, after all, is there for a reason. That said, maybe we SHOULD have more judges with a heart.
You'd Be a Strict Judge
You'd be a strict judge. As a judge, you will learn the letter of the law verbatim until you hold in your head all the laws and regulations you can. Then, you will use these rules and laws to make rulings. It's pretty simple to you. Emotions play no part in your rulings, only past cases and the letter of the law itself. Justice cannot play favorites, so you don't either. <br><br> You don't shirk from giving the maximum punishment when that is the law, and you don't hesitate to give harsh sentences. On the other hand, you cannot be bribed or influenced. You don't care if the victim is a homeless person or a senator; you treat everyone exactly the same - as the law says you should.
You'd Be a Balanced Judge
You would be a balanced judge. While some may let their emotions influence most of their decisions, and some make NO room for emotions, you choose to do a bit of both. How would you do it? <br><br> You would stick to the law, but you will find ways to bend it when the law doesn't give the justice you think is proper. You will make recommendations to lawyers to find compromises for their clients. You will mitigate harsh sentences. You will inflict the maximum punishment when you think someone hasn't learned anything from what they've done and have shown no regret. However, there are lines you won't cross, and you will always consider the law BEFORE you consider how you feel about it, and use it as the supreme point of reference.
Rate:
Sign Up for Free Daily Posts!