Bizarre, Constitutional Law, Courts, Criminal law, Lawyering, Society

Ohio Judge Sentences “Bully” To Wear Demeaning Sign In Public

bully-2-e1397330995935article-2603196-1D0E0E1500000578-133_634x819We have previously discussed the use of shaming punishments by judges around the country — a practice that I have previously denounced in columns and blog postings. I discussed a new case this week on BBC involving Edmond Aviv, 62, in South Euclid, Ohio. Aviv pleaded no contest to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge. Aviv, 62, had been feuding with his neighbor for 15 years, particularly over the smell of her dryer vent when she did laundry. He retaliated by hookup up kerosene to a fan to blow the smell on to the property of Sandra Prugh. Municipal Court Judge Gayle Williams-Byers (left) decided to impose her own brand of justice and ordered him to demean himself in public and wear a signing reading “I AM A BULLY! I pick on children that are disabled, and I am intolerant of those that are different from myself. My actions do not reflect an appreciation for the diverse South Euclid community that I live in.” For those of us who view this type of novel or shaming punishment to be unprofessional and abusive, it is Judge Williams-Byers who is in serious need for corrective measures. Indeed, many view judges who entertain the public with shaming sentences to be the ultimate bullies.

Aviv certainly does not sound like a nice man. He was long accused of harassing his neighbors and has three prior convictions for harassing conduct. Prugh is also a highly sympathetic victim, a women who has two adult adopted children with disabilities and a paralyzed son. Prugh accused Aviv of previously spitting on her and calling her a “monkey mama.” She also said that he threw dog feces on the windshield of her son’s car and on a wheelchair ramp.

Williams-Byer ordered Aviv to serve 15 days in jail, seven months on probation and 100 hours of community service. He was also ordered to attend anger-management classes and psychological counseling. Then she decided to get “creative” with her own brand of justice.

I have previously written about the rise of shaming punishments in the United States in both blogs (here and here and here and here) and columns (here and here and here).

If these allegations are true (and he does have prior convictions), the proper response is increased jail time, injunctive relief, and the possible escalation to a felony offense. These shaming punishments degrade our legal system and turn judges into little Caesars meting out their own justice to the thrill of the public. We have seen judges force people to cut their hair in their courtroom or clean their court bench with a toothbrush. These sentences make justice a form of public entertainment and allow judges to turn their courtrooms into their own macabre productions. While judges talk a good game about their effort to be creative, they clearly enjoy this role and the publicity that comes from making people demean themselves. It appeals to the lowest common denominator of our society and unfortunately there are many who enjoy to see others degraded. Indeed, some appear to be working through their own serious issues or yielding to their own emotional impulses in punishments like forcing people to cut their hair in their courtroom or wearing signs that the judge herself creates over the weekend (as discussing in prior stories). I believe this trend is a direct result of faux court programs like Judge Judy and Judge Brown (who was recently arrested himself) where people are yelled at or taunted by the court. We are losing the distinction between entertainment and the law. The result is a loss of professionalism and consistency in sentencing. I have long advocated for bar associations to move against judges like Williams-Byer and consider removal over such abusive sentencing. Little has been done. Judges bask in national coverage and develop a taste for the attention and accolades. Absent an effort by the bar, this trend will grow and our court system will increasingly add these circus like scenes for public enjoyment.

Williams-Byer is a former prosecutor who won her seat by a handful of votes in 2011. She oversees small cases involving misdemeanors but, with the publicity of this case, could well try to build on the popularity as did Judge Poe in his successful run for Congress.

49 thoughts on “Ohio Judge Sentences “Bully” To Wear Demeaning Sign In Public”

  1. Well, apparently three prior convictions didn’t do much to improve his behavior. Perhaps walking the proverbial mile in his victims shoes might? I’m sure he got plenty of rude remarks and middle fingers. I don’t usually think this sort of punishment is proper, but there are people out there who only learn by being on the receiving end of what they usually dish out. It’s all about them and empathy has no meaning.

  2. They’re developmentally disabled. So, they’re not a minority in Ohio. Trust me!

  3. Just curious – are any of these people members of a minority group?

  5. Everyone is guilty of something, the most cruel and unusual among us, are the same suspects with the largest skeletons in the closet.

  6. Darren & mespo727272

    Gementera v. United States, 126 S. Ct. 735 – Supreme Court 2005

    The court denied the writ from 379 F.3d 596 (9th Cir), which had this language:

    We turn then to the Eighth Amendment, which forbids the infliction of “cruel and unusual punishments.” U.S. Const. amend. VIII. “The basic concept underlying the Eighth Amendment was nothing less than the dignity of man.” Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86, 100, 78 S.Ct. 590, 2 L.Ed.2d 630 (1958) (finding denationalization of military deserters cruel and unusual). Consistent with human dignity, the state must exercise its power to punish “within the limits of civilized standards.” Id.

    A particular punishment violates the Eighth Amendment if it constitutes one of “those modes or acts of punishment that had been considered cruel and unusual at the time that the Bill of Rights was adopted.” Ford v. Wainwright, 477 U.S. 399, 405, 106 S.Ct. 2595, 91 L.Ed.2d 335 (1986). Shaming sanctions of far greater severity were common in the colonial era, see, e.g., Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84, 97-98, 123 S.Ct. 1140, 155 L.Ed.2d 164 (2003); Lawrence Friedman, Crime and Punishment in American History 38 (1993), and the parties do not quarrel on this point.
    …
    The parties have offered no evidence whatsoever, aside from bare assertion, that shaming sanctions violate contemporary standards of decency. But the occasional imposition of such sanctions is hardly unusual, particularly in our state courts. See, e.g., Stephen P. Garvey, Can Shaming Punishments Educate?, 65 U. Chi. L.Rev. 733, 734 (1998) (describing proliferation of unorthodox and creative shaming punishments); infra at note 18. Aside from a single case presenting concerns not at issue here, we are aware of no case holding that contemporary shaming sanctions violate our Constitution’s prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment.

    (AFFIRMED. HAWKINS, Circuit Judge, dissenting:)

  7. Darren Smith

    In my opinion this is judicial misconduct. The judge in my view the judge violated this man’s eighth amendment right to be free of “unusual punishments.” Maybe my interpretation of the common law on this is incorrect but I don’t believe it must be both cruel AND unusual to be unconstitutional.

    Could some of the attorneys here educate me on this?
    ===================
    The DOJ brief I linked to, filed in the U.S. Supreme Court, is instructive.

    It involves an appeal from the Ninth Circuit that held that when shaming is part of a rehabilitation scheme deference is given to the trial court.

    It had upheld a shaming sentence.

    That case involved stealing mail and the shaming was for more hours than the present case we are discussing.

  8. Darren:

    Here’s a primer from Furman v. Georgia, 408 U.S. 238 (1972):

    “The Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause, like the other great clauses of the Constitution, is not susceptible of precise definition.” [Brennan]

    The words “cruel and unusual” certainly include penalties that are barbaric. But the words, at least when read in light of the English proscription against selective and irregular use of penalties, suggest that it is “cruel and unusual” to apply the death penalty—or any other penalty—selectively to minorities whose numbers are few, who are outcasts of society, and who are unpopular, but whom society is willing to see suffer though it would not countenance general application of the same penalty across the board.

    “A penalty . . . should be considered `unusually’ imposed if it is administered arbitrarily or discriminatorily [Douglas]

    “The basic concept underlying the [Clause] is nothing less than the dignity of man. While the State has the power to punish, the [Clause] stands to assure that this power be exercised within the limits of civilized standards.” Id., at 100.
    At bottom, then, the Cruel and Unusual Punishments Clause prohibits the infliction of uncivilized and inhuman punishments. The State, even as it punishes, must treat its members with respect for their intrinsic worth as human beings. A punishment is “cruel and unusual,” therefore, if it does not comport with human dignity. [Brennan]

    Looks like a dignity argument could be made.

  9. In my opinion this is judicial misconduct. The judge in my view the judge violated this man’s eighth amendment right to be free of “unusual punishments.” Maybe my interpretation of the common law on this is incorrect but I don’t believe it must be both cruel AND unusual to be unconstitutional.

    Could some of the attorneys here educate me on this?

  11. Here is a DOJ brief filed in the U.S. Supreme Court that argues shaming is not a violation of the 8th Amendment (LINK).

  12. Giovanna De La Paz
    …
    But looking on the bright side, I appreciate the tax money the judge saved the public from having him put in jail.
    ===============
    She also gave him 15 days in jail.

  13. bigfatmike

    “If the sentence is legal, stop carping about it, and lobby the legislature to set sentencing parameters.”

    Wait a minute. Isn’t the whole point of sites like this one and the Op-Ed pages to carp about things that deserve the attention of ordinary people like many of the readers of this site. Isn’t the whole point to carp about matters in the hope that others will be motivated to take action like lobby the legislature?

    If the carping stops, those doing the carping will never have the time and resources to follow up and other less informed or less involved people will never have the information to follow up.

    Carping is a vital social function. And I think is is fair to say we have a pretty good group of carpers here.
    …
    =============================
    carping: characterized by fussy or petulant faultfinding; querulous …
    petulant: moved to or showing sudden, impatient irritation, especially over some trifling annoyance …
    querulous: full of complaints; complaining.

    In other words frivolous, a legal term.

    No, BFM, that is the type of complaint that is counter productive.

    Biatch, biatch, biatch.

    If this sentence is constitutionally illegal (e.g. 8th Amendment) or by statute, then by all means take it up on appeal and get it reversed.

    On the other hand, if it is not illegal, then make it so by moving the state legislature to statutorily forbid it.

    Stop carping and start mature complaining that “gits ‘r dun” doods and doodettes.

    1. “Stop carping and start mature complaining that “gits ‘r dun” doods and doodettes”

      What a novel idea – mature complaining!

  14. “Wearing a sign in public may demean him to the point where he will stop doing the hateful. ” -Giovanna De La Paz

    What if it makes him more hateful? And what if it causes him to act out in other, even more destructive ways?

  15. Sometimes shame does work. This man was a vengeful bully towards his neighbor for 15 years and nothing stopped him. Wearing a sign in public may demean him to the point where he will stop doing the hateful. On the other hand, nothing may stop this man’s anti-social behavior.
    But looking on the bright side, I appreciate the tax money the judge saved the public from having him put in jail.

  16. Shame Returns As Punishment

    April 12, 2000, by Julie Deardorff, Tribune Staff Writer.

    http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2000-04-12/news/0004120235_1_unusual-punishment-humiliation-sentencing

    Excerpt:

    “Shame didn’t work in the past. I don’t know why it would work now,” said Gershen Kaufman, a professor in the counseling center and psychology department at Michigan State University and author of six books on shame.

    “It breeds profound rage and a profound wound to the person who is shamed and those associated with it, particularly family members. Whether it’s a bumper sticker on a car or a sign, it becomes humiliation for everyone.”

    …

    “If you have alienated people, the effort to shame them is irrelevant and may only be a badge of honor,” said Murray. “It is not necessarily going to work on the most incorrigible, hard-core cases.”

  18. Paul Revere

    The lady in the blue denim jacket is quite likely this thug’s put-upon neighbor. The Judge’s photo is opposite the thug at the top of the article.

  19. Dear “Anonymous”, don’t call it shame, embarrassment; call it “feeling and remediating”. If you cannot connect, feel what you did to another, and if you are allowed year after year to continue the same bully thoughts and actions with no remediation – and the “powers that be” say, “Poor, poor you” and give you reasons why you did this and this (excuses to be mean are trained) because the top administrations in the nation blame rather than train. To correct cruel behavior, you must get the person to “feel” – and “talk time” will never work with a sick bully. The child, person will never remediate. Never is the adult, Judge mean. It is, “I care about you and you will never do this to another human being”. It is the delivery of the consequence. . . perhaps this (now sick man) would of had a chance had someone cared when he was younger. When a child is mean, breaks rules, hurts others, i.e. comes into a group of peers and kicks someone for attention, the child who he kicked, cries or gets up and a fight begins (hour after hours in each classroom) After 2-3 years of “talk time”, parent blaming others, the child is now angry anytime he/she is talked to by social worker, psychologist, others. The child learns there is no consequence (maybe a day sent home so I can watch TV because my mom is afraid of me too. When the “talk time” is over it starts again. The first grade bully now dares any adult to tell them what to do. He/she refuses to leave the room, throws a phone at the principal, desks tip over. This is weekly with many students rich, poor, pink, green, rainbow. It is what is trained by our society. Our leaders and courts do not follow their own rules. Rules and laws are made in Congress, signed by the President; millions of dollars are spent publishing and training of the laws to the states. But rules and laws mean nothing if our leaders do not follow the laws, procedures, time limits they were hired to do. It starts from the top.

    No one need to be mean or punishing. The key to a child learning is first the behaviors must be modeled, expected; less talk time and more action that is neither mean or cruel, but settling to groups of children, adults when there are rules and laws. Children feel protected. Adults feel safe when there is follow-through and accountability. Children, adults settle when rules for safety, respect, society are followed. As the Judge, I would not have written the sign for this man. I would make him write “What he did? Why wasn’t it good to do what he did? And in his words, how will he change? If the mean, ugly behavior continues with a very smug attitude, make it clear he will write a new sign and sit for two days if the behavior continues. Perhaps try and tap into the man’s conscience – have him/her watch video’s of bullying, stories of meanness to see if you can “crack a feeling”. For this adult, is there a chance? Perhaps, but not until you crack those feelings Follow through with the wrong doer with his writing the sign; answering the questions: What he did? Why it was not good to do what he did? What will he do to remediate what he did? It would be good for neighbors to stop and talk to him, dialogue, not mean, but with care, concern and accountability to help him. For them to say, “Good for you, good thinking” and what can we do to help. That is remediation with accountability.

  20. Not sure i agree with you on this one…The shaming tactics seem to be potentially effective, and it saves $$$. I can see your point about potential bullying by judges, but i am certain this already occurs…to both lawyers and citizens on both sides.
    I dont mind it in this case…

Comments are closed.