Judge Jack S. Nordby
Minnesota Lawyer’s Barbara Jones has an interesting story this week about WATCH, the group that patrols the courts in its ongoing effort to ensure domestic-violence cases are treated seriously. The group’s website says it has more than 60 volunteers and interns that monitors more than 4,000 court proceedings annually. The group’s representatives are noticeable in the courtroom because of the red clipboards they carry to let the judge — and everybody else — know that they are WATCHing.
In the 16+ years since its inception, WATCH has had something of a love-hate relationship with the bench. Judges recognize the value of their cause, but on the other hand some find their methods, while well-intentioned, pose a potential threat to the fairness (or at least perceived fairness) of domestic-violence proceedings.
Squarely in the latter camp is Hennepin County District Court Judge Jack Nordby, who acknowledges that he has at times been targeted by the group. Nordby last month made the highly unusual move of issuing a statement on his concerns about WATCH at a recent sentencing hearing. Here’s are a couple of excerpts from that statement:
The red clipboard is an ingenious device, communicative far beyond its mere garishness. It says, principally to the judge but to others as well: We are watching you. We do not trust you. We expect you to be severe to the defendant, to impose high bail, onerous conditions of release, harsh sentences. We expect you to restrict the use of exculpatory evidence, but to be liberal in receiving the damning stuff. We expect you to be sympathetic, kind and protective toward victims and complaining witnesses, but not toward defendants (who may construe fairness and understanding for endorsement of their conduct.) We expect you to avoid any attempt at humor or lightheartedness in these solemn proceedings, no matter what good it may do. We expect these things and more – or else. Or else, we shall convey our displeasure to your superiors, we shall demand that you be assigned to cases where our interests are not involved, we shall campaign against you in your next election, we shall hold you up to obloquy in our newsletter and in the press, we shall urge the Board of Judicial Standards to punish or remove you, we shall perhaps demand your resignation.
All this and more is expressed by the simple flash of a red clipboard. Judges know this, because the organization’s leaders write them personal letters telling them how to conduct their courtrooms, how to speak and act, how to rule on certain issues, how to do their jobs, and they will expatiate upon these things in their periodical newsletter which they duly send unsolicited to the judges, to keep them edgily aware of their ubiquitous presence. …
WATCH assumes that judges, or many of us, are hostile or indifferent to the suffering and safety of victims of domestic abuse, or ignorant of these evils. We are not, of course, but no matter. It has an unquestioned right to be present in courtrooms, to criticize us privately or publicly, to campaign against us, to seek our discipline or removal; but it has no right to influence our decisions by intimidation.
Whether or not you agree with Nordby’s statement (the full text of which is linked to in the Minnesota Lawyer article) probably depends upon whether you view the group as primarily performing a watchdog function, ensuring the proper administration of justice for domestic abuse victims, or an advocacy function, campaigning against alleged abusers and judges seeking to ensure that defendants get their constitutionally guaranteed right to a fair hearing,
I don’t have a clear answer on this. I think, like many things in life, there are some shades of gray. One thing’s for sure, for good or ill, Nordby has undoubtedly sentenced himself to a future full of red clipboards.
![[Print]](http://minnlawyer.com/minnlawyerblog/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/print.png)
![[Email]](http://minnlawyer.com/minnlawyerblog/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/email_2.png)
![[Facebook]](http://minnlawyer.com/minnlawyerblog/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/facebook.png)
![[Twitter]](http://minnlawyer.com/minnlawyerblog/wp-content/plugins/tdc-sociable-toolbar/twitter.png)
Would we tolerate a person holding up a sign in a courtroom? Then what’s the difference here?
The courtroom is not a place for observers to communicate with the each other nor the litigants nor the bench. The only reason the clipboard is red is to communicate something.
This is a very sympathetic cause, but rules are rules.
Who says WATCH members are communicating with each other in the court room? I thought it was one volunteer with a clipboard taking notes. Does a reporter taking notes also distract Judge Nordby?
And why would Judge Nordby admit he is so easily distracted by the by the “flash” of the “garish” red clipboard, which he calls an “ingenious device?”
A lot of garish adjectives here to make a clipboard seem, in a flash, to be more ingenious than it really is. Sometimes a clipboard is just a clipboard.
Didn’t Judge Ito ban Nicole Brown Simpson’s family members from wearing angel pins during the OJ trial?
Why have colored clipboards at all, if they aren’t intended to communicate a message? If the color of the clipboards doesn’t matter, then use normal wood grain ones.
I have to agree with Peter on this one. The red clipboard is clearly meant to convey to the judge the message that WATCH is watching you. The only real ground I see for debate is whether the effect of that message is a net positive or negative to the overall fairness of the proceeding.
As a founder of WATCH, I can’t resist providing a little background on the “garish” and now intimidating red clipboards.
When getting started we were advised by those in the system, including several judges, that our volunteers should have identifying badges so that every one in the courtroom would know when an observer was there, lest we be perceived as sneaky and secretive.
We were advised by MADD, the organization on which WATCH is modeled, not to use badges or anything with the word WATCH on it, lest we be perceived as trying to influence a jury.
We decided on a simple Masonite clipboard, something our volunteers could use to hold their notes. A volunteer offered to to go look for the best deal on clipboards she could find.
A few hours later she called. She couldn’t find any wood ones, did we want neon pink or dark red plastic? There were more of the red ones. That, and the fact that I don’t like pink, made red the obvious choice.
We never considered it a symbol, we saw it as a courtesy to those working in the courts, something they had requested so they wouldn’t wonder about every stranger sitting in the courtroom. Over the years the clipboard has evolved to become our logo — after all, the work we do doesn’t give us many options — but to say that we chose it as a symbol, or brandish it in the courtroom as a threat, is just wrong.
In fact, we’ve discovered that many of our volunteers feel intimidated by the imposing ambience of the courtroom, and are uncomfortable entering it without a clipboard, something they see as their credential.
It’s an ironic twist, or perhaps a tribute to the credibility that WATCH has built over the last 15 years, that two judges, the most powerful people in the courtroom, would report feeling intimidated by the sight of a volunteer toting a bargain red clipboard. As M. Kessler notes, sometimes a clipboard is just a clipboard.
Thanks for the background, Ms. Lenfestey. It appears then that the clipboards were indeed intended as an identifying symbol, but that the color was not selected with any particular intent.
The “garish” color discussion puts me in mind of a scene from the movie “Meet the Parents.”
Robert DeNiro, the intimidating father of Ben Stiller’s girlfriend, asks his prospective son-in-law if he picked out the color of the green rental car that he procured at the airport. Stiller tells him that the guy at the counter made the color selection. DeNiro then tells Stiller that studies have shown that geniuses tend to select green cars. When Stiller smiles at the comment, DeNiro immediately reminds him, “but you didn’t pick it out.”
Heh heh heh. Yes, they were an “identifying symbol”, but one that was chosen as a courtesy to court personnel, not a threat.
Although WATCH does not have direct interaction with victims or their families, we have often been told, via the victim’s advocate or a letter to our office, that the victim was grateful to see the red clipboard, often the only non-court affiliated person in the courtroom, just to know that one person heard her story. Many victims, and defendants, sadly, go through their hearings with no family support, no friends.
One person’s threat is another person’s comfort. Eye of the beholder, and all that.
Jack Nordby has been an activist liberal judge his entire career. Any cop who has been in his courtroom, as I have is well aware of Nordby’s arrogance and his belief that his personal agenda is greater than the written laws he’s elected to judge impartially. Hennepin County will always have it’s share of criminals recycled back on the streets because of judge’s like Nordby, Kevin Burke, and a host of others who are more concerned with representing their liberal judicial agenda above anything else.
I recently have been affected by the watch groups ignorance to the realities of the dynamics of life. Judge Aldrich, who is a good man and dedicated Judge, was, I believe, pressured to order an OFP against me, putting my son in harms. further evidence since his decision clearly states that my son is, has been, and continues to be abused by his own mother and her Mentally ill felon boyfriend whom is guilty of a felony assault against a woman and has violated 4 restraining orders against 4 different woman in under 5 years. My current status is that I am left with a Judge who appears to have zero interest in being in family courts, Burke. Here is the letter I sent him today. This is the pathetic level that I have had to lower myself to, I have lost thousands of dollars and the security of knowing that my own child is safe.
9/30/2010
Attn: Burke
Please make a decision on case #……… to be heard by the Panel of the Appellate Court.
I realize that it can be hard to make decisions that effect the outcome of a child’s life. By delaying the
inevitable, which would be James and Barbara and I comfortably being a family unit again, you are showing me that you do not care. You have enough evidence in our case file to show beyond a reasonable doubt that delaying this case even further is a bad judgment. I have studied Family Court. I have been involved in Family court for twice as long as you have. I have been a father longer than you have. Odds are ( based on daily work schedules), I have spent more time with my children than you have spent with yours. I am friends with your colleges, both past and present. My personal observation is that you do not want to be a Family Court Judge, If I am mistaken and have offended you, feel free to make a decision based on your emotional dislike of my perspective on the reality of the situation here.
I understand that life does not always work out the way we planned, If it were not for the actions of others, I would be the Instructor of St. Cloud prisons Barbering Program and cutting hair on Saturday’s at my Shop. This is a big deal breaker in the fate of my life, I once again have to overcome the adversities of life, which I will, as I have always done.
Now, you have concern for how someone in my situation might handle being forced to be on the sidelines as my son’s life is dangled helplessly right in front of me. It is almost like you expect some kind of Anger driven fit to be shown by me, this will not be done.
I have plans to work with our legislators to make real change in the way that Family court deals with “ the child’s best interest “. Many before me have attempted to do this, some for good, and some for bad. I will be effective in changing the system standards in your life time, I am disgusted with the ignorance shown overall and I am not alone. Make a decision that best suits the child please, The GAL you have chosen to be an expert witness to the accounts of this case is not qualified to work in her previous county “ Carver “, why would there be any reason to think that she is Qualified to work in yours. My excitement and honor to have this case handled by one of the greatest Judges to ever set foot in an American Court room is gone. Thank you for your time, Kevin James Ayers.
Just posted article re: Judge Jack Nordby which I thought might be of interest. It can be found at the URL listed below.
Is Judge Jack Nordby of Minneapolis an Il Duce Wannabee, arrogant and an ethical gremlin?
http://tinyurl.com/2ekbddk