Judge should con­sider re­tir­ing af­ter call­ing Al­len­town a ‘cesspool’

The Morning Call - - TOWN SQUARE -

It was great to see our mayor and state leg­is­la­tors pounce on the out­ra­geous rant by Judge James An­thony about Al­len­town (“Shooter gets up to 56 years in state prison; judge be­moans gun vi­o­lence that’s turned Al­len­town into a ‘cesspool,’” The Morn­ing Call, Sept. 4). He de­serves it.

The ques­tion now, though, is this: Has he ex­posed him­self as so bi­ased that he should re­cuse him­self from any case that in­volves a res­i­dent, business or other en­tity liv­ing or based in our city? My ques­tion, of course, is rhetor­i­cal. Damn right he should.

If, in­deed, that is the case, then how use­ful is he if he can’t pre­side over at least one-third of the cases that come be­fore the court? For that mat­ter, shouldn’t any­one who has been found guilty in his court have a le­git­i­mate ar­gu­ment that their case should be re­tried?

If we are, as ev­ery­one of us swore at the be­gin­ning of each school day, “one na­tion, un­der God, in­di­vis­i­ble, with lib­erty and jus­tice for all,” then we bet­ter start think­ing about the words we use and the things we do that could re­flect big­otry and hate­ful­ness.

If Judge An­thony has a con­science, he should be think­ing about an early re­tire­ment.

Alan L. Jen­nings


The writer is ex­ec­u­tive di­rec­tor of Com­mu­nity Ac­tion Com­mit­tee of the Le­high Val­ley, Beth­le­hem.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.