Difference between revisions of "Faux Process And Rubber-Stamped Orders"

(username removed)
(username removed)
Line 17: Line 17:
In 2023, . . .
In 2023, . . .


The Georgia Code of Judicial Ethics bars the mere ''appearance'' of impropriety. As to the practices and habits implemented by Judge Brantley, it "appears" that recklessly rushed rulings and "rubber-stamped orders" are his primary go-to tools for closing out cases. He's simply not preparing for cases over which he presides and blitzes to the conclusion he wants without properly verifying the law or facts to his cases. And to justify these practices, Brantley asserts that "If the losing party doesn't like it, they can deal with it on appeal." This way of closing cases is severely flawed as many people cannot afford the long drawn-out appellate process and, in the meantime, their rights and liberties can irreparably be trampled with no recourse pending appeal. Further, appellate judges are busy too and to "pass the buck" onto the Court of Appeals is an irresponsible use of State resources and doing so recklessly causes irreparable harm (especially if it involves the custody of a child).
The Georgia Code of Judicial Ethics bars the mere ''appearance'' of impropriety. As to the practices and habits implemented by Judge Brantley, it "appears" that recklessly rushed rulings and "rubber-stamped orders" are his primary go-to tools for closing out cases. He's simply not preparing for cases over which he presides and blitzes to the conclusion he wants without properly verifying the law or facts to his cases. And to justify these practices, Brantley asserts that "If the losing party doesn't like it, they can deal with it on appeal." This way of rapidly closing cases is severely flawed as many people cannot afford the long-drawn-out appellate process and, in the meantime, their rights and liberties can be trampled with no recourse pending appeal. Further, appellate judges are busy too and to "pass the buck" onto the Court of Appeals is an irresponsible use of State resources and doing so causes irreparable harm (especially if it involves the custody of a child).


So, what exactly does this have to do with Judge Bowers? Consider the following:
So, what exactly does this have to do with Cobb County State Court Judge Carl W. Bowers? Consider the following:
In 2017, Judge Bowers presided over a case. I could not believe that happened. Why would Judge Bowers sign an order that made legal conclusions and findings of facts that were not supported by the law or the record? Further, in light of Judge Bower's public statements, we cannot consider any of this a coincidence.
In 2017, Judge Bowers presided over a case. I could not believe that happened. Why would Judge Bowers sign an order that made legal conclusions and findings of facts that were not supported by the law or the record? Further, in light of Judge Bower's public statements, we cannot consider any of this a coincidence.
Early in Judge Bowers' career, he served as Judge Brantley's staff attorney--a job likely handed to Bowers in light of his family's longtime relationship with Judge Brantley. Specifically, former Georgia Attorney General Mike Bowers was Judge Brantley's supervising officer in the military.
Early in Judge Bowers' career, he served as Judge Brantley's staff attorney--a job likely handed to Bowers in light of his family's longtime relationship with Judge Brantley. Specifically, former Georgia Attorney General Mike Bowers was Judge Brantley's supervising officer in the military.
(username removed)