|
Pinellas County probate court judge George W. Greer has crossed the line.
Greer appeared this past weekend as the lead speaker at the 10th anniversary symposium of the University of Pennsylvania Center for Bioethics in Philadelphia, Pa., the theme of which was "The Legacy of the Terri Schiavo Case: Why Is It So Hard To Die in America". He spoke on the topic of "Who Should Decide: Courts/Legislators".
Greer's legacy is that he's the killing judge in the case of Terri Schindler Schiavo, the woman who sustained brain injuries in 1990 at age 26 and left no living will. Her husband, Michael Schiavo claimed that she would not want to be kept alive by a feeding tube and battled her parents in the courts for nearly a decade for a court order to end her life, initially trying to end the woman's life without even informing her parents.
Terri died on March 31, 2005, 13 days after her death sentence was effected by Greer and Schiavo.
First of all, George Greer egregiously violated Florida's Code of Judicial Conduct and every other state's Code of Judicial Conduct by appearing in Philadelphia and at other such public gatherings which promote the singular interests of such groups.
Secondly, he mocked the Schindler family and denigrated them for exercising their Constitutional right to seek redress of grievances in the court. According to George Greer, if he'd had his way, he would deny litigants the appeal process, deny them their access to the courts unless they concur with his rulings. He clearly stated that he felt he should be autonomous and was obviously irritated because his rulings in the Schiavo case were not only challenged in the appellate courts and Supreme Court but also by the legislative and executive branches of government. Greer obviously doesn't feel that he should have any oversight, commenting that hopefully he wouldn't feel bad about reversals. He obviously doesn't advocate the balance of power or separation of powers---he wants all the power tilted to the "independent" judiciary.
No wonder George Greer doesn't like to have his decisions questioned and wants to avoid the appeals process. He has a 76% reversal rate and one would hope he would feel badly that he makes the wrong decisions in three quarters of the cases he adjudicates.
He made the wrong decision in the Schiavo case, a decision that was based on a fraud and deception at the expense of the disabled across America and more personally, Terri Schiavo and her family---her true family, not her husband in name only that acquired guardianship and control of her by lying to the court under oath in a falsified guardianship application.
How can a judge who is overturned by the Second District Court of Appeals of Florida in 21 of 29 cases in which decisions were issued be cited by the St. Petersburg Bar Association and other bar groups for "grace and professionalism", for following the rule of law and his "judicial independence"----even when he was overturned for improper admittance of hearsay testimony?
According to court records, from 1994 until May, 2004, Greer's decisions outside the Schiavo case were appealed 32 times. The 2nd DCA dismissed the petitions for appeal without rendering a decision in three of cases but of the 29 cases in which it did render a decision, the lower court decision of George Greer was reversed 22 times. How would you like your life in his hands, hands that signed the order to take the life of Terri Schiavo based on self-serving hearsay testimony which was accepted without proper cross examination and without even pre-trial depositions or interviews. Those same hands that killed Terri Schiavo and set the stage for the death of other vulnerable adults fumbled with and clutched his water goblet before his injudicious comedic routine before the bioethicists who don't seem to understand the concept of the sanctity of life?
In the cases they reversed, the appellate court held that Greer failed to hold required hearings, made unconstitutional rulings, acted outside of his jurisdiction, admitted inadmissible hearsay and committed numerous procedural errors. Sounds like the Schiavo case.
George Greer's entire demeanor at the symposium was obnoxious. His cavalier, sarcastic approach to the death of a handicapped woman is an affront to society and immediate grounds for his removal from the bench and indeed, any office of public trust as he clearly lacks the proper sensitivity for any public position. He treated his killing of a disabled individual as a big joke and clearly demonstrated his total lack of impartiality in the Schiavo case as well as his disdain for the Schindler family and their representatives. http://beansidhe.isc-net.upenn.edu:8080/ramgen/BioEthics/courts_legislaters.rm
Greer said if powers of government are centered in the executive branch, it results in monarchy. If powers of government are centered in the legislative branch, it results in anarchy. But what he didn't say---and what is the truest of all---if the powers of government are centered in the judicial branch---an unchecked judiciary----it results in tyranny.
Greer has been on a traveling road show the last couple of months, appearing with all the right-to-die proponents and clearly aligning himself with the euthanasia-Dr. Kevorkian sect. Canon 2B is a general prohibition of a judge from lending the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others----and that's exactly what George Greer has been doing by appearing at these bioethics symposiums and the program at Boston University for the School of Public Health. He has become the death judge of America, on a public speaking tour to advocate the killing of the vulnerable and disabled in America.
And that's not judicially and ethically proper.
Canon 5A of the Code of Judicial Conduct which addresses extrajudicial activities in general states, "a judge shall conduct all of the judge's extra-judicial activities so that they do not cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a judge, demean the judicial office or interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties.
Greer has flunked all categories. It should also say that he should not demean litigants as he did the Schindlers and Gov. Jeb. Bush.
Had George Greer bothered to inquire of the state judicial commission if his activities were ethically permitted, he would surely have been told no. In fact, a June 2003 ethics opinion specifically addresses a judge's involvement in a hospital ethics committee---very similar to Greer's appearance at a bioethics symposium. In fact, the opinion specifically references the Schiavo case.
The question posed was if a judge could serve on a hospital's ethics committee and the Florida Supreme Court said no, that such would be a violation of the Code of Judicial Conduct.
The Florida Supreme Court said that such was governed by Canon 2A which mandates that a judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary. If one views Greer's presentation at the bioethics symposium, there is absolutely no semblance of impartiality visible and his bias and disdain for the Schindler family, their attorneys and the attorneys representing Gov. Bush in Terri's Law is appalling.
The Florida Supreme Court's Commentary to Canon 2A of the judicial code states that "A judge must avoid all impropriety and the appearance of impropriety", The Court said that in the case of a judge involving himself in a hospital ethics committee, the judge participates in issuing opinions which promulgate policy and resolve medical/legal issues.
Bingo. That's exactly what Greer's appearance in Philadelphia was intended to do this past weekend and additionally, it was blatantly political in nature. Judges cannot be politically active. In fact, Greer blatantly made politics an issue and made a point of indicating that he is a Republican.
"These facts show that there is a potential for litigation involving the committee because the committee's opinions, which are obviously relied upon by hospital staff, may validate a course of treatment that becomes an issue in subsequent litigation", the Supreme Court's opinion said. "For example, litigation could result from the hospital's reliance upon the opinions of the committee concerning informed consent. Particularly troublesome are the opinions regarding DNR orders and living wills, which involve the termination of life-support procedures. Recently, a trial court and an appellate court grappled with such matters. See In Re Guardianship of Schiavo, 800 So. 2d 640 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Moreover, if the judge were to remain as a member of the ethics committee, we foresee that litigation could involve the inquiring judge as a witness or even as a defendant. The appearance of impropriety would be great if the judge were a member of a committee the opinion of which is connected with litigation".
George Greer's appearance at the bioethics symposium was ethically improper and bold judicial misconduct, total arrogance.
In the ethics opinion at issue, the Supreme Court also applied Canon 5A, writing that "Although the inquiring judge writes that the hospital is not located in the county in which the judge serves, both counties are in the same judicial circuit. Chief Judges are authorized to designate county judges to sit temporarily as circuit judges. ….The inquiring judge can be designated a circuit judge to hear cases from the circuit. The judge's close ties to the hospital would require recusal because the judge's impartiality would be called into question. Moreover, recusal would be required in the county court if the hospital appeared there on matters within the jurisdiction of the county court".
In that as administrative judge of the Sixth Judicial Circuit probate court, Greer's impartiality in all future guardianship cases is called into question and he is required to recuse himself in all such cases----that is, if the Supreme Court allows him to remain on the bench.
The Supreme Court ruled in the 2003 matter that "potential for conflict is so great as to create an untenable position for the inquiring judge".
In another ethics opinion issued by the Florida Supreme Court, this one in 1996, the Court held that a sitting judge cannot comment extensively on issues arising, and have actually arisen in other courts around the U.S. on a regular basis. While the 1996 opinion addressed a judge who wanted to be a TV commentator, it would also be applicable to such public appearances such as Greer has been engaging in up and down the Eastern seaboard.
In the 1996 opinion, the Supreme Court said that such extrajudicial activity would implicate, "at least, Canon 2B, Canon 3B(8) and Canon 5A. Once again, Canon 2B is a general prohibition against a judge from lending the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others---such as Michael Schiavo, Mary Labyak, Arthur Caplan, Jay Wolfson and Ronald Cranford, all principals in the death movement.
"A judge must ensure that extrajudicial activities do not cast reasonable doubt on the judge's capacity to act impartially as a judge. Here the inquiring judge proposes to comment extensively on issues arising, and have actually arisen in other courts around the United States. In this context, it would be nearly impossible for the judge to avoid injecting his own legal opinion or foreshadowing how he might rule on a contested legal issue", the Court ruled.
"On the question of demeaning the judicial office, the Committee recognizes that, in view of many, television news is largely a commercial endeavor. As recent experience with several high publicity legal proceedings has demonstrated, issues that come before courts are often not conducive to exposition in the "soundbyte" format of television news. Unfortunately, the extremely limited time available to a commentator on a television news show is not conducive to full and fair explanation of complex legal proceedings. Accordingly, the Committee has serious concerns that the commercial and entertainment aspects of a regular judicial appearance on a television news show might well outweigh the legitimate public information aspects".
That would seem to be applicable to Greer's traveling road show on euthanasia as well.
"Finally, with regard to the third consideration under Canon 5A, an extrajudicial activity must not interfere with the proper performance of judicial duties. Here, the judge proposes regular appearances on a local television news broadcast. Such an arrangement could well lead to a public perception that the judge has priorities other than proper performance of judicial duties. Moreover, article V, section 13 of the Florida Constitution mandates that all judges shall devote full time to their judicial duties. Again, the very real risk is the perception that the inquiring judge would be viewed as devoting a substantial amount of his productive time to a very public commercial endeavor unrelated to judicial duties".
George Greer claims that he follows the rule of law. But he's not following Article V, Section 13 of the Florida Constitution.
This is certainly applicable to Greer who has been more attuned to having his ego stroked and trying to defend his loyalties to the euthanasia and right-to-die movement than all of his other judicial duties. FLORIDA SUPREME COURT
COMMITTEE ON STANDARDS OF CONDUCT GOVERNING JUDGES - OPINION
Canon 1 of the Florida Judicial Code states that a judge should observe high standards of conduct and personally observes those standards.
The derisive, sarcastic demeanor exhibited by George Greer at the bioethics symposium last weekend is immediate cause for his removal from the bench. No wonder his church asked him to leave.
Irresponsible or improper conduct by judges erodes public confidence in the judiciary. A judge must avoid all impropriety and appearance of impropriety. A judge must expect to be the subject of constant public scrutiny. A judge must therefore accept restrictions on the judge's conduct that might be viewed as burdensome by the ordinary citizen and should do so freely and willingly. Examples are the restrictions on judicial speech imposed by Sections 3B(9) and (10) that are indispensable to the maintenance of the integrity, impartiality, and independence of the judiciary.
The test for appearance of impropriety is whether the conduct would create in reasonable minds, with knowledge of all the relevant circumstances that a reasonable inquiry would disclose, a perception that the judge's ability to carry out judicial responsibilities with integrity, impartiality, and competence is impaired.
In Greer's case, his integrity, impartiality and competence are major issues and issues which lend to the demand for his dismissal from all offices of public trust.
Quoting that pillar of propriety, U.S. Sen. Barney Frank of Massachusetts, Greer took issue with the legislative branch of government, saying that they were under no obligation to follow the law, it's not part of their oath, and that they are indeed swayed by public opinion.
Once again, Greer engages in pure hypocrisy if he would like the public to believe that he followed the law and had taken and filed his oath of office. He did neither. And as far as being swayed by public opinion, it's very clear that not only has he been swayed by public opinion, but he has a become the mouthpiece for the death movement in America and skewed polls which proclaim that people do not want government in the middle of family decisions.
What is ironic in this situation that while Michael Schiavo and George Greer and the rest of the right-to-die road show were on exhibit in Philadelphia expounding on bioethics, the State of Texas was trying to put Andrea Clark to death based on the 1999 Futile Care Law signed by then Gov. George W. Bush.
So how come Schiavo, Greer and company haven't become involved in the efforts to save Andrea Clark, to keep the government and St. Luke's Episcopal Hospital from overruling Andrea's expressed wish to live and that of her family? Are Greer and Schiavo talking out of both sides of their mouth again? How can the public have any confidence in any judicial decision of George Greer?
Maintaining the prestige of judicial office is essential to a system of government in which the judiciary functions independently of the executive and legislative branches. Respect for the judicial office facilitates the orderly conduct of legitimate judicial functions. Judges should distinguish between proper and improper use of the prestige of office in all of their activities.
Similarly, George Greer can't lend the prestige of his office to the right-to-die movement in America.
The Judicial Qualifications Commission is an independent agency created by the Florida Constitution solely to investigate alleged misconduct by Florida state judges. It is not a part of the Florida Supreme Court or the state courts and operates under rules it establishes for itself. The JQC has no authority over federal judges or judges in other states. Complaints against state judges must be filed with the JQC, not with the Supreme Court or any other state court or judge. Neither the Supreme Court nor its Chief Justice has any authority to investigate alleged misconduct by state judges or to investigate the JQC.
Complaints against George W. Greer or any other Florida judge can be filed with the Judicial Qualifications Commission, 1110 Thomasville Road, Tallahassee, Fla 32303.
The ethical standards for judges are called the Code of Judicial Conduct and they apply to all sitting judges, such as Greer. http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/decisions/ethics/index.shtml
The JQC can investigate complaints made by individuals, and it can investigate judges on its own initiative. During the initial investigation, the Constitution provides that all JQC complaints, investigations, and proceedings are confidential.
Complaints can be filed as a simple letter to the address above outlining the alleged misconduct of the judge. No form is required. Complaints cannot be filed with the Supreme Court, only with the JQC.
The JQC can investigate a judge for misconduct if a complaint is filed at any time while the judge is in office and for one year afterward.
Possible forms of discipline can include one or more of the following:
--No discipline
--A public reprimand
--A fine
--Suspension from office
--Removal from office
--Involuntary retirement due to serious illness
In addition to the JQC process, the Florida House of Representatives has authority to impeach judges, who then are tried for misconduct in the Florida Senate. Judges are removed from office by impeachment if found guilty by the Senate. No state judge has ever been found guilty following impeachment by the House. Apart from impeachment, only the JQC can recommend forms of discipline, which must be approved by the Florida Supreme Court. There are no other methods of disciplining judges for ethical misconduct authorized by Florida law, although all Florida judges can be voted out of office in regular elections.
Judges can be temporarily suspended from office while under investigation in only two ways. First, if a judge is impeached by the House and is awaiting trial by the Senate, an automatic suspension is imposed by the state Constitution. Second, the investigative panel of the JQC can request suspension with or without pay while it investigates a judge, which the Supreme Court must approve. No other governmental entities can suspend a judge from office pending an investigation. The Supreme Court has no authority to suspend a judge under formal investigation unless the JQC investigative panel first requests it. http://www.floridasupremecourt.org/pub_info/jqc.shtml
The performance of George W. Greer in Philadelphia last week was reprehensible. He clearly crossed the line. It's time to pull his plug and remove him from the bench. Perhaps he could get a job with George Felos and Deborah Bushnell and became a death advocate in the private sector rather that using the bench for his activism. 5-3-06
© 2006 North
Country Gazette
|
