The court case that I have observed was Matter of the Hon. Paul H. Senzer from June 2020.  In this case a judge was taken to court on the context of him sending vulgar and sexist emails to lawyers and clients. As a result of that they are now on trial trying to decided whether or not he should be removed. In this case to my understanding the defendants lawyer is trying to argue to the judges that the punishment that they are giving the judge who has committed these acts is considered as way too harsh, basically that the crime doesn’t fit the punishment. The other party to my understanding is trying to point out that this judge should be held accountable for his actions for disrespecting a individual based off of their gender being that he was sexualizing a women, and also that he knew what he was doing.

Honestly my personal response to this would be that I believed that everyone conducted themselves in an appropriate matter. No one was like yelling or talking over each other or doing things alone those lines. I believe that the judge who committed the act of sending those emails was wrong only because hearing that kind of news puts a bad rep on judges, because in my eyes I look at it as if this was probably the only time he got caught doing this rather then it being his first time doing it if you understand what i’m saying. Also I feel as if the defendants lawyer kept repeating the same thing and trying to make it seem as if the judge who committed the wrongful act did not know what he was doing or as if what he was doing was not bad. In my eyes he made it seem as if it was just a mistake. The other parties side I feel as if he did his best trying to point out why what the judge did was wrong and why he should be punished for it. He tries to tell why the judge having these gender biases , and being inappropriate is something in which he should be held accountable for. I do not think anything surprises me about this case. I feel like I understand what was going on I do not think I understand what the judges was asking or trying to say very well though. I feel like I found the other parties side more persuasive because I feel like he provided many reasons to why what he did was wrong. I think the defendants lawyer did a good job at citing cases even though they did not really go with what the judge did.