Proud Member of The Moms Clean Air Force
Print This Post
Sep
27
Maybe fatal to him? More possibly fatal to her if it proves to be fatal to him?
Sigh. Just like I asked in this post on 5/2/06, does no one love Zach Reed?
Certainly not Cleveland Muni Court Judge Joan Synenberg, who is running against attorney Christine Russo for a Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court judicial seat.
Today, Synenberg decided that although Cleveland City Councilman Zach Reed, “is guilty of ‘terrible, unforgivable judgment,’…[he is] not guilty of a second probation violation…there was insufficient evidence that Reed drank alcohol in the last few months,” according to a Plain Dealer article. Synenberg then “released him from probation after giving him a tongue-lashing for continuing to frequent bars while prohibited from drinking alcohol during his probation for a drunken-driving conviction.”
Hmm, when’s the last time a tongue-lashing of an adult who has already broken the law related to drunk driving and violated probation kept that adult on the straight and narrow for the rest of his life?
Synenberg was a social worker after getting a BA at CSU and before she became a lawyer, including work in the Cuyahoga County Jail. I was a licensed social worker who did field work in the Cuyahoga County Juvenile Court and City Council while getting my JD/MSSA and then worked at a mental health agency for eight years.
So, if she thinks like a social worker still, even a little bit, she would not have made the decision she made in Reed’s case, given these facts:
This information about Reed’s original offense:
Reed was stopped by police in April 2005 when his car was swerving. He failed sobriety tests and registered an alcohol level of 0.28 – more than three times Ohio’s legal limit of 0.08.
He was later convicted of driving under the influence and disorderly conduct and sentenced to three days in an alcohol treatment program and a $650 fine.
This information in today’s PD account of Synenberg releasing Reed from probation:
Earlier this year, Reed told his probation officer that he had remained sober, then admitted in a May court hearing that he had consumed alcohol. Synenberg gave him 10 days in jail for that violation.
Once out, Reed continued barhopping.
One of his attorneys, George Forbes, questioned Reed’s judgment. Forbes said he and his wife were dining in the Warehouse District this summer when they saw Reed.
“What is wrong with you?” Forbes asked him. “What are you doing here?”
WOIO Channel 19 video recorded Reed recently at bars in the Warehouse District and the Flats.
Reed promised at Tuesday’s hearing that he had not consumed alcohol during those nights out. His probation officer doubted him, saying Reed previously misled her and has a “credibility problem.”
The probation officer recommended that Synenberg extend Reed’s probation six months and make him wear an electronic monitoring device and attend more alcohol abuse classes.
Synenberg reviewed the video of Reed at bars, and said while it may have appeared that he was drinking beer, she concluded he hadn’t been.
Anyone remember James Cline? Anyone remember Edele Passalacqua?
Cline blew through 11 DUIs before he killed two college students. How long can Zach Reed avoid being Cline?
Passalacqua was his assigned counsel on DUI #10 and assigned to #11. She asked to be removed as Cline’s counsel in #11, the judge refused, she didn’t show up and was fined $100. Just like Synenberg, she defended people accused of crimes. As Regina Brett writes about what Passalacqua says,
“I represent very bad people. Child molesters. Rapists. Murderers,” she said. “It’s what I do for a living.”
It’s what all criminal defense lawyers do: Protect the constitutional rights of defendants, regardless of what they think of those charged with crimes.
“My job is not to get them off for something they did,” Passalacqua said. “My job is exclusively to make sure the state of Ohio does its job.”
What we need are judges who will do theirs.
Did Synenberg do her job as judge with Reed? Does she pass this test set up by the case history of Cline and the judges who passed him down the line until he became a murderer?
Or did she identify too much with her old line of work as a criminal defense lawyer, representing people like Frank Gruttadauria?
In Passalacqua’s case, the PD endorsed her, but she lost by about 1000 votes.
In Synenberg’s case, the PD has endorsed her not once (less than a week after she entered the race in late August) but twice since she entered the race against Russo. I was confident that she can overcome the name game because of her qualifications and appeal, but now? I fear that Synenberg’s decision in Reed’s case will put her on the short end eventually, even if Reed stays clean for the next 42 days.
Very sadly, Zach Reed may wind up the best example of just how difficult it is for people to kick addictions, or even just plain old bad habits. And if he does turn out to be that example, Judge Synenberg may be made an example of as well.
I hope, hope, hope I am wrong.
By Jill Miller Zimon at 5:57 pm September 27th, 2006 in Politics
Comments
4 Responses to “Has Cuyahoga Cty judicial candidate/C-land Muni Judge Joan Synenberg made a fatal error with Zach Reed?”
Voted into Top 25 Political Mom Blogs
Now on sale-WLST essay included!
Posts About Pepper Pike City Council2010 WE Magazine 101 Women Bloggers to Watch
Category Specific RSS
Pepper Pike Cleveland+ Politics Women Ohio Elections Law Jewish
I hope you are wrong as well. Despite Judge Synenberg going too easy on Councilman Reed, she is eminently more qualified than Christine Russo. I am a registered Democrat but Ms Russo needs mopre than blind party loyalty…she needs to grow up.
Yes, she is more qualified. But qualified folks make mistakes, and even mistakes are okay. The problem here is that Synenberg has ample experience, ample exposure, ample knowledge, and ample limelight to realize that Reed was not only someone who could be made an example of, but failing to extend the probation for six more months and keep the bracelet on protects everyone – Reed included – from Reed.
Maybe they have some deal – or someone knows things we don’t about Reed’s new leaf. But there’s no indication of that. Sounds to me like he is still in denial. And I do not believe that he does not have a problem.
Someone innocent will probably end up paying the ultimate price before Judge Synenberg ever gets her head on straight.
In the meantime, the guilty, but well connected get to go free, or serve very minimal sentences.
Tragedy in her court wears the robe of a jurist.
Well, let’s be fair here. There’s no doubt that judges make mistakes. There’s no doubt that many, if not all judges, even if by accident, end up favoring the wrong side when they shouldn’t or fail to give credence to situations when they should. Let’s be real: the people are in court because they have issues – legal or otherwise – that they failed to resolve before filing in court.
Too many people pursue lawsuits way before it’s a last resort moment.
If I were a judge, one of the determiniative factors to me would be how many times have these people tried to get it right – whether we’re talking about their lives or their behavior toward others (like in a business transaction)? Are they just being bullies?
Because face it, the courts tend to favor bullies, although of course that’s not how it always goes (the one case I “tried” had me on the side of the presumptive “bully” but the law was 100% on my side and for good reasons).
Anyway – this is like the use of force when it shouldn’t be used. We end up teaching people to give up quickly and not develop their own resources for solving problems. And so they get their gun or they just say, I’ll take you to court.
In Reed’s case, I’m just shocked because Synenberg is so often described by proponents as this innovative creative caring judge. Not sure what is going on here.