Charles Kramer, The Levison Group
Chief Judge Raymond Voet of the Ionia Michigan District Court, is known to have little patience for technological interruptions. Beeps, whistles, hums, dings, and ringtones have no place in his courtroom, and he makes everyone know it. Don’t even get him started with an Angry Birds sighting, or some other ingenious cell phone app. Ringing is bad enough. Signs posted outside his hallowed halls advise civilian court-watchers that they face a $25 fine if their cell phone interrupts proceedings and all practitioners and clients are warned about contempt citations. The warnings are not idol threats. Judge Voet takes his edicts seriously and enforces them with vigor. He has been known to confiscate phones of attorneys, and to hold them in contempt if their phones interrupt his courtroom. He has also been known to confront police officers and even personal friends who commit similar affronts. Recently, however, the judge had no one to yell at when his proceedings were assaulted by a digital ring tone — because the offending phone was his own. (Unfortunately the ring tone was not a snippet from Ardo Cho’s “I’m the one to blame,” Chelsea Stubb’s “Its all about me,” BB King’s “Its my own fault,” or even Michael Jackson’s “The Man in the Mirror.” That would have been priceless.)
Apparently the learned judge had recently purchased a new phone, and didn’t know how to turn it off. He also wasn’t adept at hanging it up. As he tried to silence his robotic mocker, it began to give him advice on how to voice-dial, in a melodic digital voice which was loud enough for all to hear. Embarrassed, but not knocked from his preaching post, the judge finally silenced the offending instrument, banged his gavel to restore order, reemphasized his policy against cell phones in his court, and took his medicine like a man. He officially announced he was holding himself in contempt, and assessed the same $25 fine against himself. Although one would think the judge might have looked compassionately upon himself if he’d thrown himself on the mercy of the court or otherwise appealed, the jurist took the higher road. Court records reflect he simply paid the fine during a court recess shortly thereafter. He didn’t even berate the judge who’d assessed it under his breath while doing so.
As humorous as this tale may be, the reality is that it is a sad indictment of society. It is unfortunate that, in today’s world, the judge’s conduct is something to be recognized and applauded, as opposed to simply being business as usual. Yet uplifting or sad indictment, the reality is that it is rare indeed when a person of authority agrees to follow the rules he or she imposes on others. Can you imagine, for example, a police officer gazing down at her speedometer, seeing she is 15 over the speed limit, and switching on the lights and siren as she pulls over to give herself a ticket? Can you imagine the clerk at the local license plate renewal bureau waiting until he’s finished his cigarette and two cups of coffee before hitting the one key needed to complete the renewal of his own registration? Can you envision your friends sending themselves to their room for yelling at their child without good reason? Probably not. It is for this reason that Judge Voet needs to be commended, extolled and held out as an example.
So, here’s what I suggest. In recognition, support, and admiration of Judge Voet, lets all vow to leave our cell phones on, with ringer volume turned way up, between the hours of 8 a.m. and 2 p.m., on every May 2 from hereonafter, no matter where we are, or what we are doing. Word of warning, however. Although this demonstration will be in support of Judge Voet, if you’re an attorney practicing before him you may want to consider changing your ring tone to “What do you mean I’m going to Jail?” by the Kumquats. If the phone rings while you’re in his courtroom, I doubt he’ll be amused.
––––––––––
Under Analysis is a nationally syndicated column. Charles Kramer is a principal of the St. Louis, Missouri law firm Riezman, Berger, P.C. You may direct comments or criticisms about this column to the Levison Group c/o this newspaper, or direct to the Levison Group via e-mail, at comments@levisongroup.com.
© 2013 Under Analysis L.L.C.
