Advertisement 1

Ontario judge wore red ball cap, not white hood

Article content

Judging by the solemnity and formality of the process, and the antipathy with which some have followed the proceedings, you could be forgiven for thinking Justice Bernd Zabel had shown up in court that fateful day wearing a white hood rather than a red baseball cap.

Eighty-one people filed formal complaints when, in the shocked delirium of the morning after the 2016 American election, Justice Zabel arrived to preside over his courtroom wearing the red Make America Great Again trademark of President-elect Donald Trump. The four-member disciplinary panel of the Ontario Judicial Council has reserved its judgment to consider what penalty to impose on the 27-year veteran of the bench.

Politics and courtrooms do not mix and Justice Zabel had to have known that, what he characterized as a joke, was a highly improper display of impulsive imprudence at best. One of his own judicial colleagues recalled seeing Zabel wearing the hat and, questioning his sanity, asked “are you out of your mind?”

Zabel took the stand and apologetically claimed that the hat merely represented his clairvoyant prediction of Trump’s victory and not an endorsement of Trump’s campaign, comments, or policies. This testimony seemed mildly stretched in light of comments made at the time, and picked up by the courtroom’s recording equipment, in which Zabel said, “Pissed off the rest of the judges because they all voted for Hillary, so I was the only Trump supporter up there, but that’s OK.”

Presenting counsel, as the role of the prosecutor is known in such proceedings, made it abundantly clear in her submissions that Zabel’s crime was more than a mere fashion faux pas. In her view, donning the hat could reasonably be taken as an endorsement of racism, misogyny and all that is inconsistent with Canadian values. In other words, Zabel was one of the 61 million bad apples overflowing the ‘basket of deplorables’ who had just elected a monstrous buffoon to rule over our southern neighbour.

As the questioning and submissions progressed, it became clear that valid concerns over a judge’s irresponsible politicization of his courtroom had been long overtaken by an exercise in virtue signalling Canada’s disdain for America’s leadership choice.

Had Zabel doffed a Hillary ‘H’ that morning in his courtroom, there is little doubt that his indiscretion would have been met with a sternly-worded admonition in the privacy of his judicial chambers. But having chosen the wrong, though victorious, electoral candidate, the die was cast for a much more public exorcism.

“Lest there be any doubt, his words celebrated the result of the American election, and his words said he was a Trump supporter,” intoned presenting counsel in her submissions.

To borrow from U.S. parlance, the act of politicization was a misdemeanour, but the choice of politician was a felony.

twitter.com/prutschi

crimlawcanada.com 

Article content
Advertisement 2
Advertisement
Article content
Article content
Latest National Stories
    This Week in Flyers