A Lowcounty, S.C. family court judge deemed unfit to serve (twice) by a notoriously corrupt state judicial commission is reportedly preparing to sue the commissioners, who include several powerful lawmakers rumored to hold grudges against her based on her rulings.
One of the commission members – powerful Senate President Glenn McConnell – is also reportedly eying the judge’s seat for one of his former law partners.
Judge F.P. “Charlie” Segars-Andrews has reportedly retained one of the state’s top civil rights attorneys for the purpose of suing South Carolina’s ethically-challenged Judicial Merit Selection Commission, a government entity which FITS readers will recall is no stranger to controversy.
Particularly controversy that involves legislative meddling.
Our sources declined to name the attorney who is said to be in consultation with Segars-Andrews, but speculation in Charleston quickly centered around veteran civil rights lawyer Armand Derfner, whose practice is based in Charleston, S.C.
Derfner’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Details of Segars-Andrews’ case are sketchy at this point, except that the legal arguments are said to have “solid constitutional grounds.”
The news comes one day after the commission released its report on the judge, a curious document that focused almost exclusively on a single divorce case in which the judge allegedly failed to recuse herself after discovering a conflict of interest.
The commission also responded yesterday to a FOIA request submitted by FITS – a response which is currently being reviewed by our legal counsel.
According to her supporters, Judge Segars-Andrews is the epitome of judicial purity, a crusading judge who is unafraid to let powerful politicos strong-arm her or dictate rulings in her court. To her detractors, she’s an unethical scam artist of the first order who is involved in an elaborate scheme (along with another judge) to steer favorable rulings to her husband and another local attorney.
By Todd December 17, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Queen Jean Toal will never let this happen. She can’t have her sacred Commission on Judicial Conduct investigated which will have to be a part of this lawsuit. Sic, if this comes to pass, you will have a field day. Upgrade your computers young man, ’cause the dam will break with leaks from the Gervais Street palace. I bet the luv guv would pay the filing fee to go ahead and get this suit filed.
By weighing in December 17, 2009 at 6:05 pm
Glenn McConnell hasn’t practiced law in over 25 years, and even when he did practice, he did a lot of legal aid work. I doubt he is jockeying for someone he practiced with almost 3 decades ago.
By kyle December 17, 2009 at 6:48 pm
I wouldn’t be so surprised. he made a big deal about getting her on the lottery commission and before that…she was either on the judicial merit selection commission or the local screening committee that is attached to it. He has kept Mullholand involved in board/commission power for years.
By justme December 17, 2009 at 7:14 pm
Angela Mulholland (his former law partner) has said she is not interested (on this blog). That was an initial rumor but doesn’t seem to be true. Ask Chip Limehouse about his role in this – or Wallace Scarborough. Both of them are unhappy with the judge’s rulings. Also, look closely at Mr. Simpson. He is a documented liar, far from the victim he made himself out to be. . . Why did the House pass a resolution – sponsored by Delleney and Clemmons a year ago lauding the judge, only to have this committee turn around on her a year later. As I have said before, something is fishy . . . .
Jakie Knotts isn’t voting for her because he says she is “arrogant.” That is so far from true it’s not even worth this sentence. There are such judges, but she is not one of them. When I was a baby lawyer she never once jumped on me for my mistakes. Other judges would have excoriated me.
By Trey December 17, 2009 at 8:43 pm
Time for Gedney Howe.
By Huhhh??? December 17, 2009 at 9:31 pm
Are judges “entitled” to keep their jobs regardless of what the Commission decides? Why have the Commission?
Let the judges duel (good way to get rid of some lawyers) or cut cards to see who gets to sit on the bench. Is that what Charlie wants?
You don’t appoint me, I’ll sue you?? Her arrogance is showing big time. Like with Judge Goode, there comes a time to tuck tail…
I know nothing about this judge except what I have read in the Post and Courier since this mess started. Based on comments, most of those identifying themselves as lawyers like her. Most of the ordinary folk who have had cases before her do not.
Things have gotten so hot P & C stopped taking comments on the stories at one point.
How do judges get to be so arrogant in this state? They have to kiss the butts of the most corrupt politicians in the country to get their jobs. I don’t understand how they can have any self-respect. But, I never liked ass kissers. Nothing, no amount of prestige, no amount of obscene retirement benefits is worth kissing ass. They are beneath contempt and just don’t know it.
By HE-MAN December 18, 2009 at 12:48 am
WE NEED MORE TODD RUTHERFORD SCREAMING THE TRUTH AT THESE FUCKERS!!!!
IDIOTS GOTDAMMIT!!!!!
By Ynot December 18, 2009 at 7:01 am
the real problem is that this entire state is rampant with corruption.
if the bow breaks, the baby will fall… and down will come legislators, senators et al.
By Charlie December 18, 2009 at 7:58 am
Todd, you are completely wrong. The commission that found the judge unqualified is a legislative commission. Jean Toal’s commission on judicial impartiality or whatever has released a statement completely disagreeing with the commission’s report. http://scbar.org/news/news/501/
By Todd December 18, 2009 at 8:28 am
Charlie: I understand the Commission which found Judge Segars-Andrews “unqualified” is the legislative commission. The Commission on Judicial Conduct is the disciplinary arm of the Supreme Court which also reviewed this Simpson case and found Segars Andrews did nothing wrong. THAT commission is completely a Jean Toal discretionary, arbitrary and secret review group. ALL of its members are personally selected by Jean Toal. Segars Andrews is vice chair of this Commission #2. This THIRD Commission is the Commission for Judicial Indenpendence. It is a random group – also hand picked by Jean Toal – and completely dominated by her. It’s sole and only function is to reject accountability of the South Carolina Judiciary by anyone, anytime and anyplace. Try to find it listed somewhere, anywhere on the Judicial website. Nobody has never really heard of this group until these past few months.
By Manse December 18, 2009 at 8:35 am
@ Trey,
Gedney (like most attorneys) would never accept that kind of pay cut.
By Lilly Collette December 18, 2009 at 8:55 am
Professor Freeman’s reasons for believing that Francis P. Segars-Andrews should be allowed to continue to serve on the bench are without merit reflecting inaccuracies and rather insulting to people who have to rely on his decision making capacities.
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/judicialmeritpage/FinalSegarsAndrewsCharlie.pdf
Final Report Issued: Noon, Friday, December 18, 2009
Commission’s Finding
[…]
Professor John P. Freeman’s Comments:
[…] The difference between my vote and that of the other nine members of the Commission lies in our different conclusions drawn from those facts. My conclusions are as follows:
[…]
3. I concur in the finding implicit in my fellow Commission members’ votes that Judge Segars-Andrews erred in reversing course following her announced position that recusal was necessary. […]
4. In my mind Judge Segars-Andrews made a mistake when, having decided independently that recusal was required, she failed to stick to her guns. In other words, having decided she needed to step aside, she should have followed through and maintained her recusal. This mistake was compounded when Judge Segars-Andrews reversed course without giving Mr. Simpson, Jr., and his lawyer a chance to be heard to rebut the position taken by Mrs. Simpson, et al. At the Commission hearing, Judge Segars-Andrews conceded that in hindsight she should have held a hearing to announce her decision that she was not going to recuse herself.7 I note in passing that the procedure for Remittal of Disqualification under Canon 3 was not followed.
5. Despite my disagreement with decisions made by Judge Segars-
Andrews in her handling of the Simpson II matter, I nonetheless have no hesitation in finding that she should be qualified and nominated for another term as Family Court Judge. I hold this view for the following reasons:
[…]
Second, I do not believe we have a right to expect judges to be perfect or never make mistakes. All judges are human, and they will make mistakes. […] There has been no showing of a pattern of misconduct or that Judge Segars-Andrews is otherwise unfit to serve as a judge. In fact, putting aside the Simpson II flip-flop ruling, there is no credible evidence whatever casting doubt on her qualifications or overall performance in my estimation.
Third, I recognize that Mr. Simpson, Jr., believes he was treated unfairly, has lost faith in the system, etc. This is regrettable. […] Because judges are fallible, inevitably we will find well-meaning litigants who become the victims of an error of fact or law by a judge. I do not minimize or downplay this problem.
Fourth, I am concerned about the precedential impact of a decision finding Judge Segars-Andrews unqualified. For one thing, I believe she absolutely is qualified to be a Family Court judge. Beyond that, I believe good judges need to be honest, competent, independent, and fearless. […]
Without disparaging the good faith of any complainant, I worry that the Commission’s credibility will suffer if it becomes a sort of appellate court of last resort for people still anxious to attack judges after having already lost before ODC or in our appellate courts. We live in a litigious society, particularly when it comes to family law matters. There never will be a shortage of frustrated litigants who want to retry lost cases, placing blame on others, including the judges who sat at their trials.
LET ME REPEAT THAT:
Without disparaging the good faith of any complainant, I worry that the Commission’s credibility will suffer if it becomes a sort of appellate court of last resort for people still anxious to attack judges after having already lost before ODC or in our appellate courts. We live in a litigious society, particularly when it comes to family law matters. There never will be a shortage of frustrated litigants who want to retry lost cases, placing blame on others, including the judges who sat at their trials.
It is of CONCERN that this philosophy has been instilled in the law students who have been taught by professor Freeman and are now practicing in our courts.
By Patriot1776 December 18, 2009 at 9:04 am
Segars-Andrews sue? Robert Rosen is pushing it. He is the evil joker. Batman will crush the villians. Any lawsuit is a conflict of interest. Every judge will have to recuse themselves.
Bunch of sore losers. She is a total fool and so are her supporters. Like I said, let them “bring it on” …. it will be interesting and entertaining to watch them all get deeper in doodoo. Rosen will go down in flames. In one case, he used Segars-Andrews to milk over ONE MILLION dollars in legal fees out of a wealthy woman named “Inga Ginsberg.” Don’t want to believe it? Check the case file at the Chas County Family Court.
By Patriot1776 December 18, 2009 at 9:19 am
BTW …. If fitsnews.com discloses my isp and other system information that it records to other parties, I will hear about it.
By Patriot1776 December 18, 2009 at 9:22 am
Todd: The Commission on Judicial Conduct is going to end up being investigated.
By JR December 18, 2009 at 9:27 am
Ahem, you don’t center around something. Thank you.
By John Grisham December 18, 2009 at 11:01 am
There is no place in a family court system for a judge’s acts of hubris. One of the JMSC members, Don Sellers, a trial lawyer from Greenville, summed it up:
“Judge Segars-Andrews refused to acknowledge what appeared to me to be the obvious. I can only conclude that Judge Segars-Andrews still does not recognize the high ethical standards imposed upon judges to avoid even the appearance of
impropriety.”
Another blogger writes: “Segars-Andrews had a responsibility to recuse herself from a conflicted situation and she chose to rule regardless. “Unqualified” sums up the act, but you have to ask yourself if a 16 year Judge was motivated by over confidence in her authority or a subconscious wish to be removed. For whatever reason, Segars-Andrews chose to ignore this “conflict of interest” and will need to face the consequences.”
It is concerning to me that the Commission on Judicial Conduct did not even investigate the case and the appellate court did not remand. Hmmmm. It does seem as if the Commission on Judicial Conduct needs to be investigated, for this case and others…. hubris seems to be insidious in our judicial system, all the way to the Queen.
By Domestic Attorney December 18, 2009 at 11:11 am
Approximately 85% of my practice occurs in the Family Court, though I have never appeared before this particular judge and, frankly, had never heard of her before this issue came up. However, it appears that people are either missing the boat, have been fed rhetoric about our justice system till they are bloated with it, or have suffered some personal grievance for which they now deem it most appropriate to throw out the baby with the bathwater.
The fact is that these judges handle as many a 100 cases in a single week at times. Some are as quick as a 5-minute Clerk’s rule for failure to pay support, others can last weeks as parties fight over children, large marital estates, and businesses. To find that a judge is unqualified because they made an erroneous decision in one request for recusal over 16 years is severe. To do so when the judge relied on an affidavit from a qualified and very respected ethical expert in making that decision is abominable. Judges are often overturned on decisions based on judicial review, and this is part of the natural process. By the arguments proposed in comments on this site, anytime a ruling is overturned, that judge should no longer be allowed to hold office. Preposterous.
Furthermore, it is a dangerous, slippery slope if we allow disgruntled parties to control the re-election of a family court judge because in most contested cases, at least one of the parties is always going to be disgruntled. It is an inevitability. In fact, a judge I respect greatly clerked for once stated that, if both parties were somewhat upset at the result, the decision was probably fair.
As for this case, the ‘aggrieved party’ actually won most of the issues. The one issue with which he really had problems was the award of attorney’s fees to his wife as part of the case. However, as was reported, one of the main problems in the case was that the husband convinced the wife to sign an initial agreement giving her about 5% of the marital estate, keeping 95% for himself. One of the factors in awarding attorney’s fees is which party was at fault for causing the fees to be incurred. Based on the husband’s attempts to bilk his wife out of that kind of money, it is not surprising that he was ordered to contribute that much toward her fees. That is equitable. That is why the appellate courts affirmed her decision. So, he got a fair result, but this one party is getting a judge thrown off the bench for a decision which was found to be fair and based on proper reasons upon review. Nauseating.
By Huhhh??? December 18, 2009 at 11:33 am
Prof. Freeman and some of the other attorneys demonstrate how inbred and clueless the legal system/business is.
There are people other than lawyers and judges in courtrooms. They see judges throw fits, fall down drunk, show contempt for the CITIZENS appearing before them, etc…
No judge, no lawyer, just like no doctor, is inherently better than anyone else and does not have the right to treat people like anything but the equals they are.
You have brought the contempt many people feel for the legal system/business on yourselves with your vile displays of arrogance.
By Todd December 18, 2009 at 3:13 pm
Domestic Attorney: If the facts as you wrote them were true, and I am not submitting they are not accurate, then an honest Judicial discipline system which had the respect of the public, legislature and BAR would have investigated the matter appropriately, would have issued an honest report in a timely manner and that would have been the end of it. People would have respected and adhered to that Commission’s decision. However, that is not what we have to work with in South Carolina. Neither the Kenny Goode case or Charlie Segars Andrews case would have been taken to the JMSC if we had a Supreme Court with an ounce of integrity. Toal protected Goode and Segars Andrews and this is what happened. We have a mess on our hands now.
By Domestic Attorney December 18, 2009 at 4:03 pm
Based upon the venomous bile spewed by “Huhhh???”, I feel safe in assuming that this individual falls into one of the latter two categories: “have been fed rhetoric about our justice system till they are bloated with it, or have suffered some personal grievance for which they now deem it most appropriate to throw out the baby with the bathwater”.
In my 11 years of practice and 15 years around the legal system, I have never seen a judge treat anyone with the lack of respect alluded to in these statements, unless a lack of respect was first shown for the court or the process by the individual. While sometimes harsh, I have never seen a decision which showed contempt for anyone, except those who were in contempt themselves first. I can guarantee I have never seen a judge fall down drunk or throw a fit, unless (the latter) prodded to do so by the intolerable acts or statements of a individual involved in the process in front of the Court.
Furthermore, rarely are blanket characterizations accurate for an entire profession. Doctors and lawyers as a whole are arrogant? As for lawyers and judges, infrequently have I found that to be true. This statement smirks of the type of bigotry usually present in statements which start with “you people”. I think I was just a victim of – not racism – but ‘vocationism’ or ‘careerism’. How novel.
By witness December 18, 2009 at 4:52 pm
Dear Dometic Attorney:
I am very happy for you that there is not the level of corruption in the family court system in your district as exists in Charleston County. The family court cartel is so well establish and so strong, that people fear speaking out. Several legislators have expressed that the Charleston County Family Court is the most corrupt in the state.
May I assure you the Simpson case is not an isolated example. There are many many more cases wherein Mrs. Andrews has exhibited the same lack of ethics, and worse.
In a recent article in the Post and Courier, a Charleston attorney stated that Mrs. Andrews makes herself available to receive phone calls from attorneys at her home after hours, and has even issued orders from her home after hours. Would you have any confidence going into her Court the next day and wondering if the opposing attorney had had ex parte communications with her the night before?
I bring to your attention the following quotations from the Opinion in one of Mrs. Andrews cases that was appealed, Callen v. Callen.
“In this case we do not address the sufficiency of the evidence, because the family court’s findings of fact are so tainted by errors of law as to require us to reverse the court’s decision and remand the case for a new hearing.”
“The court also committed reversible error in admitting the testimonies of allegedly surprise witnesses without first making the required inquiry and exercising discretion.”
I believe that this further demonstrates the course of conduct of Mrs. Andrews, and gives further weight to my assertion that the Simpson case is but one of many examples of her unethical judicial conduct.
Many of the people who have posted comments about her are not merely “disgruntled litigants” who did not like her decisions, they are people whose rights have been denied, whose cases were decided by a judge devoid of discretion, ruling with complete disregard for the evidence, the rules of procedure, federal and state statutes, and well established precedence, and these “disgruntled litigants” lives and their children’s lives have been irreparably damaged.
JMSC has done the citizens and children of Charleston County a tremendous service to remove Mrs. Andrews from the bench. It would be so nice to go to Charleston family court confident that one would recive a fair and impartial hearing.
By You Make Me FITS December 18, 2009 at 5:24 pm
FITS – here’s a wild notion, maybe she just didn’t pass the screening commissions guidelines to be fit for service on the bench, and the screening commission is not supposed to disperse the information which may be highly personal in nature, as to why she was unfit. But, I know…it’s a conspiracy…
P.S. how is the screeing committee “notoriously corrupt?”
By Lilly Collette December 18, 2009 at 6:27 pm
If Segars-Andrews wants to sue on an alleged violation of her civil rights — it’s my right to post comments on her at http://www.aclu.org/blog
It is my intent to stay on this woman’s case until she is brought to justice for her fraud and related criminal misconduct.
By Jeff December 18, 2009 at 10:46 pm
Judge Segars’ divorce decision was upheld by the Court of Appeal, the divorced Husband’s complaint to the Court’s Ethic Board, the Office of Disciplinary Council (ODC) was summarily dismissed— so far so good. Then the legislative Selection Commission finds her “unqualified” for re-election. But the Judge’s relative’s (her husband’s) law partner gave an expert opinion in a prior and “unrelated” case against the Husband’s father. But the same lawyers were in both cases. The Judge’s relative’s (her husband’s) share of that expert’s fee was $300,000. While that have may have a certain smell about it, the Judge’s decision in the subject case was seen as not unduly hurtful or unfair to the Husband. This is a two term judge having served 16 years and having been twice been found “qualified” by this very same Commission and elected to office twice.
This is very curious and extremely rare case. My though is if the judge has had an ethical lapse, the place (jurisdiction) that should be decided is with the Court’s ethical arm, not by the legislative branch— separation of powers etc. Even if the judge is later found “qualified”, the entire General Assembly can always deny her a re-election. It may be some what confusing and tangled, but please read both reports/statements and dissenting opinions—- before you decide.
“The Judicial Merit Selection Commission has released its draft Report of
a Candidate’s Qualifications on Judge F.P. “Charlie” Segars-Andrews,
Family Court, Ninth Judicial Circuit, Seat 1. Please be advised that
this report will not be final until noon on Friday, December 18. The
text of the report can be accessed here
.
Commission on Judicial Independence and Impartiality releases statement
To view a statement from the Commission on Judicial Independence and
Impartiality regarding the Judicial Merit Selection Commission’s report
on Judge Segars-Andrews, click here
“.
By Lilly Collette December 19, 2009 at 4:59 am
TRANSCRIPTS AND EXHIBITS FROM HEARINGS FOR JUDGE SEGARS-ANDREWS
http://www.scstatehouse.gov/judicialmeritpage/TranscriptInfo120209/TranscriptInfoDecember2009.html
By Ynot December 19, 2009 at 7:12 am
there are other judges that also need to be dealt with as well.
By stand828 December 19, 2009 at 2:29 pm
A judge in South Carolina would have to send someone to death row for a traffic violation or the equivalent for the ODC or the court’s ethic board (I assume you mean the Commission on Judicial Conduct) to conduct a genuine investigation of a judge, unless perhaps he’s a lowly magistrate. Like so much in this state, it depends on your position and your connections.
Would anybody believe the blatant lie told by Jean Toal to explain her first auto accident in which she left the scene. She didn’t notice having hit another car, doing $5,000 worth of damage, because she was listening to a book-on-tape while her car’s air conditioning was on? She didn’t notice the major damage to her own car when she got out to walk to her house? Right.
How can a Court of Appeals judge (Cureton) arrested on a CDV charge for assaulting his wife have nothing happen to him , yet an Anderson County magistrate (Michael Smith)charged with simple assault for allegedly touching a woman inappropriately in a bar (he was cleared in a jury trial) be suspended without pay, and not reinstated after being found innocent? Toal and Cureton get away with not so much as a reprimand, but Smith is out of a job. Explain that.
The powerful are protected by who they know, that’s wrong, and along with the self-important arrogance of so many on the bench in this state, it does more to damage the public’s opinion of the integrity of the judicial system than anything Ms. Segars-Andrews may have done in one case. People aren’t blind, but they accept the fact that it’s just the way it is, and it isn’t likely to change. That’s why this outcome is so surprising, and why so many have come forward to support finding Ms. Segars-Andrews unqualified. It finally appears that a judge isn’t necessarily bulletproof and can be held accountable for her actions.
By Lilly Collette December 20, 2009 at 5:22 am
Take a look at http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=628405884&ref=name
for some facts on Segars-Andrews.
By Not Sayin', Just Sayin' December 20, 2009 at 10:59 am
She’s a very weak judge, but I don’t think she should’ve been found “unqualified”.
By Patriot1776 December 20, 2009 at 12:42 pm
Remember the Tommy Ravenel case?
Why did the SC State Law Enforcement Division (SLED) tip off former SC State Senator and former US Congressman “Arthur Ravenel” that his son was being being watched and investigated by Federal Agents and SLED before little Tommy was ever busted?
Who was protecting who that was connected to the Ravenel’s?
By Patriot1776 December 20, 2009 at 12:49 pm
Not Sayin’ ….. did you read the JMSC report? I thought it was, in part, funny. The allegations about the “valentines day card” and instant messaging during oral argument before the court was hilarious!
By justme December 20, 2009 at 8:26 pm
Let’s be clear – there was no credible evidence that Judge S-A was text messaging during Mr. Simposn’s part of the trial. In fact, her notes demonstrate the opposite. When is someone going to acknowledge publicly that Mr. Simspson (and his father) are documented perjurers??
By Guy Richards III December 20, 2009 at 9:44 pm
The complaint will be filed tomorrow or the next day. It is succinct, strong, and bases its arguments on solid and clear constitutional grounds. I am curious to see how the Committee will answer.
Judge Segars-Andrews is rumored to be meeting with revered civil rights attorney, Gloria Allred this week. She has been involved in the cases of Scott Peterson, Michael Jackson, the Octomom, Paula Jones, and most recently in representing Tiger Woods’s mistress, Rachel Uchitel.
If suits are to be filed against those now known to have conspired together to unseat Judge Segars-Andrews, I would hate to be in their position and have to go against an attorney like Glora Allred. She is not someone I would want to face in the court room.
By stand828 December 20, 2009 at 10:37 pm
Segars-Andrews thinks this is a civil rights issue? Please. And Gloria Allred ain’t all that, but I wish she would get involved. Then the media spotlight on the corruption in the judicial system in this state would be even harder for the public to ignore…
By Lilly Collette December 21, 2009 at 7:07 am
In one breath it is said, “The complaint will be filed tomorrow or the next day” and in the next breath it is said, “If suits are to be filed […]”.
It is also said that the complaint “is succinct, strong, and bases its arguments on solid and clear constitutional grounds” raising some allegations of a conspiracy to unseat Segars-Andrews. However, there is no mention of that annoying little thing called— Evidence.
Segars-Andrews is of course free to say what she wants in her complaint. However, there are some restrictions and penalties on that found at S.C. Code. Section 15-36-10. Frivolous Civil Proceedings Sanctions Act. http://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t15c036.htm
Name dropping is considered to be in poor taste. I sincerely doubt that Ms. Allred would appreciate her name being used in an immature attempt to intimidate.
Yall have a nice day now ya hear.
By Chas. Div. Atty. December 21, 2009 at 7:43 am
I have practiced in Family Court for over 25 years. I’ve appealed many judges decisions, especially Segars-Andrews decisions. The truth of the matter is that Segars-Andrews is not the worst judge in S>C>, nor is she (by any stretch of the imagination, one of the best judges. It may well be that she is subject to back room politics motivating the decision…so what. All judges in South Carolina are elected solely based on their political support and merit has little or nothing to do with it ever. A number of judges have been elected who were clearly the “mental runts of the litter” to be chosen from and succeeded solely because they had the votes and only because they had the votes…not merit. Some of these most obvious selections include: Ct of App. “judge” Huff; Cir. Ct. “judge” Jefferson; former Cir. Ct. “judge” Danny Martin; Cir. Ct. “judge”Liz Harrington…and more. Segars-Andrews only received her position purely because of political support and I don’t remember her raising cain that it was unfair then…live by the sword and die by the sword….grow up. Fortunately, there have been a number of wise, intelligent well qualified people who managed to get enough political clout to get a judgeship, but without the politics, they would not have been able to receive the judgeship. By the way, you should go through her decisions that were appealed and torn apart on appeal, often because they were just plain stupid decisions transparently based on an agenda personally held by Segars-Andrews…..common knowledge among practicing divorce attorneys, but no one wants to take the heat by themselves pointing that out publicly. Until the system really changes….it’ll always be only about the politics. At least this time politics finally weeded out one of the runts that never should have been there in the first place.
By Todd December 21, 2009 at 8:51 am
Queen Jean and others are pushing to get the Wilkins heir (Republican) out of the US Attorneys office and get her do-boy, Alex Sanders’ son in law Bill Nettles (yeller dog Democrat) in there ASAP. An investigation into her Commission on Judicial Conduct would not be pretty.
By Just a thought December 21, 2009 at 9:10 am
The most powerful argument why Ms. Segars-Andrews must not be re-appointed. A significant number people believe they cannot get a fair hearing. That is the problem, not qualifications.
By Patriot1776 December 22, 2009 at 12:07 pm
Segars-Andrews and her supporters are obviously delusional. I guess we are going to have to teach them a hard lesson. First shot will be criminal charges against those making or attempting to make contact with the members of the JMSC. Don’t think it will happen? You’ll see. The entire SC judicial system is going to get turned inside out because of Segars-Andrews and Robert Rosen.
By Patriot1776 December 22, 2009 at 12:10 pm
Judicial Watch is coming in to investigate.
By Lilly Collette December 22, 2009 at 5:28 pm
http://www.postandcourier.com/news/2009/dec/22/segars-andrews-asks-supreme-court-weigh/
Ninth Circuit Family Court Judge F.P. “Charlie” Segars Andrews is asking the S.C. Supreme Court to void a decision that would knock her off the bench next year. […] “There are serious issues of constitutional law involved in this case,” her complaint says. “The fundamental issue involves far-reaching issues of protecting judicial independence.”
——————————————
The most serious issues in this case is how can Segars-Andrews throw her judicial independence on the spike of criminal misconduct and then expect to hide behind it after she has totally destroyed it.
By Knight_Family December 27, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Segars-Andrews is not alone! you could fill a barge with others from charleston county. the commission removed Segars for unethical conduct… what about probate judge irv condon who is responsible of his underlings that violated judge youngs orders, limitations and restrictions place on them in october 2005… the victims are still suffering.. the Supreme Court removed the authority of Condon and one attorney.. judge Dennis remanded the case the appeal and all motions back to Condon and then they sent the case to judge mary blunt in summerville… who used the orders from the rotten history and get this .. until I exposed the relationship.. Blunt’s attorney was Ben Mack while I was paying Mack to rep my mother… Among themselves… these lawyers see no problems and have not objections…. they clients however have another opinion.. of which we were not even allowed to express… Soon I hope Judge Irv Condon (and his Associates), and Judge Blunt join the fait of Judge Segars-Andrews…They all violated sc code 62-1-308(c) and 15-75-20 and 15-75-60 to boot… I think i will try to turn Segars-Andrews case into a class action of court victims versus corrupt lawyers who impersonate the duties of judgeship in SC.. Join me anyone. Find us at Charleston County Probate Appeal REMANDED by Judge Dennis April 18 2008 case No. 2007-CP-10-4141 and make sure to read the way they hide my indictment of their behavior as the clerk listed the evidence as MISC documents… you can contact the Knight Family Class Action Committee at mildred.knight@comcast.net or constgrp@comcast.net
By Knight_Family December 27, 2009 at 12:45 pm
I wonder how the trio of Rosen-Defner-Sanders argue that any judge has had her/his personal constitutional rights violated….that is not a person .. I was under the impression that the courts ruled by applying the law… but it is nice to see the Segars-Andrews swallow in the irony of being a sore-loser and victimizes herself against the system…. I bet CCI is full of folks that feel the same way… she was found guilty by a legislative body that appoints judges… I say lets keep cleaning house and repeal probate and give everyone the Public Option to opt out of the law… any law… just pick one at random… Certainly, America is long past the double standard and change is on its way South Carolina… not only should these kinds of judges be off the bench … they should try some time behind bar… not continue to be members of one either….