ARROGANCE, ENTITLEMENT, INCOMPETENCE, ILL HEALTH OR WORSE?

I'm talking about Superior Court Justice Susanne Goodman. Apparently she is unable or unwilling to carry out her duties properly. The article in today's Waterloo Region Record is titled "Top court blasts judge's conduct, quashes verdict". The verdict was a not guilty one in the case of a man charged with beating and sexually assaulting a woman. Her injuries when police arrived included severe bruising, swelling, numerous cuts and bleeding to her face and head. The victim testified that she had lived with the man and he had been assaulting her over a period of months. He denied the accusations.

The judge acquitted him at the end of the trial and indicated that her written reasons would follow on a certain date. They did not. Over the next six months prosecutors repeatedly asked for them and were told that they would be produced on a certain date. Again they were not. The Appeal Court has overturned the not guilty verdict and ordered a new trial. They have also advised that this situation has occurred previously with this judge and a new trial ordered then as well.

So my first question is this. If the judge had produced as promised written reasons for her decision would that have been the end of it regardless? Regardless of legal considerations, common sense or a just plain appropriate verdict flowing from the evidence presented? So is the issue the lack of written reasons period or is it that she made a really horrible decision that cannot remotely be justified whatever her reasons might be? Finally is it possible that she intentionally sabotaged her not guilty verdict hoping to allow the prosecution a second kick at the can?

My second question is this. If she is incompetent for whatever reason why did it take her failing to produce promised written reasons twice before the Appeal Court are saying no more? Are judges able to produce injustice as long as they follow the proper process? Also while you can have the Crown step up and object to either an allegedly poor decision or process, what happens when the defendant can not afford to hire legal representation for an appeal of an allegedly poor decision? Especially the same thing in civil cases. Here in Waterloo Region we have some horrible judges that frankly aren't fit to judge a dog much less a human being. Where is their accountability?