Example collocations logo

Judges in sentence

681 examples of Judges in a sentence

Give judges a list of mandatory sentences to impose for crimes, so that you don't need to rely on judges using their judgment.
So we managed to get two women judges on this war crimes tribunal.
And because of these reasons, we see prosecutors and judges and district attorneys starting to divert cases out of court and into restorative justice so that some people never touch the system altogether.
We elect the district attorneys, the judges and the legislators who operate these systems for we the people.
And I still remember the first cases where they came, all 25 together, she would stand up, and they were in the back, and they would support her, and the judges kept saying, "No, no, no, no, we're going to do things the exact same way we've been doing them."
I met with one of the development agencies, and they were training prosecutors and judges, which is the normal bias, as opposed to defenders.
That is why we train police officers, we train judges, we train public prosecutors around the world.
We can also train judges so that they find flexibilities in the law and so that they rule on the side of tolerance rather than prejudice.
And we always won because the judges were just so grossed out.
That's probably a topic that is best reserved for a room full of lawyers and judges.
One suggestion is that all of us become much more attuned to the necessity, through policy, through procedures, to get more science in the courtroom, and I think one large step toward that is more requirements, with all due respect to the law schools, of science, technology, engineering, mathematics for anyone going into the law, because they become the judges.
Think about how we select our judges in this country.
They're being judged also, and the judges are trained to give no nonverbal feedback, so they look like this.
But it ended up in this very long, protracted legal battle and there I was after five years fighting against Parliament in front of three of Britain's most eminent High Court judges waiting for their ruling about whether or not Parliament had to release this data.
Other outcomes include long-term stalking, even after the abuser remarries; denial of financial resources; and manipulation of the family court system to terrify the victim and her children, who are regularly forced by family court judges to spend unsupervised time with the man who beat their mother.
And the people who were highly trusted 20 years ago are still rather highly trusted: judges, nurses.
And when I talk to judges around the United States, which I do all the time now, they all say the same thing, which is that we put dangerous people in jail, and we let non-dangerous, nonviolent people out.
But when you start to look at the data, which, by the way, the judges don't have, when we start to look at the data, what we find time and time again, is that this isn't the case.
Judges have the best intentions when they make these decisions about risk, but they're making them subjectively.
What I decided to look for was a strong data and analytic risk assessment tool, something that would let judges actually understand with a scientific and objective way what the risk was that was posed by someone in front of them.
And that's the single most important thing that judges say when you talk to them.
One of the judges, Lord Atkin, described it like this: You must take care to avoid acts or omissions which you can reasonably foresee would be likely to injure your neighbor.
The judges debated as to, can they do this?
And something that we've seen, something about the PRISM program that's very concerning to me is, there's been a talking point in the U.S. government where they've said 15 federal judges have reviewed these programs and found them to be lawful, but what they don't tell you is those are secret judges in a secret court based on secret interpretations of law that's considered 34,000 warrant requests over 33 years, and in 33 years only rejected 11 government requests.
And it's important to note that the programs that we're talking about were all authorized by two different presidents, two different political parties, by Congress twice, and by federal judges 16 different times, and so this is not NSA running off and doing its own thing.
We need to educate law enforcement, attorneys, judges and jurors on juveniles' developmental limitations and how they can play out in a high-stakes interrogation.
And who judges?
For example, in "Birds," the Chorus takes the role of different birds and threatens the Athenian judges that if their play doesn’t win first prize, they’ll defecate on them as they walk around the city.
Perhaps the judges didn’t appreciate the joke, as the play came in second.
On one hand, legal things are invisible to judges.
Next