Thomas Penfield Jackson: Difference between revisions
Dude, take a pill. Did Judge Jackson steal your girlfriend or something? POV removed again. |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
He is perhaps best known to the public as the presiding judge in the [[Microsoft antitrust case]] where his controversial handling of the case was the subject of discussion by both legal professionals and the media alike. |
He is perhaps best known to the public as the presiding judge in the [[Microsoft antitrust case]] where his controversial handling of the case was the subject of discussion by both legal professionals and the media alike. |
||
The judge's conduct during the case was [[controversial]] |
The judge's conduct during the case was extremely [[controversial]] and was later found to have unfairly favored the prosecution. This, along with his inappropriate public statements about the [[Microsoft]] Corporation and its employees while the case was still pending, eventually resulted in his removal from the case by the [[US Court of Appeals]]. Speaking about Microsoft executives, he compared them to "gangland killers" and "stubborn [[mules]] who should be walloped with a [[two-by-four]]". The judge also characterized Microsoft leader and co-founder [[Bill Gates]] as "unethical" as well as comparing him to a "[[Illegal drug trade|drug trafficker]]" and [[Napoleon]]. Statements of this nature by a presiding judge while the case is still being argued are considered to be a violation of ethical judicial conduct. |
||
Judge Jackson's order that Microsoft be divided into two companies, one owning the Windows operating system and the other owning Microsoft's various application software products, including the Internet Explorer Web browser, was also reversed on appeal. His factual findings, however, were upheld, as was his conclusion that Microsoft was liable for monopolization under Section 2 of the [[Sherman Act]]. |
Judge Jackson's order that Microsoft be divided into two companies, one owning the Windows operating system and the other owning Microsoft's various application software products, including the Internet Explorer Web browser, was also reversed on appeal. His factual findings, however, were upheld, as was his conclusion that Microsoft was liable for monopolization under Section 2 of the [[Sherman Act]]. |
||
The ruling was overturned by the US Court of Appeals who criticised Jackson's conduct and bias. Judge Jackson, in spite of the findings of the appellate court, denied that any such bias existed and insisted that any perception of bias in the minds of observers was created by Microsoft, though he declined to explain how this was done or even how it was possible. |
|||
When an unrelated case involving Microsoft and charges of [[discrimination]] was assigned to him in 2001, |
When an unrelated case involving Microsoft and charges of [[discrimination]] was assigned to him in 2001, Jackson [[recused]] himself from the case. |
||
Revision as of 17:20, 20 April 2005
Thomas Penfield Jackson (born January 10, 1937) is a US District Court Judge for the District of Columbia. He was appointed in 1982 after serving as president of the District of Columbia Bar Association.
He is perhaps best known to the public as the presiding judge in the Microsoft antitrust case where his controversial handling of the case was the subject of discussion by both legal professionals and the media alike.
The judge's conduct during the case was extremely controversial and was later found to have unfairly favored the prosecution. This, along with his inappropriate public statements about the Microsoft Corporation and its employees while the case was still pending, eventually resulted in his removal from the case by the US Court of Appeals. Speaking about Microsoft executives, he compared them to "gangland killers" and "stubborn mules who should be walloped with a two-by-four". The judge also characterized Microsoft leader and co-founder Bill Gates as "unethical" as well as comparing him to a "drug trafficker" and Napoleon. Statements of this nature by a presiding judge while the case is still being argued are considered to be a violation of ethical judicial conduct.
Judge Jackson's order that Microsoft be divided into two companies, one owning the Windows operating system and the other owning Microsoft's various application software products, including the Internet Explorer Web browser, was also reversed on appeal. His factual findings, however, were upheld, as was his conclusion that Microsoft was liable for monopolization under Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
The ruling was overturned by the US Court of Appeals who criticised Jackson's conduct and bias. Judge Jackson, in spite of the findings of the appellate court, denied that any such bias existed and insisted that any perception of bias in the minds of observers was created by Microsoft, though he declined to explain how this was done or even how it was possible.
When an unrelated case involving Microsoft and charges of discrimination was assigned to him in 2001, Jackson recused himself from the case.