Judge Stallings, who has presided over Richard Glossip's retrial despite her ties to the Oklahoma County District Attorney's Office that sent him to death row, revealed in a closed-door proceeding that she took a trip with Fern Smith, the former prosecutor responsible for Glossip's conviction, in 1997. The trip was part of a group vacation that included several colleagues from the DA's office.
Glossip's lawyers argue that Stallings' connection to Smith raises concerns about her impartiality, as the two have a history together that predates the case at hand. Stallings told Glossip's attorneys that she had been on a "hen do" with Smith, which was different from how she described their trip in 1997.
The defense team claims that Stallings' opinion in a previous evidentiary hearing, where she ruled against Tremane Wood, who faces execution for the same crime as Glossip, shows loyalty towards Smith. They also argue that Judge Stallings devotes more pages to Fern Smith's testimony than anyone else's and describes her testimony as "resolute," suggesting that Smith was somehow more credible.
The Oklahoma judicial code requires judges to avoid not only impropriety but also appearances of impropriety. This standard is rooted in the need to preserve the legal system's legitimacy and serves a practical purpose by relieving judges from feeling ashamed about admitting to prejudice.
However, concerns over appearances have not traditionally been a deterrent in Oklahoma City, where Glossip's case has sparked a contentious fight between the DA's office and the board of pardon and parole. Defense lawyers argue that allowing Judge Stallings to preside over Glossip's trial undermines efforts to ensure fairness and impartiality.
Ultimately, the question of whether Stallings can remain impartial in Glossip's case will be decided by an evidentiary hearing on October 30, where she will consider testimony about her connections to Smith and Prater. If Stallings' recusal is not granted, Glossip's legal team may turn to the chief judge of Oklahoma County or the state Supreme Court for relief.
Glossip's lawyers argue that Stallings' connection to Smith raises concerns about her impartiality, as the two have a history together that predates the case at hand. Stallings told Glossip's attorneys that she had been on a "hen do" with Smith, which was different from how she described their trip in 1997.
The defense team claims that Stallings' opinion in a previous evidentiary hearing, where she ruled against Tremane Wood, who faces execution for the same crime as Glossip, shows loyalty towards Smith. They also argue that Judge Stallings devotes more pages to Fern Smith's testimony than anyone else's and describes her testimony as "resolute," suggesting that Smith was somehow more credible.
The Oklahoma judicial code requires judges to avoid not only impropriety but also appearances of impropriety. This standard is rooted in the need to preserve the legal system's legitimacy and serves a practical purpose by relieving judges from feeling ashamed about admitting to prejudice.
However, concerns over appearances have not traditionally been a deterrent in Oklahoma City, where Glossip's case has sparked a contentious fight between the DA's office and the board of pardon and parole. Defense lawyers argue that allowing Judge Stallings to preside over Glossip's trial undermines efforts to ensure fairness and impartiality.
Ultimately, the question of whether Stallings can remain impartial in Glossip's case will be decided by an evidentiary hearing on October 30, where she will consider testimony about her connections to Smith and Prater. If Stallings' recusal is not granted, Glossip's legal team may turn to the chief judge of Oklahoma County or the state Supreme Court for relief.
Stallings claimed it was just a harmless "hen do" but her previous testimony against Tremane Wood and the way she's always singing Smith's praises makes me wonder if it's more than that 
. The defense team says Stallings' impartiality is in question and I can kinda see why 
. If this trip with Smith was just a fun getaway, then why did Stallings describe it as different from how she told her colleagues? Just saying...
And if she's being extra nice to this prosecutor's friend, does that mean she's not impartial at all? 
... if Judge Stallings can't put her personal feelings aside and make an impartial decision, then maybe she shouldn't be presiding over Glossip's case.
She was on a "hen do" with Fern Smith like 28 years ago and she's still presiding over Glossip's case? 
That's some major drama, fam! The defense team is totally right that it raises concerns about her impartiality - I mean, who wouldn't want to get along with someone so closely? 
But at the same time, I'm like... what are the rules here? 
It's all very suspicious! 
Can't we just expect our judges to be impartial without any drama? 
judge stallings is in some deep trouble!!! 
she took a trip with her ex and they went on a "hen do" together in 1997 
but described it as a different type of vacation when asked about it now 
i'm not surprised the defense team is bringing this up tho 
and if she can't recuse herself from glossip's case, it's gonna be a long trial 
let's keep an eye on it and see how it all plays out 
but at the same time, I think it's kinda crazy that they're making such a big deal about Stallings' trip with Smith in 1997 
. Maybe they're just trying to deflect attention from their own concerns? 
!