JudgeMental Podcast – EP 98: Wednesday on Friday
In this episode, Trey and Christine kick off with a candid conversation about the emotional toll of social media criticism — and why they remain committed to calling out dysfunction in the justice system regardless of political affiliation. Christine opens up about the relentless hate she receives online and the moral tightrope she walks trying to stay fair to people on all sides of the system.
The conversation ranges widely, touching on:
The performative nature of press conferences and how government actors use them to push narratives rather than address root causes
The Todd Blanche/SPLC indictment and what reading a charging document actually tells you (hint: not the whole story)
Youth crime in Louisville — the real problem, the closed juvenile detention facility, and why clapping at press conferences doesn't fix anything
The death penalty debate — Christine shares her unwavering stance against capital punishment and why, ironically, the firing squad may be the most humane option if it ever came to that
Public education and family court — how Christine's one semester teaching in a public school opened her eyes to deeper systemic failures, and how that connects to what she sees in family court every day
Litigation tactics in family law vs. civil law — what's zealous advocacy, what's delay, and where's the line?
Brady obligations and family court — could a Brady-like disclosure requirement actually improve outcomes for kids in custody disputes?
The episode wraps with a preview of their next case discussion: BB v. [school district], out of the Ninth Circuit — involving a 7-year-old, a Black Lives Matter post-it that said "All Lives," and a school's reaction to it. The oral arguments are fascinating. Trey and Christine recommend reading the case before the next episode.
Stay connected and join the conversation on the Judge-y community at judge-y.com | Follow @Judgingthejudges
Download the Judge-y app and start rating judges today: judge-y.com
LEGAL DISCLAIMER
The content of this podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be, and should not be construed as, legal advice. Engaging with this content does not create an attorney-client relationship between you and the hosts, guests, or their firms. The views and opinions expressed on this podcast are solely those of the individuals involved and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of any law firm, company, or organization. We make no representations or warranties regarding the accuracy, completeness, or applicability of the information presented. Any reliance on the information in this podcast is at your own risk. Laws are constantly changing, and every situation is unique. You should always seek the advice of a qualified attorney for your specific legal concerns.
