Young Thug trial: Should a different judge judge the judge?

In the latest twist in the longest trial in Georgia’s history, which judge should judge the judge?

Put more simply: Who should decide whether Chief Judge Ural Glanville remains on the case?

Superior Court Judge Rachel Krause, currently tasked with that decision, should step aside, said former Judicial Qualifications Commission chair Lester Tate.

“Given the dumpster fire the YSL trial has become, I’m really shocked she has not recused herself,” Tate said. “Even if the letter of the law allows it, to benefit the judiciary and protect its image to the public, the better practice would be for her to voluntarily recuse.”

Tate cited an unrelated JQC opinion regarding which judge should preside over the divorce case of another. The JQC polices judicial misconduct across the state and issues opinions to guide judges’ behavior.

Credit: Jason Getz / Jason.Getz@ajc.com

Because the public “must believe in the absolute integrity and impartiality” of its judges, that opinion said, judges on the same circuit should not sit in judgment of each other in divorce cases.

But the opinion didn’t stop there. It added, “it is inappropriate for any trial court judge to preside in any action wherein one of the parties holds a judicial office” in the same circuit.

Tate said Krause’s presiding over whether Glanville should remain on the YSL trial “is in contradiction to the spirit of that opinion.”

”In my opinion, the best practice is for a judge to never sit on a case that involves another judge in the same circuit and certainly in the same county,” said Tate, who represents judges in disciplinary matters.

Chuck Boring, another former JQC chair, said Krause addressed all of the issues Young Thug’s attorney, Brian Steel, and defense attorney Doug Weinstein raised when they asked Krause to recuse herself and all other Fulton County judges.

In her order, Krause denied Steel’s call to have her step aside, stating that the $2,000 Glanville gave to her re-election campaign was not an “exceptionally large” contribution that warranted recusal. Krause also denied Weinstein’s motion, for lacking merit and supporting documentation.

“In this case, it appears Judge Krause did a good bit of research and addressed all of the issues and denied it. That’s something she has to determine herself as to whether she believes she can be fair and impartial,” Boring said, adding that in Georgia political contributions are not an automatic reason for a judge to recuse.

Boring said defense attorneys, who wish to have Krause from handling the motion to recuse, will have to demonstrate “she has done something to show a lack of impartiality” and simply being in the same judicial district or receiving a campaign contribution is not enough.

“No judge would want to be put in this position and have to decide this sticky issue. However, it is her job and it appears she is not taking the easy way out and just recusing when legally it is not necessitated,” Boring said.

Krause has not ruled on whether she will have a hearing, with Boring saying that she doesn’t have to unless she determines there is a dispute over the facts after recent filings by prosecutors and defense attorneys.

Calls for Glanville’s removal came after he, along with Fulton County DA prosecutors and a key state witness met inside Glanville’s chambers on June 10 without the presence of defense counsel. Glanville, after originally denying calls for him to step aside as a result of the meeting, decided in the end to transfer the recusal motions for another judge to decide and halted proceedings until a decision is made.

Get all the news about the Atlanta Braves delivered each morning. Sign up for Braves Report.