GAIL DRAKE: Judge Willie Lockette and the Fred Flintstone Case

“Keep ye judgment and do justice.”

– Isaiah 56:1

We are blessed with honorable jurists in Albany, and despite some courthouse hiccups, we can count our blessings. Of the many challenges our judges face, undoubtedly one of the biggest is to keep a straight face.

Twenty years ago, I was perusing Dougherty County Superior Court for one of those trial observations required for new lawyers. The only trial playing that day was “Smith v. Jones,” a jury trial between a used car salesman and a customer.

The facts didn’t appear to be in dispute: “Smith” had bought a car from “Jones” that turned out to be a lemon. Smith added several bells and whistles on this car at a cost of thousands of dollars and demanded a full refund from Jones. Jones refused. And now they had a “boney-fide” trial before a judge and jury. Both men displayed a modest educational background. As I looked around, I realized that there was no attorney anywhere. Except in my seat.

As I settled into the back row of the courtroom, the security guard leaned over. “Smith is in court all the time with one case or another,” he said. “I’m surprised this is actually going to trial, since usually the other guy caves in and gives him money.” An insider’s perspective.

“All rise!” The Honorable Willie Lockette strode in, warmly greeted everyone, and commenced the trial. He explained that in this courtroom, every litigant was treated with respect and every case was treated with equal dignity, whether it be a $2,000 case or a $2 million case, and whether or not litigants have a lawyer. The parties would still have to follow the rules of civil procedure, and he would moderate.

Jury selection took less than 10 minutes. Neither Smith nor Jones had any questions, and the first 14 jurors on the list were selected. No jury strikes.

Plaintiff Smith presented his case. “I bought this car from Mr. Jones here, paid good money – see, here’s the receipt. And that car was a bone shaker. I mean. I took it to this mechanic and he said …”

“Now wait,” said Judge Lockette, raising his hand. “You can’t testify what someone else said out of court — that’s hearsay.”

“Oh, sorry Judge. Well, anyway, that car broke down by the next week. I tried and tried to fix it, but it never did run right. I went to Jones for a refund and he refused.”

The judge asked Defendant Jones if he wished to cross examine the witness. Within minutes, the two men were leaning back and forth, loudly arguing at the same time. I couldn’t understand their words, but four female jurors on the front row were laughing out loud. A tall thin blond on the back row stiffened her spine – and her lips.

“Wait,” said Judge Lockette, “you have to let him answer the question.”

“Oh, yes, Judge.” The men calmed down, through fits and starts, one spoke for a short while, then both at the same time, and Judge Lockette continued to referee.

Then Jones presented to the jury. “I sold him the car for $2,000. When he came back a few weeks later, I offered him his money back. But he refused. He insisted I had to pay him for all these things he added to the car.”

Smith rose to present his closing argument: “He done sold me a Fred Flintstone mobile and didn’t even cut the bottom out of it! I’m a diabetic – I can’t do this.”

The jury howled out loud in laughter and three on the front row nearly fell over. The thin blonde’s spine — and lips — grew even stiffer.

Judge Lockette charged the jury with instructions and sent them out to deliberate. Twenty minutes later, there was a note from the jury. Can the same person get the car and money?

“There is no windfall,” said Judge. “One person gets the car and the other gets the money that you decide.” Within a few minutes, the jury had reached a verdict and returned. They ruled in favor of Smith – in the amount of $2,000. Jones opened his wallet on the spot and handed over the entire amount in cash.

It was a proud day here in the south Georgia wiregrass. Because no matter how big or small, with or without resources for a lawyer, the people will be received and treated with equal dignity and justice under the law.