|
DARROW: Okay. Oh, what happened there?
<br /> HALL: Well, here's the definitions, if you like, oh, did you go backwards?
<br /> DARROW: You know what happened, I think a slide jumped, so I'll come back to that when
<br /> you deal with that, but this is the first one.
<br /> HALL: Okay. Basically, it says what I, I just told you guys. I don't know exactly where they got
<br /> this rule from, but if I had to guess, I would say that it's modeled after the rule for judges based
<br /> on bias and prejudice that there is a similar rule in our Hawaii Revised Statutes that, if
<br /> somebody coming before the court thinks the judge has a bias or prejudice, they can submit an
<br /> affidavit just like it says in these rules, and the judge will have to declare that impartiality or if
<br /> whether or not they have a bias or prejudice. So, I just present this to you guys, again with the
<br /> reminder that in order to adopt any of these, it would have to go to a joint commission as Jeff
<br /> said, so even if you guys were all for it, if Windward isn't, it needs to be adopted by a majority
<br /> of both, both commissions. So, I believe that is eight members would have to approve to adopt
<br /> something to this matter. So, I don't know if there's any questions; I can entertain that. Included
<br /> in here is also legal definitions for bias and you can just jump to that slide.
<br /> CARR SMITH: Oh.
<br /> HALL: Oh sorry, go ahead.
<br /> CARR SMITH: No, that's what I was wondering, what's the legal definition of, of bias or
<br /> prejudice.
<br /> HALL: Yeah, we can jump to bias first. It's kind of small print in, small and big at the same
<br /> time, but I think--can I get it double spaced here Jeff? No,just joking.
<br /> DARROW: I know, I wanted to fit it all on one screen. [Laughs]
<br /> HALL: I know.
<br /> DARROW: Sorry. [Laughs]
<br /> HALL: I think the point of the matter is basically through all of this, having an inclination or
<br /> being bent, or it's basically, do you have a pre judgement on this matter, and basically no matter
<br /> what they say to you, you're already going to approve or deny, right? No matter what the
<br /> evidence says, this is what I'm going to do. And so, we all have biases in a certain way, but is
<br /> that bias so huge that it's going to affect your ruling and how you look at this matter without
<br /> giving the applicant a fair shot. So that's--when I think about bias, I think that's in a legal term,
<br /> that's what it is, can you be impartial even with what you know about certain things, or if you
<br /> have a bias about, on certain matters; can you still come to the table and be impartial and not pre-
<br /> judge a matter before even hearing what they have to say and their evidence that they presented?
<br /> And then if you go to prejudice, Jeff, it's pretty much the same, I mean it's the same but
<br /> different, right? I mean, it's, there's a thin line between the two but the idea is kind of the same
<br /> 2
<br /> EXHIBIT C
<br />
|