I wanted to post this YouTube video, but it didn’t seem to have anything to do with court corruption. It is just a cool thing my son invented; Double Board Backgammon. If you love the game, watch.

Here is the commonality. Appearance of fairness matters.

Sean and I disagree about how the dice must be rolled. I looked up rules at https://bkgm.com/articles/BowerHortonSimborg/RulesAndStandardsGuide/Gibson2013.html#sec-5.5

I was right. Of course.

You can see in the video where I try to reproduce non-random rolling by turning the cup upside-down on the board the way Sean does, instead of shaking and rolling the dice from a distance above the rolling surface. I would gain no advantage. But that is not to say someone with better dexterity and more practice than me could not cheat by rolling like Sean rolls.

I refuse to play, even with my son, if the other player appears to have an improper advantage, even if slight.

Backgammon is only a game.

How much more important is it that our judicial officers refrain from any appearance of impropriety?

When Judge Susan Weaver refuses to give a continuance to a pro se defendant when summons was not even issued in one case and, in a separate case, sua sponte gives a represented defendant a continuance because service of summons might have a technical impropriety, it is not a good look.

When Judge Lee P. Rudofsky misquotes lines against a pro se plaintiff and quotes every other line from evidence, distorting the truth in favor of the Big Money defendant, it is not a good look.

In court and backgammon, appearances matter.