|
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
|
 |
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Sunday March 23, @08:19PM EST (#1)
|
|
|
|
|
Judicial bias in domestic cases IS the problem with the whole judicial system.
When my ex brought false DV claims against me, she provided more than 2 versions of what allegedly happened, no (real) injuries occurred, and the judge had the audacity to say:
"Well despite testimony, something must have happened" ...sic...
Isn't it the judges job to determine WHAT happened and to make a judgement based upon the evidence!!! He ordered me to stay in jail without bail for up to 90 days.
I want to add his name to a registry, anyone know of one? His pre-judicial bias is a mockery of the robe he wears...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday March 24, @12:39AM EST (#2)
|
|
|
|
|
"The most important aspect of Judge Reed's court is a "no drop" policy. Even if the victims are unwilling to prosecute or the district attorney's office recommends dismissal, Judge Reed insists on hearing the case. All accused offenders arrested for domestic violence face their day in court."
Throw this feminazi in jail and throw away the key. Until this judge is held accountable for her hate crimes, justice is nothing more than the whore of the legal system that is pimped out by hate monger criminals like this.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday March 24, @12:58AM EST (#3)
|
|
|
|
|
"justice is nothing more than the whore of the legal system that is pimped out by hate monger criminals like this."
Has anybody checked? Judging (no pun) by this feminazi's behavior she may have two robes, one for her judical duties and the other for her Ku Klux Klan meetings. Her mentality, her reasoning, her perceptions could be seamlessly applied to either situation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday March 24, @01:06AM EST (#4)
|
|
|
|
|
Good and bad, perfection and evil, woman and man. It's all so simple when you're a feminazi judge.
Some day our decendants will tell stories about robed bigots who rode rough shod over downtrodden people, while cloaking themselves in self righteousness and hypocrisy. Not the Klan you naive, powerless man, feminazi judges like this one who don't have a clue about truth or justice.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This article is not only an expose of the criminal judicial bias men face in the court system but a prime example of journalistic bias by two femitwit writers, Rita Mayer and Ilene Whitworth.
I guess it take two femitwit writers to write a short article. Spelling and all that!
Anyway, I am glad this asshole in a black sheet got just a little taste of her on medicine.
And always remember: "More pain, suffering and injustice in our society has been caused by the fascist tyrants in black robes than was ever caused by the fascist tyrants in white ones."
Also,
Judge Robert Noland of the Georgia Family Court quote:
"I ain't (sic)never seen a calf follow a bull. They always follow the cow. So I always gives custody to the mamas." *
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
"I ain't (sic)never seen a calf follow a bull. They always follow the cow. So I always gives custody to the mamas." *
Wow, with barnyard logic like that, he's got MY vote!
At least with regard to cases of bovine custody... how often is that a problem?
I'd also like to know if he applies to the same sort of pig-sty analogy to child-support, i.e. "I ain't never seen a bull give nothin' a cow, once he done did the deed he do.... he jez' walk away an' swish his tail, and don' never give her a second thought. So I never give support to the mamas."
I wouldn't bet on it-- non-sequitur analogies can be finagled to justify any contingency, and I'm sure he'd probably even demand support to a child of adultery, with some lame line like "well I ain't never seen no daddy bird shirk his fatherly duties, jez' cuz a cuckoo done laid a few eggs in his nest....."
Happily, such rulings fall under "abuse of discretion," i.e. a ruling so based on whim or caprice, or against logic, that it amounts to a denial of justice; such rulings are grounds for automatic appeal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
by Anonymous User on Monday March 24, @11:11PM EST (#9)
|
|
|
|
|
You got it right. I seem to remember some quote from Justice Ginsberg about men who spread their seed like Johnny Appleseed. Very offensive image of male (and female) sexuality.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Judges have a virtual carte blanche due not to failures in the law, but in the guts and backbones of lawyers-- or lack thereof-- in failing to stand up to them for fear of getting on his honor's "bad side" with regard to future cases. While normally such cases come immediately under the definition of "abuse of discretion" in failing to render a logical verdict according to the law and evidence, but rather making a decision based on whim or caprice, these gutless lawyers are all in the same country club-- literally as well as figuratively-- when it comes to placing the clients' needs secondary to those of the attorney's future working relationship with the court; I've even read articles in legal journals saying "well, tough" in regard to clients who expect a vigorous defense, and saying "your working relationship with other attorneys will last much longer than any one client." And this was even with regard to decisions which might cost the client a good deal of money simply due to the incompetence of the other side!
As long as the legal system continues to be over the heads of the average person, justice will never be made available to the average person.
Meanwhile Texas, along with other states such as Florida, are virtual hotbeds for kangaroo courts and fronteir judges who rule with a noose instead of a gavel, and legislators who frequently collaborate for political gain rather than public good.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I haven't spent a lot of time in court (thankfully), so my impressions of courtrooms is shaded heavily by what I see on television and what I read in books and elsewhere. I have the distinct impression that a judge regards the courtroom in which he works as "his." I think EVERY attorney that tries a case in a court in this country is OBLIGATED to remind any such judge that, no your Honor, this is not your courtroom, it is the PEOPLE's courtroom.
|
|
|
|
|
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
|
