Legal Flat-Earthers

Truth-haters in a profession that demands truth...

It is flawed human nature that makes us want to believe things that are not true.

Legal flat-earthers cause problems in our judicial system.

I watched a crime show last night.

The 3 daughters of a woman who killed her husband -

refused to believe that their mother killed their father/stepfather.

Instead, they hate their grandparents (the parents of the dead husband),

for believing the woman is a murderer.

Somehow, Grandpa and Grandma are the guilty ones in this scenario.

I am distressed about these people, while still feeling sorry for them,

because they won't admit they might come from a gene pool contaminated which such evil.

These kinds of people often grow up and spend their lives excusing the bad behavior of others - in court as defense lawyers or mental health advocates

And the same goes with the older relatives of young suspects,

who in their zeal to advocate for their son, brother, etc.

actually thwart legitimate confessions that the true victims deserve to hear.

What will these sisters do when Jesus tells them the truth to their faces on the Judgment Day?
Will they call Him a liar too?
That day is coming for everyone who thinks a guilty relative is innocent.

Yep.

Supreme Courts

And let us remember that Supreme Courts exist to right the legal wrongs

committed by lower-court judges.

And... the things those judges allowed to happen in their courtrooms.

Or...refused to let happen in their courtrooms.

Furthermore...

Each Supreme Court has a panel of judges, several of them,

in the hopes that the majority of them will make a decision

that is Constitutionally valid.

This says a lot about our Founding Fathers' opinion of the frailty of human justice.

Internal Affairs

Internal Affairs Departments prove that there are LEOs who mis-perform:

*for lack of proper training

* for making decisions under pressure that are not in line with department procedures

* for misusing their authority for personal financial gain

* for misusing the power of their authority to exercise undue power over others.

* to feed their egos

* etc.

As I mentioned before, in my neighboring county in Nebraska, an investigating officer planted evidence that put two innocent men in prison for life for a double murder.

But the evidence-plant was discovered, the innocent men were freed,

and the CSI-perp was sentenced for 20 months to 4 years in prison.

Under God's Old Testament law in Deuteronomy 19:

"16 If a malicious witness takes the stand to accuse someone of a crime, 17 the two people involved in the dispute must stand in the presence of the Lord before the priests and the judges who are in office at the time. 18 The judges must make a thorough investigation, and if the witness proves to be a liar, giving false testimony against a fellow Israelite, 19 then do to the false witness as that witness intended to do to the other party. You must purge the evil from among you. 20 The rest of the people will hear of this and be afraid, and never again will such an evil thing be done among you. 21 Show no pity: life for life, eye for eye, tooth for tooth, hand for hand, foot for foot."

So, if this CSI-perp had lived in old Israel, he would have been stoned for murder.

And in today's America, he should have been given four life-sentences

for what he tried to do to those two innocent men.

Jean-Baptiste Huet 1766

Defense Lawyers

Unfortunately, unlike Supreme Courts and Internal Affair Departments,

there is no agency or department solely dedicated to the discovery and punishment

of unscrupulous lawyers who use malicious defense,

or regularly. intentionally float lies and evidentiary falsehoods to try to free guilty clients.

Disbarment is overseen by each State's 'Bar Association',

which consists of lawyers and judges.

And those in charge can decide if they will even consider a complaint.

Most disbarment complaints are about lawyers who financially defraud clients,

not about lawyers who so pervert our judicial system.

As an outsider, this looks like 'professional mesireh' where the bad apples are protected

by the others in the group.

Jurors should be able to ask for a review of a lawyer's ethical performance from

a real oversite organizations, and the same goes for prosecutors and expert witnesses.

Expert witnesses

When 'expert witnesses' disagree on a matter, at least one of them is wrong.

Yet after the trial they each go on their way,

without any consequence, free to mis-testify other day.

And so do those that hire them, either prosecutors or defense lawyers.

norman rockwell

Jury-initiated investigations

This is a late addition to this section.

I have seen so many crime shows where at least one court officers did something wrong.

A few times, I have heard from jurors who acquitted a defendant,

who said that if they had known everything the judge withheld, they would have convicted.

I'm of the opinion now that each jury panel, 6 months after the trial

should assemble and vote to see if any officer of the court or expert witness

should be investigated for incompetence, bias or impure motives.