The Justic system, the courts

Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"? Who here doesn't
agree?

For example from what I have observed. Why would the family cour
hearing use no Jury? All I saw was a Judge "partialness questionable",
Defendant, Prosecutor, no visitors (but myslef) lawyers (liars), a
social service worker, steinographer, and of course the Bailiff.

I thought the whole thing was totally unjust and very very sloppy. Why
no Jury? Isn't it always up to the jury to decide rather than a Judge
who is supposed to remain impartial? There were hand gesters and
whispering. Both of which seemed really upsetting.

Why was there no audio recording much less video taping of the trial?
Why wasn't each person given a microphone that way there will be no
dispute about what was said later?

After what I have seen I have lost all faith in the Justice system and
I would be very hellbent to ever need one once the time ever comes.
(crosses fingers) I can not truth our Justice system to protect me if
the need ever arrises.

And Traffic Court is another story altogether. Many lawyers (liars)
agree to just pay the ticket or if need by go to court and just pray
that you get off on a technicality. That is the only way to do it as
there is not only NO Jury but NO prosecutor as well. Just a bias Judge
that will only belive every word that the arresting officer says and
will disregaurd everything the defendant has to say in her testimony.
The Judge also refuses to give the defendant the right to
cross-reference the prosecuting officer. Is anyone hearing this with
first hand experience?
Justice system = Oxymoron

Hope I never need it...

wrote:
> Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"? Who here
doesn't
> agree?
>
> For example from what I have observed. Why would the family cour
> hearing use no Jury? All I saw was a Judge "partialness
questionable",
> Defendant, Prosecutor, no visitors (but myslef) lawyers (liars), a
> social service worker, steinographer, and of course the Bailiff.
>
> I thought the whole thing was totally unjust and very very sloppy.
Why
> no Jury? Isn't it always up to the jury to decide rather than a
Judge
> who is supposed to remain impartial? There were hand gesters and
> whispering. Both of which seemed really upsetting.
>
> Why was there no audio recording much less video taping of the trial?
> Why wasn't each person given a microphone that way there will be no
> dispute about what was said later?
>
> After what I have seen I have lost all faith in the Justice system
and
> I would be very hellbent to ever need one once the time ever comes.
> (crosses fingers) I can not truth our Justice system to protect me
if
> the need ever arrises.
>
> And Traffic Court is another story altogether. Many lawyers (liars)
> agree to just pay the ticket or if need by go to court and just pray
> that you get off on a technicality. That is the only way to do it as
> there is not only NO Jury but NO prosecutor as well. Just a bias
Judge
> that will only belive every word that the arresting officer says and
> will disregaurd everything the defendant has to say in her testimony.
> The Judge also refuses to give the defendant the right to
> cross-reference the prosecuting officer. Is anyone hearing this
with
> first hand experience?
> Justice system = Oxymoron
>
> Hope I never need it...



Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than. Either
that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
anything intelligent to say.

wrote:
> wrote:
> > Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"?
>
> Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than. Either
> that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
> anything intelligent to say.

Option Number Three: Don't Feed Trolls.

Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"?
> >
> > Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than. Either
> > that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
> > anything intelligent to say.
>
> Option Number Three: Don't Feed Trolls.


You just shot yourself in the leg with that remark. Just because your
a Liar, I mean lawyer.

You have no buisness posting that **** and obviously you have nothing
intelligent to add to the thread.

wrote:
> Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > wrote:
> > > > Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"?
> > >
> > > Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than.
Either
> > > that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
> > > anything intelligent to say.
> >
> > Option Number Three: Don't Feed Trolls.
>
>
> You just shot yourself in the leg with that remark. Just because
your
> a Liar, I mean lawyer.

You obviously have a very limited understanding of the concept of
defamation. Terming someone a liar, without proof, is libel or slander
per se. However, since your net worth is likely close to the value of
your opinions, it's not worth suing you over it.

> You have no buisness posting that **** and obviously you have nothing
> intelligent to add to the thread.

Well, since I violated my own rule (Don't Feed The Trolls), I guess
it's my own fault. G'bye!
<PLONK>
--
C.R. Krieger
(Been there; done that - fast)

Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> wrote:
> > Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> > > wrote:
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"?
> > > >
> > > > Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than.
> Either
> > > > that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
> > > > anything intelligent to say.
> > >
> > > Option Number Three: Don't Feed Trolls.
> >
> >
> > You just shot yourself in the leg with that remark. Just because
> your
> > a Liar, I mean lawyer.
>
> You obviously have a very limited understanding of the concept of
> defamation. Terming someone a liar, without proof, is libel or
slander
> per se. However, since your net worth is likely close to the value
of
> your opinions, it's not worth suing you over it.
>
> > You have no buisness posting that **** and obviously you have
nothing
> > intelligent to add to the thread.
>
> Well, since I violated my own rule (Don't Feed The Trolls), I guess
> it's my own fault. G'bye!
> <PLONK>
> --
> C.R. Krieger
> (Been there; done that - fast)



No you're a liar more than you're a lawyer. And you have nothing
intelligent to add to the thread except for your off topic **** that
you are so full of.

Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> wrote:
> > Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> > > wrote:
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"?
> > > >
> > > > Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than.
> Either
> > > > that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
> > > > anything intelligent to say.
> > >
> > > Option Number Three: Don't Feed Trolls.
> >
> >
> > You just shot yourself in the leg with that remark. Just because
> your
> > a Liar, I mean lawyer.
>
> You obviously have a very limited understanding of the concept of
> defamation. Terming someone a liar, without proof, is libel or
slander
> per se. However, since your net worth is likely close to the value
of
> your opinions, it's not worth suing you over it.
>
> > You have no buisness posting that **** and obviously you have
nothing
> > intelligent to add to the thread.
>
> Well, since I violated my own rule (Don't Feed The Trolls), I guess
> it's my own fault. G'bye!
> <PLONK>
> --
> C.R. Krieger
> (Been there; done that - fast)



No you're a liar more than you're a lawyer. And you have nothing
intelligent to add to the thread except for your off topic **** that
you are so full of.

wrote:
> Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > wrote:
> > > > Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"?
> > >
> > > Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than.
Either
> > > that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
> > > anything intelligent to say.
> >
> > Option Number Three: Don't Feed Trolls.
>
>
> You just shot yourself in the leg with that remark. Just because
your
> a Liar, I mean lawyer.

You obviously have a very limited understanding of the concept of
defamation. Terming someone a liar, without proof, is libel or slander
per se. However, since your net worth is likely close to the value of
your opinions, it's not worth suing you over it.

> You have no buisness posting that **** and obviously you have nothing
> intelligent to add to the thread.

Well, since I violated my own rule (Don't Feed The Trolls), I guess
it's my own fault. G'bye!
<PLONK>
--
C.R. Krieger
(Been there; done that - fast)

Motorhead Lawyer wrote:
> wrote:
> > wrote:
> > > Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"?
> >
> > Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than. Either
> > that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
> > anything intelligent to say.
>
> Option Number Three: Don't Feed Trolls.


You just shot yourself in the leg with that remark. Just because your
a Liar, I mean lawyer.

You have no buisness posting that **** and obviously you have nothing
intelligent to add to the thread.

wrote:
> wrote:
> > Who here thinks our Justic system is fair and "just"?
>
> Looks like everyone is 100% satisfied with the system than. Either
> that or they are just too ignorant of the fact to actually have
> anything intelligent to say.

Option Number Three: Don't Feed Trolls.