Judges Who Have No Judgment

They also don't want anybody else to have any judgment either.

We are not allowed to question any official decision by even the lowest authorities – especially cops.

I had to sit through two trials in which the judges repeatedly explained to me that it wasn't their job to question the violations handed out by police.

I could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that the accident for which I was ticketed was caused in no way by me.

The other driver had at least three violations including probable intoxication, and filing a false police report.

He caused the accident by disregarding the slowing of my vehicle and my left turn signal.

He made a wild attempt to pass at high speed in a residential school zone, and he misjudged everything so badly that he smashed into the side of my car and skidded off the street.

Those facts were undisputed, but both judges repeatedly called them irrelevant, since all the court system was for was to examine the factual nature of my violation, making an illegal turn on a “highway.”

Although I could prove the other driver's violations and his lies, the judges called them all irrelevant.

They were powerless to do anything about them, or even to look at the evidence, because their only concern was my violation.

I was not allowed to show the jury the law in this matter.

It wasn't a violation and the law plainly stated as much.

The judge said it was his job to instruct the jury about the law.

He refused to let them see or hear the actual law, and he wrote his own simplified version of the law.

“If he made any motion to reverse his direction in the street he is guilty.”

I argued the law with him but his reading of it was idiotic.

It hinged around the definition of a highway.

"Highway" means all public ways and thoroughfares and bridges on the same.

I said, yes, “same” means on a designated highway.

I explained that highways through La Crosse are also called streets when they pass through town. But nothing in that definition says it refers to all roads and streets everywhere, which is what he argued. Turning has never been illegal in all places, or why would anyone ever need to post signs. According to the judge, all turns, Y turns and U turns must be performed in intersections on all roads, streets, and alleys, which are all highways.

I showed him a page from the Wisconsin Driver's manual, which said about U turns:



They are illegal “In mid-block on any street in a business district or in mid-block on a though (main) highway in a residential district, except where it's divided...

What could be more clear than that for a judge who doesn't know how to read the law?

He disregarded it and wouldn't let me show even that to the jury.

The trial was a farce, and if it is typical of this legal system, I hope the whole thing crashes down soon.

It is an engine of oppression and stupidity.

It deserves absolute destruction.

It's practitioners will be written out of the Book of Life.

They are liars and mockers of law and reason.

The take the name of God in vain and make it a universal joke.

I hope Islam gets a hold of them and executes them for the good of humanity.

I have judgment and it is just.