Archive for the ‘Courts’ Category
When I first looked to see what Dave Stancliff had written in his Sunday As It Stands opinion column I thought,
“here he goes again – preaching more lawless, mob rule.” After reading the article I decided not to make any observations – the whole thing was way too trite.
So, what changed my mind? You don’t suppose I could pass up another golden opportunity to excoriate Dave Stancliff, do you?
Actually, no. What griped me is the constant drum-beat for more laws to deprive everyone of what freedom, justice and accountability remains in our corrupt society. “Frivolous lawsuits” are just that, FRIVOLOUS.
When every deck there is, is totally stacked against the average working and retired man and woman in this country, using one Mickey Mouse lawsuit to fill newspaper space railing against “frivolous lawsuits” does everyone a disservice. Rather than denigrate the injured, he would have better served everyone had he spent the time and word dealing with the real cause of the problems: greedy, self-serving and amoral lawyers.
Let’s set the matter right – right up front, I don’t have any use for lawyers. First, its been my experience, that they all believe they are better than everyone else. If for no other reason than they are in a position to victimize the people that are forced to use them. The judges in this country think they are too good to speak to or recognize the “common” man. So they breed this special class of royalty that judges will accept past their Bar. Second, if you don’t have the money to pay their exorbitant fees, despite the fact that they are employed by you, the “fee” payer, they exercise their right to betray you, to the detriment and harm to you, your business and your family’s best interest. Even if you have the money, where “money” is no issue, they still treat you like some sub-human, low-class pile of dog crap.
Since that’s pretty much the bottom line when it comes to lawyers, for me personally today, whenever I have a problem, rather than look to a lawyer to purportedly speak in my behalf, I deal directly and personally. Since the gutless, effeminate paranoid have passed so many laws today restricting speech, the safe possibility to personally resolve ANY matter by simple speech (communicating by letter, email, telephone or personally) – actually talking to one another, I realize this is a rather precarious solution. That’s the way people used to settle their problems. So, what’s happened?
Well, in Mr. Stancliff’s case, the “shoe’s on the other foot.”
It wasn’t too long ago that Dave Stancliff was threatening to take me to court for writing an observation or two about his newspaper column. Despite the fact that he was making all kinds of outlandish accusation, from where I stand, that was about as “frivolous” as it could get. His “threats” were not “frivolous,” but the basis he set forth certainly was.
What have we recently learned about how we are justified in dealing with people that makes threats? What was the justification President Obama gave for going to war with Muammar Gaddafi and Libya? His, Gaddafi’s “threat.”
There’s another lesson learned here and that is when you don’t communicate, and I am not talking about arbitrary ultimatums either, the only other way to resolve issues is WAR. The choice: either talk peacefully or act violently. When people refuse to recognize your legitimate rights to exist same as them and then act on that belief refusing to talk to you, they are at de facto war with you.
The best solution is to work out the problems personally – peacefully – one on one. Whenever you bring in a surrogate to speak for you or act in your behalf, you are ostensibly at war. No one ever wins at war. Yet, it seems, that is a lesson few if any wannabe elitist Americans have learned.
April Fool’s Day today, right?
(Reuters) – The Supreme Court ruled on Wednesday that members of a fundamentalist church have a free-speech right to hold anti-gay protests at military funerals to promote their view that God hates America for tolerating homosexuality.
Personal responsibility is something that applies to everyone, even those that voluntarily go to war.
Humboldt County any Better?
Here are three articles that touch everyone in Humboldt County, if not the North Coast. We’ve got a new Sheriff and maybe a new District Attorney. Any reason or assurances they’ll change anything?
Why would anyone want to sit on a jury and be a part of this corrupt mess?
A six month investigation by reporters Brad Heath and Kevin McCoy at USA Today has revealed more than 200 cases where prosecutors with the U.S. Justice Department — the elite of the elite — either broke the law or ethics rules to obtain a conviction, sending dozens of innocent people to years behind bars for crimes they didn’t commit.
And the prosecutorial misconduct uncovered — condemned by judges as “outrageous” and “flagrant,” ranging from lying to juries to withholding key evidence that could free a defendant — wasn’t limited to certain corrupt pockets of the country here and there, but was widespread. And experts say it’s only the tip of the iceberg.
Mark Sodersten spent 22 years behind bars for a murder that the evidence suggests he didn’t commit, with a California appeals court overturning his conviction and admonishing the prosecutor in the case for witholding taped interviews with witnesses that could have exonerated him.
“This case raises the one issue that is the most feared aspect of our system—that an innocent man might be convicted,” the justices wrote after reviewing the case. Unfortunately for Sodersten, the court’s 2007 decision came too late: he had died six months prior. But despite his death, the court issued the decision anyway, saying the case’s “impact upon the integrity and fairness that are the cornerstones of our criminal justice system” required them to do so just to maintain public confidence.
Human Rights Watch issued a report last month decrying the use of excessive force by police in Vietnam, noting that 19 such incidents that resulted in 15 deaths were reported in the state-controlled press over the last year — with zero consequences for the officers involved.
“Police brutality is being reported at an alarming rate in every region of Vietnam, raising serious concerns that these abuses are both systemic and widespread,” the group’s deputy Asia director Phil Robertson said in a statement.
Yet if police brutality is “systemic and widespread” in Vietnam — and all signs are that it is — then it’s a struggle to come up with an appropriately scathing term with which to describe the situation here at home: in the first six months of 2010 alone, there have been 439 credible reports of excessive force in the United States, according to the National Police Misconduct Statistics and Reporting Project (NPMSRP), resulting in no less than 60 fatalities
[Photo: Peter Stinson]