Injustice

The Hanging Court

Again, you have four witnesses. 

All testify to one thing.

The bus was speeding.

The bus was on the wrong side of the road. 

The bus hit the dog.

The bus kept on going.

It was a yellow school bus.

It was a Wake County School bus.

Dad of the two kids, grandma, and the dog owner sue WCPSS.

The driver was white.

The driver was allowed to keep driving, without penalty from the school.

The driver had children on the bus. 

The children included minor elementary school kids.

The children were witnesses. 

This was grandma, and two minor children, walking the dog early in the morning before school.

They were almost killed.

The dog is a family dog, given to grandma, but ownership still is retained by her son, the uncle of the two minor children. 

The bus is never impounded for forensic evidence.

The matter was reported instantly to law enforcement.

Law enforcement does nothing but advises to get the severely injured dog to the vet.

After years of medical treatment, the bill is about $10,000.00.

Second scenario. 

AAAD transportation driver, drives handicapped children to school.

One child is very large in a wheelchair, and, it is known his wheelchair tips when turning.

A previous driver complained of the circumstances.

A previous driver was hurt trying to right the wheelchair.

The wheelchair tips, minutes from school

The wheelchair cannot be righted.

The driver is Hispanic

The driver seeks help at the school to right the chair.

The driver is a mile and a half from the school.

The student is uninjured and continues the rest of the day at school.

The driver gets fired, under advice of WCPSS.

Do you think this is equitable?

Continuing,

The first case goes before a court. 

The judge says, you can help get compensation for your kids.

You can help argue the case as next friend. 

Since you have no money, and, the kids have no money, and grandma has no money (after inquiry in the courtroom, if I remember correctly), you can move the case forward for free.

The dog owner has some financial resources.

The judge considers the case as one, although technically they should be three. 

The subject matter is the same in all three cases. 

Following some discovery, it was found that the driver knew he hit the dog.

The driver reported the incident to school officials, WCPSS.

WCPSS did not recommend he stop the rest of his route. 

WCPSS did not recommend he return to the scene of the hit and run.

WCPSS did not impound the bus. 

WCPSS did not have the driver return to render assistance. 

The driver was on the phone with WCPSS around the corner within minutes reporting the incident.

The Cock Fight

The court room is transformed into a cock fight with the assignment of a new judge. 

New definition of the term adversarial court system is injected.

Justice is not a principal to be cultivated by the new judge.

Justice is not a principal to be cultivated by the attorneys assigned to the case.

All the attorneys are government employees or officers of the court.

All the attorneys made oaths to uphold the North Carolina Constitution and the US Constitution. 

The judge/Commission is bound by the same type of oath. 

Would you think the judge would recommend charges against the bus driver?

Would you think the judge would recommend charges against the WCPSS whom covered the accident?

Would you think the attorneys would recognize the criminality of the defendant bus driver and WCPSS and agree to just compensate the victims?

No, it is a cock fight. Justice is left outside of the courtroom.  Justice is only whom can win the court battle.  The court battle is not about justice, but, whom can debate the best. 

It is a fixed poker game where the dealer knows a player is cheating and is okay with him winning the game.

The attorneys argue and use technical jargon.  They just want to win.  They want to defend the driver and WCPSS at all cost. 

It is a hanging court.

The new judge/commissioner says, you cannot defend the interest of your children.

The new judge says the cases are not one and have to be tried as separate cases. 

The new judge withholds a ruling on whom has to pay. 

The new judge intentionally withholds rulings on plaintiff motions. 

Discovery is part of all cases.

As part of the game and technicalities, the government attorneys and employees withhold essential information for the case.

They intentionally delay the case.

You move that they be sanctioned. 

Delays in the case cause the cause to be weakened.

That is a tactic by the government attorneys.

The witnesses moves one, the kids in the school.

The driver moves on. 

All things change with time making the case harder to try.

The dog dies.

What would you do?

What do you consider to be justice?

Is it okay for a citizen to commit a hit and run?

Is it okay for a citizen to drive recklessly with children in the vehicle?

Is it okay for a citizen to destroy evidence?

Is it okay for a citizen to withhold evidence?

Is it okay for a citizen to delay and obstruct a case?

Then, ask, can the government do all of the preceding, and, is that okay?

Can the courtroom be reduced to just “Whom can argue the best and use technicalities?”

Is the courtroom a cock fight arena?

Is justice to be meted out unequally?

Can two judges/commissioners come out with drastically difference rulings and conduct?

Is there a judicial standard?

Is there an attorney standard?

Those are essential questions for the federal court, and North Carolina State Bar Association, and the Judicial Standards Commission to ask.

Do we still live in Jim Crow Era?

Is justice only for a certain group?

Is justice only for a certain skin tone?

Do we have hanging courts?  Just hang them all, I say?

Here is the link to document in this matter, you decide for yourself.

THE DOCUMENTS