The weird world of courts makes no sense..
Elfers' case was in federal court, loaded with false information as the basis for their inflated claims that Coroner Varnau's handling of Elfer's relative's death investigation was sufficient bad to SHOCK THE CONSCIENCE of the public.
This Elfers' court quest to attack Dr Varnau was the second hearse chasing scheme concocted by Chief Deputy John Shadle and his babe Prosecutor Little.. a disgusting manipulation of the grieving family to attempt to discredit Dr Varnau in any way the duo could, as their smokescreen WHEN SHADLE's JAIL HOMICIDE WAS FESTERING IN BCI's HANDS AND NOT BEING RULED TO THE LIKING OF SHADLE whose son was a prime suspect. The duo operate on the standard propaganda premise that if you repeat a lie often enough AND LOUD ENOUGH if becomes the public's accepted 'truth'... Shaming the Public in the process...
So if the case was so devoid of merit, why not simply celebrate...
Celebrate because:
-
1) Elfers misbegotten distention of life to pursue the false claims is now relieved
2) Dr Varnau doesn't need any more lawyer bills, nor stress from misguided citizens and she has her hands full of the jail homicide fallout.
3) The County Commissioners are also relieved of their unpleasant defensive turmoil when they haven't harmed anyone in the Elfers' world.
4) The Federal Court can move on to better cases with less false claims hopefully.....
...but full of horrifying examples of things that were deemed to be revered in precedent setting cases to not shock the conscience.......... like this one from pg 13:
Cruz–Erazo v. Rivera–Montanez, 212 F.3d 617 (1st Cir. 2000) (allegation that police officers verbally harassed and intimidated homeowners, occupied their property without permission, deliberately lied in official documents, and perjured themselves in official court proceedings with intention of causing homeowners harm did not sufficiently “shock the conscience” so as to violate substantive due process);
or this curiously relevant one:
The allegation that sheriff and prosecutors pursued baseless criminal charges for “political” reasons was not so egregious as to “shock the conscience”;
-
If those don't shock the court's conscience then the 'judges' are evil people who should not be entrusted to control 'justice'..........
And if case law is so full of BAD JUDGMENTS forming PRECENDENTS, what chance does true need for justice stand in case law quicksand..?
For such an exercise of dismissal, the Judge MUST start with the assumption that everything the Plaintiff has claimed is true and then look for reasons in law books why those assumed-true combination of claims and facts fails to stand up against rules and precedents. A thoroughly backhanded process that is especially annoying when the claims are not worthy of that truth label. At all.
And as a practical matter of people's own limitation of energy and finances, the hairsplitting over whether one facet of a complex event's claim was 'a state matter' (not federal) and not dealt with there in state courts already, when other facets were not state matters, so the feds can then trash it..... granted the matter -- like the rest -- was not factually valid... but in other people's cases it could have been
How can you build a wholesome intellectual justice construct on bad principles?
All that effort at hairsplitting while ignoring the substantive matters and avoiding dealing with merit... not a single hint to the plaintiffs that
-
1) it's not the coroner's duty to clean up the smithereens of a messy death scene...
2) or that the skull piece was not practically reunitable with the body after the body was cremated....
3) or that the coroner's arms length was the limit that the sheriff's deputies were to respect and get busy,
4) or the fact that the process was done in the dark with flashlights because the sheriff's deputy did not want the light switch flipped on for fear of it being a trigger on a retributive trap set up by the suicidal character.........
etc.....
So what's satisfying to a plaintiff AND the OBSERVING PUBLIC as a demonstration of JUSTICE? never having their issues dealt with but having their issues accepted as true and valid and yet rejected on mumbo-jumbo hairsplitting.......??.. puzzling.....
See for yourself
So what do you think, having just waded through bucket-loads of case law? Think there ought to be something more RELIABLY JUST AND CONFIRMABLY ACCURATELY APPLIED?
RELIABLY JUST because there is NO INDICATION that the court being referenced was not WRONGHEADED, aka crooked or stupid, in their advising.....
CONFIRMABLY ACCURATELY APPLIED because there's NO COMPARISON ATTEMPTED in foisting the quote on the arguing's progress.
Case Law Abomination
In court documents, whether it's arguing by the parties or it's a justification of a judge' orders, the reader faces reams of citations of case law.
And as you've noticed in the current battles, those citations are bare of much of any background other than the names of the parties and maybe a phrase or two to describe a connection to the point being demanded that the reader accept.
Now how prone to error do you suppose this practice is?
If this were a mathematical argument to establish a conclusion wanted by the writer, the bases must be stated, both the conditions that form the reasoning as well as the conclusion that is available if the conditions are met.
Where is that demanded logic in these DESPICABLE LAWYER PRACTICES?
Nowhere to be seen.
The foundation of math is math logic. Where is the training of the law schools on math logic that withstands the attacks of time and expansion of ideas?
Nowhere to be seen.
A couple of Examples should do, of the sort of egregious denials of justice that courts and lawyers perpetrate based on their faulty skills,
PRO SE AND PARENTAL RIGHTS.....
A case in point is the denial of 'pro se' rights in a wrongful death case based on case law, which when followed up showed that the cited case included a child as one of the Plaintiffs, whereas the 12th District Appeals Court denied the pro se rights to a pair of ADULTS based on the child's case. Obviously children would not be going to be exercising their own right to argue. And so on the basis of that denial of the child's access to Pro Se in case law, the Ohio Supreme Court refused to hear even cases where it was strictly adults making demands for justice.
This particular sort of combination of wrongful death and pro se is a classist denial since those with money to burn could continue with the child as a party when that child is represented by a lawyer, whereas the parent is denied the right to pursue the child's benefits. The lawyer has no personal interest and the child has no oversight... and in all other negotiations and contractual matters, including governmental affairs that parent is authorized to make momentous decisions. But not in Ohio's courts. Go figure that reasoning by the lawyers and their income producing motives.
Even the person charged by the Probate Court (as the Deceased's Personal Representative) to manage the affairs of the Deceased is prohibited from pursuing the Wrongful Death case Pro Se, figuratively standing in the shoes of a Deceased Loved One and carrying out his role
How many of those court cases are WRONGHEADED PRECEDENTS? One of the list above was clearly a matter of INACCURATELY APPLYING previous cited judgments.. both failures complicate the justice likelihood in Pro Se cases and Parental Rights cases....
... and the list of faulty case law usage goes on and on.... such as....
IMMUNITY OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS and EMPLOYEES.....
In both the Gusweiler TRO case and the DeathSquad's Federal (civil liberties violation case) filed over the same events and the same issues, the battles over whether governmental employees are IMMUNE to prosecution for their causation of loss of life and property have occupied key roles...
So let's look at that PRIVILEGE of IMMUNITY for governmental authority... especially in these battles where all the parties are employed in the same governmental lawsuit blizzard.
The Ohio law governing liability and immunity of cities, counties and their employees is ORC 2744...
ORC 2744 is a labyrinth of liabilities and exceptions and was not part of the State of Ohio's bold claim to BEGIN allowing governmental authorities to be sued.. but just some... and just sometimes..... Our big grievance is over the way that the Ohio Supreme Court HAS BUNGLED THE INTERPRETATION OF THE ORC 2744 when there is a rogue governmental authority involved...
To be specific, the Ohio Supreme Court has decided that the section titled ORC 2744.03 Defenses - Immunities is only to defend governmental employees when they are otherwise not protected by other section's specificity. But look at the argument in the Ohio Supreme Court's Docket site clearly against that decision....... complete with clear logic precision in analyzing the law's statement..
That argument's demonstration demolishes the right of the OSC to hold their heads up as able to do logic... AND WORSE untrustworthy in public wellbeing guardians responsible for JUSTICE because they are seeable AS CRIMINALLY AND PROFESSIONALLY HIDING THEIR MESS IN CASE LAW... specifically ON IMMUNITY FOR GOVERNMENTS...
ORC 2744.03 (A)(5) and (6) say clearly that the political subdivision (aka county) and their employee are LIABLE if the acts or omissions were done with malice, bad faith or in a wanton or reckless manner... Yet the Ohio state courts insist that the section is for *defending* the political subdivision or employee... not the citizen.. imagine that judicial re-writing of the written law in plain site....
A wretchedly obvious violation of the separation of powers with the judges foisting their grand protection on rogue dictocrats and their thuggery IN SPITE of the fully expected public voices that induced the LEGISLATORS to write a paragraph into the law with protection for the public as well as the politically expected hairsplitting cases for moving vehicle incidents, toxic hazards controllers, law directors, volunteers, etc
The so-called Justices of the OSC, et al, declined to clean up the mess they made in Case Law and dismissed the case, continuing to hide that they are responsible for wrongly interpreting ORC 2744 and thereby instructing courts to misinterpret the Immunities Defenses law to the detriment of the public.
BUT in FEDERAL COURT the recent case against the Scioto County Jailers who caused the death of an inmate by maliciously and recklessly denying him medical attention has not been so corruptly dismissed on immunity for the jailers. The Cincinnati Federal District Judges on the Scioto inmate's case specifically used ORC 2744.03 (A)(6)... to say the case should go ahead, immunity was not granted in Ohio under Ohio law interpreted by federal judges .
So WHAT IS GOING ON IN THE DEATH-SQUAD's FEDERAL CASE...?
Why have they not used the LIE that the Coroner has an ANIMOSITY POWERED AGENDA AGAINST THE SHERIFF's OFFICERS.. together with ORC 2744 to say the case should go ahead??
Phillips made the point that Dr Varnau's website usages were 'proprietary' acts and so in Federal Court, they would be able under ORC 2744.03 (A)(5) to demand rejection of dismissal SINCE (in evaluating a Motion to Dismiss on the basis of Immunity like the Commissioners and Dr Varnau are claiming) THE COURT WOULD BE OBLIGATED TO BELIEVE THE PLAINTIFFS' LIE THAT DR VARNAU's ACTS WERE DONE IN BAD FAITH AND LIKELY MALICIOUS toward the aggrieved Death Squad.
rotfNotLaughing... even though it's likely that Phillips' admission that he had trouble finding any cases in Ohio law to support his contention that this case should go forward.. rotfl....
The Death-Squad's lawyer's handiwork is here... see for yourself,,, of course the lawyers will argue that Phillips has no case law FROM OHIO in the flood of crucial citations, and rightly it should be recognizable that citing case law from states all over the map would require unreasonable familiarity with the code books for mountains of states for each federal judge, ignoring that they are lawyers from their chosen specific state.....
But Indy-us wants you to know that he cannot *wonder* what case law *should* do for these murderous thugs..... agreed?
Can Phillips argue that IF they had taken this case to State of Ohio Courts then it would have been thrown out, just like Scioto's jail inmate's sister's case was before going federal, so he took the case directly to Federal Court WITHOUT GOING TO OHIO's COURTS.....
It seems to me that the Federal Court Judge should throw the case out because the DeathSquad hadn't exhausted their remedies before the law IN THE STATE before approaching the Federal Court. Federal Court should not be available to thugs and their lazy, incompetent lawyers
What about IF the TRO case is thrown out (as it ought to be), would that count as exhausting the remedies in the state of origin? Who can say? But I doubt it...
Of course it would be worse if the TRO case were not thrown out, as it should have been... because of the horrible precedents Gusweiler is setting into 'case law'.......
Want to see what case law would look like after Gusweiler and Ringland get through with case law abominating.....
Gusweiler and Ringland were the immunity-for-abusive-civil-servant violative judges in that case that went to the OSC above... Did you see which county government office was the instant cause that got the case to the OSC where the OSC got a logic demonstration that the OSC had 'dirty laundry' to clean up on their violative interpretation of immunity now enshrined in case law on immunity.. Brown County does things differently out of court
With the obvious malfeasance already built into case law, wouldn't it be funny to testify that CASE LAW SHOULD BE SWEPT INTO THE TRASH.. making the lawyers all argue from scratch as it should be...
Just like much of the UNCONSTITUTIONAL LAWS WRITTEN INVALIDLY BY LEGISLATORS should be invalidated by a team of constitutional law experts, double checking one another... etc, etc
The requirement for proper mathematical logic applications and training of lawyers could and should have been a precondition for them to be entrusted with a structure of such importance and extent over human wellbeing as Case Law..
Is that justice construction any less important than the space launches with astronauts lives at risk? Is that justice function of so little importance as crucial to peace, pursuit of happiness and rightful liberties that the library of case law would be sloppily built, unlike bridges and skyscrapers, we hope..?
What say you? Can this be incrementally cleaned up? Time to think again... ttyl
No comments:
Post a Comment