Truemors
is reporting from
Member
NP Rank:
NP Rank:
MN Board of Judicial Standards:Justice or the Appearance Justice?
Share: 
by CynicalPatriot | March 2, 2010 at 03:10 pm
311 views | 0 Recommendations | 3 comments
Photos
Minnesota Judicial Reform and Accountablity = Scales of Justice
uploaded by CynicalPatriot
This is a preview of an article I wrote on Examiner.com regarding one recent, personal experience with Judicial Corruption in Minnesota USA
As I continue on this difficult road in search of Minnesota Judicial Reform and Accountability, I realize that many of you have not been touched or do not realize that you have been touched by the Duplicity and Corruption of the Minnesota Judiciary.
Some of you have had the good fortune to have not been in court. Others have been in court and trusted that, regardless of the outcome of your matter, the courts were a fair and just arbitrator of the evidence and facts as you were taught in High School Civics. You trusted that schools and the teachers you looked up to would not purposely deceive you. Others of you felt you were treated unfairly but the exact the source of your opinion was vague and nebulous. And others can point to specific lapses in integrity and jurisprudence but lacked the knowledge to express your sentiments and/or the money to seek remedy. And others are unaware of how rulings by Minnesota Judges adversely affect Minnesota Taxpayers. No. not Tax Court. I refer to things like rulings adverse to taxpayers involving, for instance, when Corporations borrow taxpayer money from the state and then default; like Northwest Airlines did 10 years ago or so. (In exchange for kickbacks, etc.) Today I am going to show you specific, overwhelming evidence that we no longer have the rule of law, but rather, whim of judges and justice to the highest bidder.
Many years ago I coined the phrase – “The American Judicial System is the best Appearance of Justice that Money can buy?” Along the way, we are going deal with themeaning of the “best appearance of Justice” and “How much justice can you afford?”
To begin, let me say I own a business. For years I have had a competitor that I believe engages in some behaviors that go beyond what is morally, legally and socially acceptable...
Please continue to read the rest of the story for free by clicking here: Examiner.com
Respectfully submitted,
Advertisement
What is NowPublic?
NowPublic lets people work together to cover news events around the world.
Crowd Power
These members have powered this story:
CynicalPatriot
Minneapolis, Minnesota, United States
Most RecentMost Recommended Comments (3)
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Brian W. (not verified)at 17:20 on March 25th, 2010
I'm not an attorney by any means... But even from the perspective of a layman I'm having a hard time seeing how your case works? Frankly, your story sounds EXTREMELY one-sided and it doesn't look like you even TRIED to take any other perspective into account. Some judge handed down a decision you didn't like, denied a motion for review, and then the judicial standards board found that there was no clear and convincing case of misconduct. They then directed you to the court of appeals if you want to challenge the legal basis of the decisison. I'm confused, how does this indicate corruption?
I did search through Minnesota's rules of procedure and I don't see anything about the court of appeals requiring an amended findings of fact hearing before considering an appeal. Doesn't "amended" mean that something has been changed? Why would it be necessary for the court to change its decision before you could appeal it?
You reference an email where someone wrote you "to deny that he he was engaging in various acts," and somehow the subject of a relative's birthday comes up? How... how does the first thing lead into the second? The only reasonable explanation that I can think of is that he tried to blackmail you by producing this letter, but then... Instead of that, you talk about how it SEEMED like he knew too much about you and somehow because of that you FELT that he was trying to strike "fear and terror" in you?
I can't help thinking that there's part of the story that you've left out, because the situation as you've described it is... Far-fetched. Barring mental illness (which I think would keep someone from running a successful business), people just don't work the way you've described.
And then you quote the harassment statute which clearly indicates that harassment is "repeated incidents... that have a substantial adverse effect" which you don't qualify for (because it needs "repeated" incidents). And even when you go on to state that he continued to contact you in an "escalating manner," you leave out whether you were involved in the exchange, or whether you helped escalate it, or anything... so it's impossible to tell if you match the "substantial adverse effect" part.
What am I missing here? Even just reading from your own story, and seeing that that they filed a restraining order against you first... It suggests that you're not exactly blameless here yourself. To me, it seems like the judge could have had a reason for turning it down, and not for some incredible "being drunk on power" reason. What am I missing here?
- Sign In or Join to post comments
Brian W. (not verified)at 17:20 on March 25th, 2010
I'm not an attorney by any means... But even from the perspective of a layman I'm having a hard time seeing how your case works? Frankly, your story sounds EXTREMELY one-sided and it doesn't look like you even TRIED to take any other perspective into account. Some judge handed down a decision you didn't like, denied a motion for review, and then the judicial standards board found that there was no clear and convincing case of misconduct. They then directed you to the court of appeals if you want to challenge the legal basis of the decisison. I'm confused, how does this indicate corruption?
I did search through Minnesota's rules of procedure and I don't see anything about the court of appeals requiring an amended findings of fact hearing before considering an appeal. Doesn't "amended" mean that something has been changed? Why would it be necessary for the court to change its decision before you could appeal it?
You reference an email where someone wrote you "to deny that he he was engaging in various acts," and somehow the subject of a relative's birthday comes up? How... how does the first thing lead into the second? The only reasonable explanation that I can think of is that he tried to blackmail you by producing this letter, but then... Instead of that, you talk about how it SEEMED like he knew too much about you and somehow because of that you FELT that he was trying to strike "fear and terror" in you?
I can't help thinking that there's part of the story that you've left out, because the situation as you've described it is... Far-fetched. Barring mental illness (which I think would keep someone from running a successful business), people just don't work the way you've described.
And then you quote the harassment statute which clearly indicates that harassment is "repeated incidents... that have a substantial adverse effect" which you don't qualify for (because it needs "repeated" incidents). And even when you go on to state that he continued to contact you in an "escalating manner," you leave out whether you were involved in the exchange, or whether you helped escalate it, or anything... so it's impossible to tell if you match the "substantial adverse effect" part.
What am I missing here? Even just reading from your own story, and seeing that that they filed a restraining order against you first... It suggests that you're not exactly blameless here yourself. To me, it seems like the judge could have had a reason for turning it down, and not for some incredible "being drunk on power" reason. What am I missing here?
at 21:55 on March 28th, 2010
Bryan W.
Are you some kind of special stupid. For 3-4 months the court administrators told me the Judge did not have time to schedule the case on her calender.
Only when I complained, did someone tell me she had refused (again in clear violation of the rules) to hear the matter. And since you only get 60 days to appeal, and they either did not tell me of the ruling or back dated the ruling, I now cannot appeal.. At one point, when I said I was recording the conversation, they had an arm police officer come up to me and say i could not record the conversations with the court clerks. I guess now we know why, it is my word against theirs.... Again, what special kind of stupid or government operative are you?
Unless the 5-6 attorneys I have spoke to are wrong, it is a required part of the appellate procedure to have a "amended finding of facts: hearing. The judge in this case did not even do a finding of facts. Therefore she had to have a hearing to determine what the facts were that she made here decision on.
She did not want to disclose these facts because she had no basis in fact or law to decline my request for a tro.
What legitimate reason does a business competitor of mine have for intercepting correspondence between me and my underage neice? What purpose, other than to prove he knew all of my movements, would he have for disclosing to me possession of that document?
And if you dont get it yet, you truly are stupid or on someone's payroll.
Those were my thoughts.
Don Mashak
The Cynical Patriot