Judge watch
 Law  Police

[The classic way Judges control the truth is to bar witnesses from using certain evidence, and forbidding juries as to come to certain decisions, eg 'that Diana and Dodi were unlawfully killed in a staged accident.'  Then the media withhold that fact from the public.]

See: Authoritarians  Pedophilia  Family Courts  Police

Holocaust trial judges
Lord Justice Sedley
Mr Justice Eady
Alvin K. Hellerstein
Michael Bernard Mukasey
Mr Justice Holman
Lord Justice Fulford
Judge James Orrell
Judge Holt
Melchior Wathelet (Belgian Justice Minister)
Thomas, Clarence

Lord Hutton

Sir Nigel Davis & Sir Crispin Davis

Persecuted lawyers
Patricia Finn

[vid] Hitler Was a British Agent (Greg Hallett) part 1of 6
[vid] Hitler Was a British Agent (Greg Hallett) part 2of 6
[vid] Hitler Was a British Agent (Greg Hallett) part 3of 6
[vid] Hitler Was a British Agent (Greg Hallett)
part 4of 6
[vid] Hitler Was a British Agent  (Greg Hallett) part 5 of 6
[vid] Hitler Was a British Agent (Greg Hallett) part 6 of 6

The disturbing case of Adrian Fulford, PIE, Pervert Royals, 7/7, Mole Films, cash-for access, B.A.E, Rolls Royce, Derek Laud, Patrick Rock and the VIP child-abuse connection

[2012 June] Dutch Child Sex Ring -- Where's the Justice? One of the perpetrators identified in that investigation by a young male victim was Joris Demmink, the current Secretary General of the Ministry of Justice -- the same government body that opposes banning "Martijn," the child sex promotion group.....How much credibility can joint anti-child sex trafficking activities have if a key enforcement official may be implicated in such activities and, at the same time, is in a position to block inquiries of the allegations against him?  Why has he not brought to court to face justice both as to his own behavior and his apparent ability to protect groups such as "Martijn"?[2012 May] Winnipeg Porn Judge Complaint to be Heard May 19

[2012 Feb] Vaccination rights attorney Patricia Finn threatened with criminal charges; New York State demands she surrender names of all clients

[2011 Dec] Father DARED me to post video: Judge's wife and daughter reveal home life of 'dysfunction and addiction' that led to brutal beating

[2011 Dec] Barbara Farris | Family Courts Allow Sexual Abuse for Profit in PORN   The following summaries are a few selected samples of real California Family Law cases (catogorized by county), in which children are taken away from safe parents, and forced to live with abusive parents. Is this because the abuser is offered money to film his sexual abuse against the child so the judicial system gets a kick back. All involved would be local police, judges, children services, attorneys and even medical examinars.

The sinister Marc Dutroux cover-up the man who had returned Dutroux to society, Justice Minister Melchior Wathelet, was “rewarded with a prestigious appointment to serve as a judge at the European Court of Justice at The Hague”.

[2011 Nov] FRIENDLY JUDGE, ACCUSED PEDOPHILE By Jon Rappoport  when Sandusky, the accused pedophile, was arraigned, the prosecution asked for $500,000 bail and an electronic ankle bracelet.  But the judge, Leslie Dutchcot, decided that $100,000 was enough-and Sandusky didn't have to secure it. He didn't have to put up any money and would forfeit the bail only if he didn't show up for court appointments. Well, it turns out Judge Dutchcot volunteers for Second Mile, the charity for at-risk kids that Sandusky founded. The charity that gave Sandusky every opportunity to befriend young boys. Why didn't Judge Dutchcot recuse herself from the case?

[2011 Oct] ‘No Food Rights’ Judge quits to work for Monsanto law firm   The Wisconsin judge who recently ruled that we have no right to own a cow or drink its milk resigned to join one of Monsanto’s law firms.

[2011 May] The (7/7) Ripple Effect Story   Then it was the corrupt (and probably free-masonic) judge’s turn to have the last word.  This horror in a black dress went on to do everything he could possibly come up with to try and manipulate the jury into giving a guilty verdict.  This judge re-defined the words in the charge, stated Muad’Dib said things that he never said, then outright lied to the jury by stating it was not up to him which evidence they heard, when he had already forbid various (important) pieces of evidence from being shown to the jury (thereby making direct decisions about the evidence being heard).  He did basically everything he could to have Muad’Dib found guilty, just short of openly telling the jury that they must convict.  Had the public gallery not been full and over-flowing, he probably would have done just that.

[2011 March] Free to deal  A DRUG dealer was spared jail by a soft judge - even though he was caught with a massive stash worth £50,000.

[2011 Feb] Judge gives go-ahead to add fluoride to city's tap water supply - despite overwhelming public opposition

[2010 Dec] Judge refuses to order vaccinations

[2009] Pedophile granted child custody  A FAMILY Court judge has granted custody of four children to their father - a convicted pedophile and rapist.

[2010 Nov] Masonic Judges Awarding Custody to Pedophiles by Wendy Thomas

[2010 Oct] Chief Justice John Roberts Jr. has history of selling shares in drug companies By Christina England
[2010 Oct] Chief Justice John Roberts cashes in Pfizer stocks to participate in landmark vaccine case By Christina England

[2010 Feb] An amicable divorce? Well it was... until those legal piranhas got their teeth into us  Then she asked if I was pleased with the outcome of the settlement. I said I was certainly not: I had a lower settlement than I'd originally been offered, and between us Barry and I had spent around £150,000 in legal bills. ...'We are in total agreement that we were pitted against each other for the financial benefit of the firm involved.

[2009 June] Justices should be seen to be done disciplining and even sacking of judges must remain a state secret unless the government chooses to release the information.....The initial decision to protect judges from having their misconduct disclosed was made by the previous lord chancellor, Charles Falconer (so much for his claim to have been a champion of openness), and the decision to waste public money by fighting the Guardian tooth and nail was made by Jack Straw, the justice secretary, who has evidently learned nothing from the MPs' expenses debacle.

[2009 Feb] Corrupt Judges & Psychiatric "Care"-- Jailing Youths Mark A. Ciavarella Jr., and a colleague, Michael T. Conahan, appeared in federal court in Scranton, Pa., to plead guilty to wire fraud and income tax fraud for taking more than $2.6 million in kickbacks to send teenagers to two privately run youth detention centers run by PA Child Care and a sister company, Western PA Child Care.

[2008] Unresolved Issues of the Diana and Dodi Inquest by John Morgan

[2007] Judge accused of child abuse ‘let off by police’

[2007 Sept 20] The Conspirators' Unbreakable Bond by Christopher Bollyn 

[2007 Sept 17] 9-11 Judge Nominated for Attorney General by Christopher Bollyn 

[2007 Sept 10] The Court's Crass Comments about 9-11 Litigation by Christopher Bollyn 

[2007 Sept 9] Judge Pushes Families to Settle Out of Court by Christopher Bollyn 

[2006 April 14] The Judicial Hijacking of the 9-11 Victim Lawsuits by Christopher Bollyn 

[2002] Why Judges Should Make Court Documents Public By Stephen Gillers

[1997] Australian Judge David Yeldham - The suicide of Justice David Yeldham after his secret life had been revealed

[1997] Corrupt Police Protected Pedophile Judge

[1997] PUBLIC FIGURES NAMED IN PAEDOPHILE RING The names of the alleged members of the ring have been given by witnesses in public sessions of the North Wales Child Abuse Tribunal, but they have been suppressed by the tribunal's chairman, Sir Ronald Waterhouse QC, who has threatened the media with High Court proceedings if they print them.

See: Experts  Stephen Knight  Law  Coroners  Pathologists  Jury Trial  General Medical Council (GMC)

See: Kelly, Dr  Diana  Whitewashes

Court Corruption (USA)

[Sept 2010 Video] : Richard I Fine, Ph.D Reflects on 18 Months of "Coercive Confinement" & Court Corruption  Richard I. Fine described the conditions in "coercive confinement' and his eighteen month ordeal waging a legal battle for freedom from his solitary jail cell without an attorney

Removal of Murder as a Possible Verdict
: On the morning of 31 March, at the start of his summing up, Lord Justice Scott Baker announced to the jury that he was withdrawing murder from the possible verdicts available to them. He stated: "My direction in law to you is that it is not open to you to find that Diana and Dodi were unlawfully killed in a staged accident" (13.25, 14.1-2). Baker went on to explain: "When a coroner leaves a verdict of unlawful killing, in this case on the basis of a staged accident, to a jury, he must identify to the jury the evidence on which they could be sure of such a conclusion. But in this case sufficient evidence simply does not exist" (14.11-15).  [2008] Unresolved Issues of the Diana and Dodi Inquest by John Morgan

"There's this judge whose been a friend of the family ever since I was a child, he almost always comes to Sunday dinner, he's that sort of really close friend of the family, I'll try asking him about these strange deaths." He managed to get this judge along to an Edinburgh pub to sit and chat, but kept the conversation absolutely mundane for a long time. He then enquired: "Er, what do you think about this Marconi business?" The judge put the pint of beer down, said "Good-day" arose from his seat and walked right out the door. The student and his family never saw him again at their house.  It was in the weeks after this the student communicated his most sensitive confidence from the high-ranking police officer world, and if there are sensitive issues to learn of in Britain it's difficult to beat this one. One can only wonder now if the fright of this judge relates to this next divulgence:  "They do pass death sentences in Britain. A single judge is sitting in a chair in front of a table with a piece of paper on it describing what some guy's supposed to have done. The guy to be sentenced is then walked in with one other person beside him as a witness, and nine times out of ten the judge is expected to pass a death sentence. Sometimes he doesn't, very occasionally, but I would say nine times out of ten it is a death sentence." And surely after such a reaction from a judge one would wonder whether he had spoken to a man who had passed such death sentences.  CORRUPTION/TELEVISION/MARCONI/VERY LONG ANTENNA/MIND GAZING ---David Moncoeur.

Confronted by Revisionism, institutions likewise show themselves for what they are: products of circumstantial arrangements on which time has conferred an aura of respectability. The judiciary, for instance, claims to defend justice (a virtue!) or to uphold the law (a necessity), and would have us believe that, as a group, judges care for truth. But, when a judge finds himself obliged to try a Revisionist, how odd to watch as he jettisons the scruples he and his colleagues claim to honor! When faced with a Revisionist, there exists for a judge neither faith, nor law, nor right. In confronting Revisionism, the judiciary shows just how rickety it is. The Adventure of Revisionism

“The Marine Corps is just a smoke-and-mirrors thing. On [my husband's] level, he said we’ve never been an enemy to the Soviet Union. They work with these Communists. The man who started this whole intelligence operation — OSS [Office of Strategic Services] — he was recruiting known Communists who were involved in subverting Spain. They’re not Americans. They’re not Christians. They’re German existentialists. Now what are they doing running our nation? They have more affinity for the State of Israel than they do our nation. They don’t care about American citizens. The judges now in the courts are all military officers following chain-of-command orders. They’re not independent judges.” (Interviews, Disk 4)  Kay Griggs

Ernst Zündel had promised that his trial would be "the trial of the Nuremberg Trial" or "the Stalingrad of the "exterminationists." The unfolding of those two long trials proved him right, even though the jury, "instructed" by the judge to consider the Holocaust as an established fact "which no reasonable person can doubt," finally found him guilty. Zündel has already won. It remains for him to make it known to Canada and to the entire world. The media black-out of the 1988 trial was almost complete. Jewish organizations campaigned vigorously for such a blackout, and even went so far as to say that they did not want an impartial account of the trial. They did not want any account of it at all. The paradox is that the only publication which reported relatively honestly about the trial was The Canadian Jewish News. Ernst Zündel and the Leuchter report have left a profound mark on history; both will be remembered for many years to come. The Zündel Trials (1985 and 1988) by ROBERT FAURISSON

In January 1987, a five-judge appeals court decided to throw out the 1985 verdict against Ernst Zündel for some very basic reasons: Judge Hugh Locke had not allowed the defense any influence in the jury selection process and the jury had been misled by the judge on the very meaning of the trial. As for me, I have attended many trials in my life, including some carried out in France during the period of the "Purge" at the end and after World War II. Never have I encountered a judge so partial, autocratic and violent as Judge Hugh Locke. Anglo-Saxon law offers many more guarantees than French law but it only takes one man to pervert the best of systems. Judge Locke was such a man.
    The second trial began on January 18, 1988, under the direction of Judge Ronald Thomas, who is a friend, it seems, of Judge Locke. Judge Thomas was often angry and was frankly hostile to the defense, but he had more finesse than his predecessor. The ruling by the five-judge appeal court also inhibited him somewhat. Judge Hugh Locke had imposed numerous restrictions on free expression by the witnesses and experts for the defense. For example, he forbade me to use any of the photos I had taken at Auschwitz. I had no right to use arguments of a chemical, cartographical, or architectural nature (even though I had been the first person in the world to publish the plans for the Auschwitz and Birkenau crematories). I was not allowed to talk about either the American gas chambers or the aerial reconnaissance photos of Auschwitz and Birkenau. Even the testimony of the eminent chemist William Lindsey was cut short. Judge Ronald Thomas did allow the defense more freedom, but at the outset of the trial, he made a decision, at the request of the prosecution, that would tie the hands of the jury. The Zündel Trials (1985 and 1988) by ROBERT FAURISSON

Judge Ronald Thomas began to label Leuchter's methodology as "ridiculous" and "preposterous", dismissing many of the report's conclusions on the basis that they were based on "second-hand information", and refused to allow him to testify on the effect of Zyklon B on humans because he had never worked with the substance, and was neither a toxicologist nor a chemist. Mr. Thomas dismissed Leuchter's opinion because it was of "no greater value than that of an ordinary tourist", and in regards to Leuchter's opinion said:  “THE COURT: His opinion on this report is that there were never any gassings or there was never any exterminations carried on in this facility. As far as I am concerned, from what I've heard, he is not capable of giving that opinion....He is not in a position to say, as he said so sweepingly in this report, what could not have been carried on in these facilities.” —Judge Thomas, Her Majesty the Queen vs. Ernst Zündel, District Court of Ontario 1988, p. 9049-9050.
    When questioned on the functioning of the crematoria, the judge also prevented Leuchter from testifying because "he hasn't any expertise". [Wikipedia. See: Wikipedia]

In Anglo-Saxon law, everything must be proved except for certain absolutely indisputable evidence ("The capital of Great Britain is London," "day follows night"... ) The judge can take "judicial notice" of that kind of evidence at the request of one or the other of the contending parties;
    Prosecuting Attorney John Pearson asked the judge to take judicial notice of the Holocaust. That term then has to be defined. It is likely that, had it not been for the intervention of the defense, the judge could have defined the Holocaust as it might have been defined in 1945/46. At that time, the "genocide of the Jews" (the word "Holocaust" was not used) could have been defined as "the ordered and planned destruction of six million Jews, in particular by the use of gas chambers."
    The problem for the prosecution was that the defense advised the judge that, since 1945/46, there have been profound changes in the understanding of Exterminationist historians about the extermination of the Jews. First of all, they no longer talk about an extermination but about an attempted extermination.. They have also finally admitted that "in spite of the most scholarly research" (Raymond Aron, Sorbonne Convenffon, 2 July 1982), no one has found any trace of an order to exterminate the Jews. More recently, there has been a dispute between the "intentionalists" and the "functionalists." Both agree that they have no proof of any intent to exterminate, but "intentionalist" historians nevertheless believe that one must assume the existence of that intent, while "functionalist" historians believe that the extermination was the result of individual initiatives, localized and anarchic: in a sense, the activity created the organization! Finally, the figure of six million was declared to be "symbolic" and there have been many disagreements about the "problem of the gas chambers."
    Obviously surprised by this flood of information, Judge Ronald Thomas decided to be prudent and, after a delay for reflection, decided on the following definition; the Holocaust, he said, was "the extermination and/or mass-murder of Jews" by National Socialism. His definition is remarkable for more than one reason. We no longer find any trace of an extermination order, or a plan, or "gas chambers," or six million Jews or even millions of Jews. This definition is so void of all substance that it no longer corresponds to anything real. One cannot understand the meaning of "mass-murder of Jews." (The judge carefully avoided saying "of the Jews".) This strange definition is itself a sign of the progress achieved by Historical Revisionism since 1945. The Zündel Trials (1985 and 1988) by ROBERT FAURISSON

"There's this judge whose been a friend of the family ever since I was a child, he almost always comes to Sunday dinner, he's that sort of really close friend of the family, I'll try asking him about these strange deaths." He managed to get this judge along to an Edinburgh pub to sit and chat, but kept the conversation absolutely mundane for a long time. He then enquired: "Er, what do you think about this Marconi business?" The judge put the pint of beer down, said "Good-day" arose from his seat and walked right out the door. The student and his family never saw him again at their house. CORRUPTION/TELEVISION/MARCONI/VERY LONG ANTENNA/MIND GAZING ---David Moncoeur.