Why do some judges hand exhibits back after a trial?

Discussion in 'Computer Support' started by Rocky, Apr 17, 2010.

  1. Rocky

    Rocky Guest

    I won a jury trial 12 to 0 as a pro se litigant against a woman that worked
    at the courthouse and had numerous friends at the courthouse that were
    unknowing helping her help the boy her daughter and I used as a middle man
    torment her own daughter.
    http://OverProtectiveMother.com

    When I sued for malicious prosecution the Judge in that trial flat out
    refused to let me use the same exhibits I had used to win the jury trial
    because they had been handed back to us. Transcripts for that trial can be
    found at:
    http://nolegalauthority.com/transcripts

    When Judge Telleen stripped me of those exhibits he also stripped me of
    evidence of Malice and evidence of evidence of a complete failure on the
    part of the State to verify any of the statements used by Beverly Rusk or
    her husband.
    http://slimefest.com/Exhibits/ProofOfPerjury/

    The fact remains, there was evidence of Malice and evidence of a complete
    failure of the State to verify Statements used by Beverly and Ed Rusk even
    before the jury trial I won I should have been allowed to present that
    evidence in a malicious prosecution lawsuit as proven by the principles of
    law that reversed and remanded the legal precedent that the courts claimed
    supported a directed verdict to this very day.

    Now back to the original question. Was it fair for the judge in the
    Malicious Prosecution lawsuit to avoid the two exhibits that were used to
    completely impeach all three of the State's witnesses with prior
    inconsistent statements simply because they were handed back to us after the
    jury trial?

    Then if that was fair, was it fair for Judges in the Appellate Court to make
    assumptions about the exhibits that Judge Telleen would not let me transfer
    from the jury trial I won into a malicious prosecution lawsuit to make it
    look like Judge Telleen did nothing wrong?

    To me that is basically a violation of the rule against Double Jeopardy
    because I shouldn't have to prove myself not guilty twice where I am
    restricted from using the same exhibits I used to prove not guilty the first
    time.

    TIA
    Rocky, Apr 17, 2010
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Rocky

    richard Guest

    On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 02:02:47 -0600, Rocky wrote:

    > I won a jury trial 12 to 0 as a pro se litigant against a woman that worked
    > at the courthouse and had numerous friends at the courthouse that were
    > unknowing helping her help the boy her daughter and I used as a middle man
    > torment her own daughter.
    > http://OverProtectiveMother.com



    Shut the **** up Roger. Nobody in this group cares about you and your 20
    old court case you lost.
    richard, Apr 17, 2010
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Rocky

    Rocky Guest

    "richard" <> wrote in message
    news:ger5oz7ryfsh.1e4g9crwo6nsv$...
    > On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 02:02:47 -0600, Rocky wrote:
    >
    >> I won a jury trial 12 to 0 as a pro se litigant against a woman that
    >> worked
    >> at the courthouse and had numerous friends at the courthouse that were
    >> unknowing helping her help the boy her daughter and I used as a middle
    >> man
    >> torment her own daughter.
    >> http://OverProtectiveMother.com

    >
    >
    > Shut the **** up Roger. Nobody in this group cares about you and your 20
    > old court case you lost.


    Typical response from someone who doesn't have the slightest clue as to what
    reversed and remanded the Mack case.
    Phucking idiot.
    Rocky, Apr 17, 2010
    #3
  4. Rocky

    Rick Guest

    Rocky wrote:
    > "richard"<> wrote in message
    > news:ger5oz7ryfsh.1e4g9crwo6nsv$...
    >> On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 02:02:47 -0600, Rocky wrote:
    >>
    >>> I won a jury trial 12 to 0 as a pro se litigant against a woman that
    >>> worked

    ....

    YOU are posting in the wrong group. This group is (mostly) about help
    with computers.
    Rick, Apr 17, 2010
    #4
  5. Rocky

    Rocky Guest

    "Rick" <> wrote in message
    news:hqcqme$549$-september.org...
    > Rocky wrote:
    >> "richard"<> wrote in message
    >> news:ger5oz7ryfsh.1e4g9crwo6nsv$...
    >>> On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 02:02:47 -0600, Rocky wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I won a jury trial 12 to 0 as a pro se litigant against a woman that
    >>>> worked

    > ...
    >
    > YOU are posting in the wrong group. This group is (mostly) about help with
    > computers.
    >


    Kindly just shut the **** up.


    Tell me if you think this is too wordy and detailed:

    The ORDER below proves that Judges in the Appellate Court are as reckless
    with the law and as reckless with the facts as a reckless attorney is.

    Duane Thompson was the reckless attorney in question and he failed to state
    correctly the decision of the Appellate Court in the Mack vs. First Security
    Bank of Chicago regarding the directed verdict At 110 Ill.Dec. page 542 the
    court reverses and remands the case.

    Duane Thompson knew from the way I worded my initial complaint against
    Beverly Rusk, the exhibits I used to completely impeach her in the jury
    trial I won and the argument I tried to make during the malicious
    prosecution lawsuit that the Mack vs. First Security Bank of Chicago fully
    supported my argument from the start.

    Duane Thompson also furnished false information about the existence of
    malice even after hearing where the evidence of malice was located and that
    "it can be used to prove malice" from the statements below.

    Page 18 line 17
    THE COURT: He's showing the witness page 25 of the transcript.

    Before the next statement was made Judge Telleen made it clear what word he
    would accept as malicious.

    Page 29 line 14:
    MR WITTEKIND: The words she uses to describe it can be used to prove
    malice.

    All the Appellate Court would do in their ORDER below when they allowed
    themselves to be duped by Duane Thompson was overlook the evidence of malice
    in the transcript for the jury trial, manipulate testimony that was
    completely impeached by prior inconsistent statements using the very facts
    these judges were making assumptions about and then going so far as to
    falsify evidence themselves in the fourth paragraph of their ORDER.

    But not only would Appellate Court Judges help Duane Thompson conceal
    evidence of one malicious prosecution they would help Duane Thompson conceal
    evidence of two malicious prosecutions where the evidence presented in the
    second jury trial proves the first jury trial was won by rendering the
    statue invalid with misleading jury instructions using perjured testimony
    and using a woman that obstructs justice by furnishing false information
    about her daughter.

    Above found at:
    http://nolegalauthority.com
    Rocky, Apr 17, 2010
    #5
  6. Rocky

    G. Morgan Guest

    "Rocky" <> wrote:

    >I won a jury trial 12 to 0


    <snip>

    If he handed the evidence back, you should still have it and re-introduce it.

    Ask in a legal group, this group is 80% trolls and idiots.
    G. Morgan, Apr 17, 2010
    #6
  7. Rocky

    Rick Guest

    Rocky wrote:
    <moronic ...>

    Ploink!
    Rick, Apr 17, 2010
    #7
  8. Rocky

    Aardvark Guest

    On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 13:21:16 -0400, Rick wrote:

    > Rocky wrote:
    >> "richard"<> wrote in message
    >> news:ger5oz7ryfsh.1e4g9crwo6nsv$...
    >>> On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 02:02:47 -0600, Rocky wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> I won a jury trial 12 to 0 as a pro se litigant against a woman that
    >>>> worked

    > ...
    >
    > YOU are posting in the wrong group. This group is (mostly) about help
    > with computers.


    Says who?



    --
    Top posting because your cursor happens to be there is like shitting in
    your pants because that's where your asshole happens to be.
    Aardvark, Apr 17, 2010
    #8
  9. Rocky

    richard Guest

    On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 14:38:57 -0500, G. Morgan wrote:

    > "Rocky" <> wrote:
    >
    >>I won a jury trial 12 to 0

    >
    > <snip>
    >
    > If he handed the evidence back, you should still have it and re-introduce it.
    >
    > Ask in a legal group, this group is 80% trolls and idiots.


    He's just mouthing off because he thought he was a big time hot shot
    defending himself in court. He's been posting this shit for over six years
    ago and tries to make it sound like this is an actual ongoing event.

    He's pissed off because a girl dumped him 20 years ago.
    richard, Apr 17, 2010
    #9
  10. Rocky

    Rocky Guest

    "richard" <> wrote in message
    news:6aena7wkl0w4.3tyy60eu4p5q$...
    > On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 14:38:57 -0500, G. Morgan wrote:
    >
    >> "Rocky" <> wrote:
    >>
    >>>I won a jury trial 12 to 0

    >>
    >> <snip>
    >>
    >> If he handed the evidence back, you should still have it and re-introduce
    >> it.
    >>
    >> Ask in a legal group, this group is 80% trolls and idiots.

    >
    > He's just mouthing off because he thought he was a big time hot shot
    > defending himself in court. He's been posting this shit for over six years
    > ago and tries to make it sound like this is an actual ongoing event.
    >
    > He's pissed off because a girl dumped him 20 years ago.


    God Richard, you truly are an IdIoT. I could have many different women if I
    wanted to.
    Rocky, Apr 18, 2010
    #10
  11. Rocky

    Rocky Guest

    Zeke posted: Why do some judges hand exhibits back after a trial?

    On Apr 17, 5:04 pm, richard <> wrote:
    > On Sat, 17 Apr 2010 14:38:57 -0500, G. Morgan wrote:
    > > "Rocky" <> wrote:

    >
    > He's pissed off because a girl dumped him 20 years ago.


    Once more you were fooled by a post from Zeke/Jeff where he took a
    post from mlm and re-posted it here.

    If you look close Jeff/Zeke can't use my exact e-mail address so he
    fakes one.

    Plus, since I know he is up to no good I post with an IP address in my
    post and when I post with google groups as I am now you know this post
    is not from Jeff/zeke.

    Rocky
    Rocky, Apr 25, 2010
    #11
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. T-Bone
    Replies:
    30
    Views:
    1,429
  2. Allan
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    468
    Allan
    Oct 4, 2005
  3. Replies:
    0
    Views:
    651
  4. xianzeguanggao

    Seek cooperation Expect hand in hand

    xianzeguanggao, Jun 14, 2007, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    529
    xianzeguanggao
    Jun 14, 2007
  5. Lawrence D'Oliveiro

    Microsoft Left Hand, Meet Microsoft Right Hand

    Lawrence D'Oliveiro, Mar 5, 2011, in forum: NZ Computing
    Replies:
    1
    Views:
    382
    Gordon
    Mar 7, 2011
Loading...

Share This Page