Retired lawyer here. I hate to spoil anyone’s opinion of the legal system, but witnesses lie on the stand ALL the time, and I have never heard of anyone being charged with perjury. Also, it’s a bad sign if the judge doesn’t like Mr Rath. I’ve seen judges who, although usually fair, have become angry at a lawyer and decided against them irrationally.
It's pretty petty at this point but what level of tolerance can we afford the AHS and the Province after their last 2 years of lies?
Court won't be back in session until April now...still no Hinshaw...but I think if we make a big enough stink about this, we can maybe get a little more honesty from following witnesses?
Color me overly optimistic.
In any case, I figured it was worth going over and mentioning to y'all.
Interesting comment. Do you think some judges base their decisions along party lines that they agree with? And are they affiliated in any way with a political party? If so then I think our system is flawed.
I have never seen that, but they are human and do have biases.
I don’t want to imply anything negative about Justice Romaine. I have appeared before her many times, and she is a judge that listens very carefully to both sides, and gives fair and reasoned decisions. We just have to hope she isn’t one of those inflicted by mass psychosis
I was sure Justice Romaine was falling asleep on Wednesday through the Respondents opening. She had this jittery, blinkey eye, head bob thing going on...almost like the most recent videos of Christina Freeland.
Was she always like that?
I've noticed a little tipping on the scales by Romaine on certain calls, one based on evidence entered after the appropriate date by the Respondent vs the same issue by the applicant. Applicant was thrown out without a lot of discussion...Respondents was taken into consideration and after 3 days, still being considered. Both under the same objection of not being available to the Province at the time the case was set.
I'm still not going to go with corruption...not my place, but there is a definite bias.
And Parker uses this to his advantage. He's pretty good...and I don't like that about him!
Of course she’s lying and everyone knows. Hope Rath is able to adjust his appreciation with the judge… What a pity, the knowledge of the ongoing www.grand-jury.net can’t be used! It’s perfectly clear - pandemic was fabricated, PCR designed and used to increase cases, systematic approach to not treat patients, this to increase deaths and fear. And, to pave the way for EUA. Any MD must be able to recognize the issues with testing, not diagnosing, not treating of patients.
Then, the orchestrated messaging throughout the past months - designed to manipulate all involved. Mass hypnosis at its best. Last but not least - mass vaccination during a pandemic with no. isolating vaccines. A deadly sin…. Hope this first case isn’t premature! With all that’s been shown at the grand jury, it’s going to be a slam dunk.
They've done this all through the Court of Opinion. Now, I want to bring more public into that court and let's see how the Opinion really looks after that!
Retired lawyer here. I hate to spoil anyone’s opinion of the legal system, but witnesses lie on the stand ALL the time, and I have never heard of anyone being charged with perjury. Also, it’s a bad sign if the judge doesn’t like Mr Rath. I’ve seen judges who, although usually fair, have become angry at a lawyer and decided against them irrationally.
It's pretty petty at this point but what level of tolerance can we afford the AHS and the Province after their last 2 years of lies?
Court won't be back in session until April now...still no Hinshaw...but I think if we make a big enough stink about this, we can maybe get a little more honesty from following witnesses?
Color me overly optimistic.
In any case, I figured it was worth going over and mentioning to y'all.
;)
Agreed! I appreciate your daily rundown
Interesting comment. Do you think some judges base their decisions along party lines that they agree with? And are they affiliated in any way with a political party? If so then I think our system is flawed.
I have never seen that, but they are human and do have biases.
I don’t want to imply anything negative about Justice Romaine. I have appeared before her many times, and she is a judge that listens very carefully to both sides, and gives fair and reasoned decisions. We just have to hope she isn’t one of those inflicted by mass psychosis
I was sure Justice Romaine was falling asleep on Wednesday through the Respondents opening. She had this jittery, blinkey eye, head bob thing going on...almost like the most recent videos of Christina Freeland.
Was she always like that?
I've noticed a little tipping on the scales by Romaine on certain calls, one based on evidence entered after the appropriate date by the Respondent vs the same issue by the applicant. Applicant was thrown out without a lot of discussion...Respondents was taken into consideration and after 3 days, still being considered. Both under the same objection of not being available to the Province at the time the case was set.
I'm still not going to go with corruption...not my place, but there is a definite bias.
And Parker uses this to his advantage. He's pretty good...and I don't like that about him!
lol
I don’t think she’s normally like that.
Of course she’s lying and everyone knows. Hope Rath is able to adjust his appreciation with the judge… What a pity, the knowledge of the ongoing www.grand-jury.net can’t be used! It’s perfectly clear - pandemic was fabricated, PCR designed and used to increase cases, systematic approach to not treat patients, this to increase deaths and fear. And, to pave the way for EUA. Any MD must be able to recognize the issues with testing, not diagnosing, not treating of patients.
Then, the orchestrated messaging throughout the past months - designed to manipulate all involved. Mass hypnosis at its best. Last but not least - mass vaccination during a pandemic with no. isolating vaccines. A deadly sin…. Hope this first case isn’t premature! With all that’s been shown at the grand jury, it’s going to be a slam dunk.
They've done this all through the Court of Opinion. Now, I want to bring more public into that court and let's see how the Opinion really looks after that!
Good point. You’re playing an important part here!