|
|
|
|
| Atlanta, Georgia - Orange County Superior Court Judge James M. Brooks was publicly admonished for behavior demonstrating bias, a recurring issue for which he has previously been disciplined. While Judge Brooks has repeatedly been accused and found guilty of bias and prejudiced actions dating back to 1987, no ceasing of or reparations for this ongoing pattern, with regard to the cases affecting the lives, property, and liberty, of those entering his courtroom, has been initiated or made available to victims.
While 1 of every 3 Americans is engaged by the judicial system at some point, the inability to obtain an unbiased trier of fact or judge willing to obey governing principles to include the law, is beginning to become an ever more obvious and fatal flaw in the system, rendering such tainted reviews unlawful or in violation of the rules of the Court, judicial canons, BAR rules or even constitutional mandates.
How is it a sitting judge could repeatedly issue biased remarks, mocking those of American citizenship with spewing condescending and tainted remarks, clearly in violation of all legal standards? Can a ruling be afforded legal standing from a judge, who refuses to afford targets or unknowing litigants, minimal human consideration with regard to health issues or the presentation of ONLY facts relevant to the issue at bar, and not preconceived notions coupled with bad behavior?
Fortunately for Californians, Judge Brooks multiple efforts have at least seen the light of day, unlike Georgia and Florida, where the judicial reviewing bodies and elected officials REFUSE to hold judges in compliance with their sworn oath of office, judicial canons, codified law, constitutional protections, and rules of the court. However, where does that leave the cases cited, affected, or improperly "adjudicated," in which Judge Brooks like a number of judges, has clearly acted contrary to his judicial requirements?
Once a matter is adjudicated by the lower court, only a superior court can overcome the violations by the subordinate right? But what are the chances that will happen? The answer slim to none, the latter of which is the norm across this country. So, why would the Appeals or Supreme Court NOT have overturned the decisions of a person so willfully acting in an inappropriate manner, literally robbing law abiding citizens forced to seek redress in a court of law? Since overturning the decision of a fellow judge, might jeopardize the body or brotherhood, such acts are TOO rare and typically result in protracted attacks against the victims reporting such atrocities. Shouldn't Masonic brothers allow the sanctioning or review of a fellow 'Inns of Court' Member, much less the inherent system available to the Council, when the entire premise of the body is jeopardized or negated so flagrantly?
Judge Brooks obviously demonstrated bias, but the victims (Elizabeth and Arnold McMahon & Sosha Joher) lost their opportunity an unbiased review before the Orange County Superior Court. Did they suffer economic loss and/or damage? You bet, each party continued to be met with further legal mayhem. So while the admonishment of a repeat offender is a step in the right direction, when will justice TRULY be done? Welcome to the world of judicial misconduct and legally sanctioned injustice! How much longer will Americans allow their own government to violate their rights, lives, and liberties? It's time to make your voice heard. Patterns of willful misconduct cannot be allowed to continue or ruin the lives and rights of others!
For more on Judge Brooks efforts and documented pattern of behavior, visit the following sites:
CJP Admonishes Brooks
Brooks Bio
O C Judge Admonished for Remarks
References to Defendants as Nazis
CJP Admonishes for Sarcastic Remarks |
|
| |
|
View Comments (1) | Post a comment |
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
