Corrupt Western Justice Systems
of the teenage boys accused of murdering Damilola Taylor was freed yesterday
after the judge threw out the evidence of the prosecution's chief witness,
describing some of it as "embellished lies", and scathingly criticised
the police for the way they had obtained the unreliable testimony.
It is comforting to know that, at last, some of our judges are
realising that females actually lie in court. This fourteen year-old seems to
have done little but lie and make trouble. And she seems quite prepared to see
boys convicted of murder so that she can benefit from the financial reward that
is on offer.
And ... She
was also told BY THE POLICE that she could get one of the defendants, who was
her friend, "off the hook" by saying she saw the killing, the judge
said. (And that's a blatant attempt to pervert the course of justice, in my
Also ... This
COULD be the end of the line for MEDIA payouts ...
However, the point of this piece
is to bring attention to the fact that in all cases of alleged domestic violence or sex-assault involving intimates, there is some
of some kind, anticipated by the accuser. And the public needs to be made far
more aware of this - particular when acting as members of juries.
Such accusers can never be
regarded as independent and objective witnesses. Indeed, for the most part, they
should be regarded as hostile witnesses, since their reasons for going to court
are very likely to include the desire to seek some form of revenge or some kind
And until such time as the courts
fully recognise that in cases
where the only relevant evidence derives from the verbal testimony of two
emotionally-involved protagonists, and that there is, therefore, no possibility of arriving at a
conclusion that is 'beyond reasonable doubt', and that, therefore, this must
mean Not Guilty,
I and others will continue creating a fuss about the continuing corruption of
the justice system.
And, of course, when it comes to gaining some
advantage - such as money! - people will clearly steal for it, aggress for it, murder for it, sell their bodies for it, risk life,
limb and long-term imprisonment for it, risk their health and their futures for it, AND THEY WILL
WORK AT SOME JOB ALMOST EVERY DAY FOR IT.
But so bewilderingly dim-witted are
many of those who run our justice system that
they don't seem to cotton on to the fact that many people may actually lie in
the courtroom for it.
Now, I occasionally get emails from lawyers - polite ones
usually - that suggest that I might not be living in the 'real' world with
regard to this issue, and that the justice system is trying to cope with very
difficult circumstances, and that, because it has a duty to 'protect the weak',
it cannot afford to make convictions too difficult to obtain.
Those who are happy to inflict severe injustices upon others
demonstrate themselves to be so morally bankrupt that they should be barred from
the legal profession altogether - and especially from becoming judges! (e.g. See AH's
Justice - Corrupt At The Very Core). And
I would feel no different about, say, a
physician who happily inflicted injury upon some of his patients in order to
benefit some others.
After all, and for example, one
could argue along similar lines that a surgeon would be quite entitled to kill a
perfectly healthy human being in order to remove the healthy organs and,
perhaps, save five lives by transplanting them into those who needed them.
Would lawyers find this
I do not think so.
No, Sir. It is those who run the justice system who are not living in the
'real' world; not me.
It is completely unacceptable for
those working in the justice system to inflict injustices on people on the
grounds that they are trying to protect the weak.
Thankfully, however, the internet
is now empowering many different groups, and every exposure of injustice is going to be racked
up by hordes of very angry people who have been affected by it or who feel
threatened by it. This will cause the justice system to collapse unless it
starts to do its job properly.
Further, of course, the politically-correct platitudes surrounding the
phrase 'in the best interest of the child' that mindlessly pour out of the mouths of those in the
so-called justice system whenever they try to justify their hateful policies
toward mostly male defendants (e.g. suspending teachers from their jobs
without proper evidence, the lack of anonymity for defendants in sex cases, denying fathers
their children etc) have now been exposed not only in terms of their
worthlessness and of the odious sex-discriminatory political motives that
them, but it now seems very clear that those within the justice system most
likely to use this phrase are the very people who are actually damaging
our society AND OUR CHILDREN far more so than is just about anyone else! (e.g.
see The Damage to Society from False Accusations.)
As such, they could hardly be more damnable.
And as more and more people begin to realise just how self-serving and corrupt
has the justice system itself become, and how it thrives by actually bringing
about and fuelling those very problems that beset our children and our society,
so it is that they will see through the lies of judges and officials who defend
their actions by robotically alleging that they are simply acting in the 'best interest of
the child' when they are clearly doing nothing of the sort but are doing the
In most of these cases they are
simply adhering to the
feminist agenda, and acting on behalf of those women who manipulate the system to their
advantage - which in many cases goes even as far as the making of false
accusations of child molestation against hapless fathers who can do nothing to
defend themselves from them - nor from the threat of them - and who must be so utterly devastated by such things.
Well, this is a justice system that is
clearly going to get an INCREASINGLY rough ride unless it - rather than I -
starts to wake up to the 'real' world.
(Also see my piece entitled Judges
to see how dishonest even the highest-ranking judges nowadays appear to be.)