We are interested here only for understanding the prime
verdict given by these judges that exist as precedence
rule for all other judges in our court, legally.
Warning! -Up to the verdict not canceled it will
damage new victims, -do not forget it !!
---------------
We begin our study of a genuine verdict of Sir M. Shamgar
and compare his text with the text of the written law.
The text of the law seen above is straight forward:
There can be no other commentary:
- It's written in imperative stile(!!)
- The Law teaches the court that in the proceedings
of a crime trial everything has to be written,
regarding what happened and spoken in the session.
Every homo sapiens understands that if the
proceedings were recorded truthfully and all what
happen in the trial session, then it gives option for
an appeal and discussion about the judges decision.
But If the judge did not record the argumentation, or
made a wrong record, that could cause a wrong judgment.
-On the other hand the judge can prevent appealing
against his wrong decision because the judge had
not written, during the proceedings, evidence,
that must be obtained in the lower court grade.
-It's not possible to remember all occurrences
during the trial and what is recorded with mistakes
and what is not recorded at all. -Is it understood?!
Look, -there is the source of the dilemma:
-We have a good law that was born in UK legacy,
(more exactly the thousands years old Rome law).
-But our judges wish to make a law on their own;
Then the judges use a false comments and so
eliminate the good law that half the world uses.
In fact the law does not give the judge
the free hand to select what would be written
in the proceedings of trials sessions.
I am sure that the false interpretation of the law
by several judges damage the justice in the court and
in the country and caused a society demoralization.
These wrong interpretations can cause an anarchistic
behavior and bring corruption in the court system.
If it is possible to place a verdict not
according to the law then there always will
be a danger to any citizen of being a victim
of subjective thinking or wish of any judge.
-It is logical?! -But It's an element of anarchy.
- It is clear that some judges make wrong
verdicts and thus are breaking the exact law.
These judges explain their perception as if the
legislator has written the law for court, then as if
the legislator has given the authority to the judge
to select what would be recorded in the proceedings.
My arguments against this casuistry:
-I found in verdicts of other judges of the same
level of reputation and maybe the same judges
wrote opportunity argumentation in other cases.
Now I wish to show to my opponents that not only
the logical understanding of the law explains
clearly whom is the responsibility of recording
the proceedings, but transcriptions the verdicts
in relevant cases explain as we are right.
I only wish to remind to our grot Lawyers
that they mistakenly interpret the law.
It go wrong with the judiciary commentary
to laws given in the law commentary and in
oppose with relevant court verdicts.
The comment has in the law is prefer of
the judges comments.
The law is writing for one and all, equality.
The judges busy to fulfil the law as it given.
Click here -for Next.
