Bias and Prejudice in a Court Room

Prejudice is defined as an an unfavorable opinion or feeling formed beforehand or without knowledge, thought, or reason; any preconceived opinion or feeling, either favorable or unfavorable; unreasonable feelings, opinions, or attitudes, especially of a hostile nature, regarding a racial, religious, or national group.

Most of us have encountered bias and prejudice in a court room in one format or another, especially those litigants who have been subjected to truly malicious rulings, capricious and beyond the bound of reason, without any evidence to support an insane decision.

A judicial officer is supposed to be objective, where objective is defined as not influenced by personal feelings, interpretations, or prejudice; based on facts; unbiased in order to form an objective opinion.

As many of us are aware an objective judge is a rare, practically extinct creature. Proceedings with a biased judge are characterized by a judge who infers his/her own standard of behavior as a parent as a criteria for issuing rulings based upon the fact as to how he/she treats his own children. That aberrant behavior would not be considered normal in a civilized society or by any medical and unbiased psychological professional.

A biased and prejudiced judge refuses to adhere to the law and cannot apply the law as his/her state of mind towards the litigant prevails rather than applying the law. In custody cases this type of judge cannot decide the best interest of the child standard as his/her warped views on how children are raised are used as the defining standard and the belief that children are the chattel of one parent based on the religious views of said judge. In this type of situation a judge allocates the threat of beating the mother of two small children to death as mere frustration on part of the father rather than recognizing the extreme hate filled action towards the other parent where the wish is to take the life of the other parent to eradicate that parent completely from the life of children.

Frustration for the mere fact that a parent exists is not an excuse for the hate filled action of one parent that has dragged throughout the entire court file for years.

Prejudice and bias is minimizing these actions as frustration as is the action of involving two small children in the abuse and hate against the other parent. In the mind set of the prejudicial court the parent at the receiving end of this abuse MUST have done something to justify these actions.

Indeed the other parent, in the eyes of the court, has no value to the lives of their children and has to be denigrated, dehumanized for years, legally battered and is placed on a lower standing than an earthworm climbing the evolutionary ladder, in said court.

Children are used as tools to continuously punish a parent and to keep the other parent tied to an ex spouse and a court as it is the belief of the judge hearing these types of cases that litigants/parents just have to deal with abuse and the fact that their children are being used as tools of abuse, rather than looking at the long term consequences of said abuse on the child and that this will create another generation of dysfunctional adults susceptible to substance abuse and spousal abuse. HOW IS THIS ACCEPTABLE BY ANY STANDARD IN ANY CIVILIZED NATION?


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s