It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Manipulation of the legal system. This is how it looks!

page: 1

log in


posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 05:55 AM
Meet Matthew Cordle. He's a young Ohio man who drove drunk and killed someone through his actions. He then made a video about it, confessed to what he did, and posted it online.

In a 3½-minute video posted last week, Cordle admitted he killed a man from a Columbus suburb and said he "made a mistake" when he decided to drive that night.

"My name is Matthew Cordle, and on June 22, 2013, I hit and killed Vincent Canzani," he says somberly. "This video will act as my confession."

Sounds decent enough, for what he could be expected to do after what came first, anyway. How many publicly stand up for what they did? Some, post mocking videos and think they won't be caught. We've seen that here too for stories..but this one? Well.. He seemed to have genuine remorse.

Then the bottom feeding scum...err..I mean attorneys..enter the scene.

Franklin County Judge Julie Lynch also alleged the attorneys balked at coming before her because she wouldn't promise a specific sentence, something they deny.

The story indicates he faces 2 - 8 1/2 years for what he's done here. That sounds light for taking a man's life through willful negligence....but it's the system we have. How can it be perverted to be even worse? Well, leave it to a lawyer to answer that one!

Cordle will enter a not guilty plea initially Wednesday, a process that will lead to a judge chosen at random before whom he will then plead guilty, defense attorney George Breitmayer said.

This may happen all the time and we just don't hear about it, but that is one of the most blatant and obscene perversions of justice I've heard of in a long while. I had no idea you could get away with no only Judge shopping a sentence for a guilty plea, but be so cheeky about doing it, you announce the intention across the Associated Press wire, in advance??

Isn't there something against this in ethics, if not procedure? The Not Guilty plea is given in 100% bad faith....isn't it?

What a world...even when you confess in full color and detail, with every intention of pleading guilty? A Lawyer will get a not guilty shoe horned in there somewhere.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 09:17 AM
reply to post by wrabbit2000

You have been at odds with some of my views before. But it is after seeing the system from the inside.(not criminal/inmate side)

The WHOLE thing, the entire system is a sham.. it hides behind decency and such.

example: we need this shakedown police state mafia because..

"thieves and rapists are bad and we catch them and lock them up"... so lame.

those types have been dealt with more efficient, humane and cost effective than by REDCOATS for hundreds of years..

you must consider that this is nothing but the "King's ransom"... King George's heirs own America as if if was never lost to them circa 1776.

which is WHY I always call badges --- R E D C O A T S .. it is more true than you realize.

the UCC is a good start..

and why does the Coast Guard fly a UNION JACK on the bow when underway on patrols at sea?

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 11:16 AM
reply to post by HanzHenry

Well, we do certainly disagree, but that's fine. If everyone agreed, it would be a very boring world, wouldn't it?

"thieves and rapists are bad and we catch them and lock them up"... so lame.

I'm not sure what you mean there? There are victims by the truck load and daily across the nation. Most, I dare say, didn't get that way because realistic options existed to avoid it...cops or not. However, without them, what is the procedure for handling crime from shoplifting walmart to rape of a child? If you get someone cold and red handed...that's one thing. After the fact? Who investigates? Who tracks them down, once ID'ed? More importantly, who arrests them and processes them into the system to let them have 'their day in court'? Vigilante justice is one approach and it did work in this varying degrees....for a good number of years in our history. A lot of innocent men and others hung from trees too, I have little doubt.

So in a pure pragmatic sense? How do we address those issues...if cops aren't there? It's almost funny, because I'm having to ask, if not for cops? Who will do police work?

The system IS broken. Badly broken needs reform at all levels and in ways we've not seen before in this nation. Still? When all is said and done...if we ever get that reform and our system or the one that replaces it comes to be? It'll still need constables, cops or proctors. Whatever term from now or the past we'd want to use... there a viable alternative to work across the width of our diverse society?

edit on 11-9-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 11:37 AM
You know I never thought of it that way.

I used to work in a court and i can confirm that this happens all of the time.

A not guilty plea is entered and then the Barrister will ask the judge for an indication of the sentence that would be given should the defendant plead guilty.

I don't know how it works in the US but here in the UK, one of the factors that has a bearing on the length of sentence is how early in the process the defendant pleads guilty.. For example, if the defendant pleads guilty (admits guilt) during the initial police interview then they get the maximum reduction. The amount of reduction decreases the further down the judicial process it goes.

The only offence where it dosent apply is Murder as thats mandatory life, which is why you see quite a lot of murder trials as a lot of people charged with murder take the view the may as well try their luck with a jury as they have nothing to loose.
edit on 11/9/13 by HumanPLC because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 11:40 AM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

what I mean is. The redcoats justify ALL they do based upon SOME of the things they do. Like catching rapists, thieves, etc.(.this is nothing more than a brutal warlord gangster buying shoes for all the little poor kids as means to justify the other activities.)

People then support them in literally do REDCOAT things. such as throwing people out of their homes under shady circumstances so FOREIGN INTERESTS ----> INCLUDING ENEMIES can -------- PROFIT off of AMERICAN'S MISERY!!!

ffs where is the honor in that?

throwing people out of their homes for mere pennies... then OTHERS PROFIT GREATLY!!

or, all the corrupt cops that have thrown people in prison on faulty evidence -- at least 10% of inmates..

the shear numbers of that.

Or the CCA.. FOR PROFIT prison system... cant be any more immoral.. and is it ANY reason we are the INMATE capital of the world...

Or, is there NO IRONY in the aspect of a "blue line"? this breeds corruption..

Or a POLICE union? and these union members then are used to harang others whom may be protesting for likewise representation.

and these are supposed "employees" of the taxpayers? what a JOKE!

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 11:46 AM
reply to post by wrabbit2000

I don't think it's fair to label this 'Judge Shopping'. First, it's the defense atty's duty to do everything within the law to get the best possible outcome for their clients. All that happened here is that they realized the initial hearing was going to before a hard-ass,, hang-em-high judge and decided they'd be better off taking their chances. Pleading not guilty doesn't let them choose a judge, just makes a random pick from the pool.

Trust me, I've seen far, far worse in the judicial system.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 11:50 AM
reply to post by wrabbit2000

So in a pure pragmatic sense? How do we address those issues...if cops aren't there? It's almost funny, because I'm having to ask, if not for cops? Who will do police work?

they could fix it if so inclined. how about stop acting like a REDCOAT?

you do know that police departments are corporations? why do we need a sheriff's depts and PD's?

we DONT! it is redundancy no?

or refusing to carry out traitorous acts..i.e.;
1. checkpoints (what would our ancestors think about these?)
2. IRS seizures of property .. refuse to do it
3. throwing people out of their homes for the PROFIT of FOREIGN interests... REFUSE TO DO IT
4. having tactical belts, armor, boots, helmets, magazines, etc made by exploited labor in FOR PROFIT PRISONS? --- refuse it!

ACTUALLY --- "they" could have been refusing a lot of things over the last 100 years... NOPE! the pay, prestige, and retirement means more to them... THE PEOPLE THAT DO WEAR redcoats are USUALLY the -------->last people

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:03 PM
reply to post by HanzHenry

Well, now I'm going to stop you right there because you are making a mistake many many people make. TPTB are very happy to see people make it too. Sheriff Departments and Police Departments are in NO WAY the same thing...on any level. They do very similar jobs and to see a deputy vs. an officer, you wouldn't know or care much in the moment...I'm sure.

Still, Police Departments are an entity of the city, existing at the pleasure of the city and under the control, at all times, of the city. You occasionally see cities disband their Police, albeit rarely, for a variety of reasons. This is how and why it can be done. In the end, the city can just erase the whole thing if they so choose as a whole.

Sheriffs are a WHOLE different thing and as elected officials go? They stand among the most powerful ...within their jurisdictions...outside of the President himself. Jurisdictions are radically different, of course, and that makes ALL the difference...however, on the local level? Obama cannot arrest a mayor or basically, whomever else he chooses to for virtually any reason which sounds valid in the moment. A Sheriff can.

A cop can't arrest a federal agent and expect anything but the end of his own career. That just gets bigger if a Police Department or Chief supported the action. He may very well go too. A Sheriff can.

It may be hard to believe because nothing in modern society is said about this, save for movies....Sheriff Arpaio in Arizona and a couple Sheriff in Nevada who just don't take crap off anyone, Uncle included. Read up on it though... Sheriffs and the power they hold as elected county Officials transcends the Western States and absolutely carries into the modern day. IF THEY CHOSE....Sheriffs could be the greatest ally a free people in this nation could ever ask to have, if things go badly wrong. Unlike almost anyone else in a position of resistance? A Sheriff could actually say he's legal.

This is what I mean by's not as simple as 'all cops must go' or even 'most' cops are bad. They don't and aren't. Enough are make it increasingly common to hear about abuse which should NEVER happen in this nation...and occasionally? Sheriffs go bad too. That is what State Police are for, or as a town near me found many years back? The FBI if they really can't get a county cleaned of corruption.

Not all badges are equal...and we may very well NEED some of them in what lay ahead for us all.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:12 PM
reply to post by jtma508

I don't think it's fair to label this 'Judge Shopping'. First, it's the defense atty's duty to do everything within the law to get the best possible outcome for their clients.

Yes, indeed. Even the lowliest child molester has a Constitutional right to due process and someone has to do it, vigorously and to the best of their ability. I've certainly heard the arguments from defense attorneys for how they sleep at night. I still can't grasp how they manage that on a realistic level, but I'll accept that somehow, they do manage. It's how our system works.

Still, this strikes me as outright wrong? I mean, when the Judge (Court) asks for a plea, I believe it should be reasonable to expect a legitimate and 100% sincere plea, whatever that may be. To deliberately and with fully stated advanced planning, game the system by a fraudulent plea at the arraignment? It strikes me as ...well.. fraud?

I suppose in the strictest sense, it isn't Judge they can't select the Judge who pops.

(Officially anyway... If you're around the legal system, as it sounds like you are or have been, you know thats not technically true, all the time. Judges have dockets with busy schedules...educated guessing with a buddy in the Clerk's office ought to help narrow the odds, shouldn't it?).

Shopping for a specific winner or not...isn't it still wrong to offer a 100% dishonest plea for the express purpose of doing what they cannot do by the actual process that exists (Recusal, if it's that serious an issue). The whole thing just hit my B.S. bone like a ball peen hammer.

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:14 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I am well aware of what you state.

are you aware and get the meaning of my words fully?

pretty clear imho what is wrong, and I have spelled out my ideas that would go far in remedy.

the UCC is a good start..

and why does the Coast Guard fly a UNION JACK on the bow when underway on patrols at sea?

are you up to speed on these 2?
edit on 11-9-2013 by HanzHenry because: linking

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 12:24 PM
reply to post by HanzHenry

I'm aware of how the UCC is presented for how it can be used. I and another member here have both spoken to that issue, extensively, and against the idea as being workable. If for no other reason, the very people one says place themselves above the law would then need to lower themselves to care about that very same law to acknowledge anything done under the process of the UCC. I've heard it called a "Deadbeat index" more than anything else, which seems to be what it functions as now.

I have no idea what the Coast Guard flies off it's vessels these days, aside from the Stars and Stripes, of course. I wouldn't know why they'd have a 'Union Jack' flying from a vessel. That should be interesting to look up or hear more from someone who has served in the Coast Guard. I'm sure the men who have done their time there got the 2 bit tour at some point, to include little things like that for explanation?
edit on 11-9-2013 by Wrabbit2000 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 01:25 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

I spent time on the USCGC cutter based out of 32nd st Navsta.

Dutch Harbor is a rough place at night., Ketchikan and Victoria much nicer ports.

on the heels of 9/11 the Sea Marshall program went nuts..

Noone knows why actually. the Ops officer said it was tradition. relating to admiralty law.

when you learn the history of the Revenue Cutter Service, not pretty
edit on 11-9-2013 by HanzHenry because: info

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 01:40 PM
reply to post by HanzHenry

I appreciate that info! Now that you put it all that way, I believe I will go look that up. There HAS to be a reason somewhere. It sounds like something to do a thread on, in fact. Hmmm.. I think you gave me a lead!

Anyway, I think the one thing we can agree on is that our system is broken and what we have now? Well..It just cannot stand or last much longer if it doesn't catch itself to correct..or be corrected. One of the two. Perhaps it's already too late to effectively walk our own tracks back from where we find ourselves.

I'm not an eternal optimist, mind you...just a Father and a Husband, looking to try and be good at both under difficult circumstances these days. I know, deep down where I prefer not to admit things? The way some advocate on here may be the only way things do come back to a livable standard.

If it goes to push from this shoving we have now? I've said before...I won't be hiding. I just won't be seeking out ways to create the situation. It's certainly the last thing any sane man should want, right?

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 05:31 PM
reply to post by Wrabbit2000

My greatest fear is the US is being set up to take a big fall. How could the world watch us become the threat we once defeated?

How can we live in a place more similar to Nazi controlled territory than say 1940 America?

"papers please" --- was a 'checkpoint' type thing.. DHS -- homeland? what word could sound more soviet?

I truly worry that enough bully victims (other countries) can "conspire" to take us out. or at least harm greatly. Look at today..

how can the last hundred years come to light and things end well? and the govts answer last 10 years has been to confirm people's suspicions?

posted on Sep, 11 2013 @ 07:24 PM
reply to post by HanzHenry

Well, I'll say something here I don't say often.. Maybe on past threads, I misjudged you a bit by the time we've had a couple times? I can be harsh too and it's a two way thing, no doubt.

You're mirroring my own deepest fears I rarely give voice to though, about being set-up. Yeah...You can be sure you're not alone on that feeling ..even if it's a feeling not allowed out very often. It does tend to color everything about world perception, at least to some degree, doesn't it?

I look around in the cardinal directions though...and where I don't see hostility? I see a type of neutrality I am not at ALL comforted by. Like a vicious neighborhood dog that lets you stroll on by without so much as a huff 100 times...because he knows on the 101st time, you're dinner.

new topics

top topics


log in