The Thomas Paul Murphy Music Player

"You might think that I am off base, but I am published by the Securities and Exchange Commission."

Thomas Paul Murphy

Friday, June 20, 2014

Destruction of Evidence and Judge Rudolph Randa 06 20 2014

Destruction of Evidence and Judge Rudolph Randa 06 20 2014

A red flag went up when I read that Randolph ordered the destruction of evidence.  Here are the issues that I came up with regard to his egregious process.
1.       Evidence prevents bad history from repeating itself!  I don’t see how a legitimate judge can ever order the destruction of evidence!
2.       Destruction of evidence is like a raccoon washing its hands and immediately declaring itself innocent of a crime or guilt.
3.       It’s not wanting to believe you committed a crime that you did!
4.       It goes to far with the level of sympathy and indicates therefore indicates the judge personally identifies with the criminal flaw; and hence should have never been a judge.
5.       It represents a continued belief that a crime committed wasn’t really a crime when it was.  That leads to legislation that supports crime and criminals.
6.       Wanting a victim to forget it was a victim so that you can further victimize them (or unsuspecting others like them!)
7.       Prisoner or defendant reform cannot occur from a sentence by a judge when one is allowed to deny they did something wrong.  (As evidence against them was ordered destroyed.) Hence a judge who destroys evidence is not consistent with being a judge!
8.       There can be no greater evidence that a Judge is crooked then a judge ordering the destruction of evidence.  This is not a third world country or a tribal based judicial system despite a personal bias to want it to be easy like that.
9.       If a judge orders the destruction of evidence does he also order the destruction of the embodiment of evidence; a witness!  It is essentially the same criminal motivation isn’t it!  It is the antithesis of legitimate criminal justice!
10.   A judge deciding someone is innocent by destruction of evidence against them?  It equates to a delusion of professionalism doesn’t it? How many times do you ask yourself, his mother told him that he would make a good judge (or other profession) and that is what motivated him.
11.   If one hand of a person is evil the other is too.  If a Judge orders the destruction of evidence then does he also order or empower the false creation of evidence?

Thomas Paul Murphy
Originally published on 06 20 2014 at:
Copyright 2014 Thomas Paul Murphy

Someone like that would not even be qualified to serve on a Jury of my peers!

Could this indeed be an intentional ploy to make that judge and all Wisconsin Judges look inept and therefore all of their cases must be reviewed?  Hence members of criminal families are freed from prison?

No comments:

Post a Comment