judge CHRISTOPHER COLLIER: THE CASE FIXER

Corrupt judges have scarred the landscape of American jurisprudence for the past 200 years.  Chicago is a classic example, where public corruption involving judges and police is legendary.  Chicago, however, is not alone in that regard.

Some years  ago in Cleveland, some outlaw bikers planted a bomb at the house of a rival gang member.  However, they placed the device at the wrong house.  When the device detonated, an innocent young husband and wife, and their two year old son were killed.  The offenders were identified, arrested and indicted.

The case was assigned to Judge James McGettrick in the Cuyahoga County Court of Common Pleas.  At trial, McGettrick threw the case out, relieving the defendants of any future criminal liability since double jeopardy attaches once a jury is impaneled.

Many years later, while drinking at a bar in Lakewood, Judge McGettrick bumped into an undercover agent, a personal friend of mine, and mistook the agent for one of the bikers.  The agent sarcastically remarked to McGetrtrick, "we really appreciate what you did for us in that murder case."  McGettrick, again thinking that the agent was a biker, remarked, "You still owe me $10,000.00 for that one."

The following day, the agent delivered the $10,000.00 bribe to McGettrick, who was then promptly arrested.  Ultimately, McGettrick, a crooked judge and case fixer, was convicted and sent to prison where he died.

While McGettrick fixed cases, including murder cases, for defendants in exchange for money, corrupt judge COLLIER also fixes cases, but for an equally corrupt county prosecutor, Dean Holman.

While McGettrick took money on a case-by-case basis, COLLIER benefits financially by retaining his seat on the bench of the Medina County Court of Common Pleas, unopposed by any Dem opponent as long he is subservient to HOLMAN.  COLLIER continues to take home his paycheck, receives his benefits, including retirement benefits. This has turned out to be a better deal for COLLIER than the deal made by McGettrick.

NEVERTHELESS, A BRIBE IS A BRIBE, IN WHATEVER FORM TAKEN AND RECEIVED!

How, might you ask, does COLLIER fix cases for the prosecutor?  It's really quite simple, really.  Here are but a very few of the ways COLLIER fixes cases.

COLLIER does not enforce the Rules of Evidence and Criminal Procedure against the prosecutor.  Quite simply, the prosecutor does as he damn well pleases  and COLLIER just sits back and lets the good times roll.

Then there is the matter of the voire dire.  That is the jury selection process where attorneys are permitted to ask questions of prospective jurors.  COLLIER permits the prosecutor, over defense objections, to explain the prosecutor's version of the law, which you can be sure is not consistent with the law as should be explained to jurors in jury instructions at the end of the trial by the judge.  This misconduct by the prosecutor, permitted and condoned by COLLIER, is intended to bias the jury against the defendant from the very outset of the trial.

Of course, there is always the matter of suppression.  Suppression is a procedure wherein the defendant moves to suppress, or strike, evidence that was illegally seized by the police.  The Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution guarantees that every citizen will be secure from intrusion by the state.  The U.S. Supreme Court, in a landmark decision, Mapp v. Ohio, ruled that illegally seized evidence cannot be admitted at trial against a defendant.  The Supreme Court characterized such illegally seized evidence, and evidence flowing therefrom, as "fruits of the poisonous tree."


COLLIER completely disregards these bulwarks of your constitutional protections and admits illegally seized evidence at trial, again in favor of the prosecutor.


As most people are aware, the state presents its witness first.  The prosecutor is permitted to first examine his witness on direct examination.  The defense attorney is then permitted to cross-examine the state's witnesses.  Here, COLLIER gives the prosecutor a bonanza.  


The rules of evidence permit a defense attorney to examine a state's witness on matters involving bias against the defendant.  In other words, the rules of evidence permit the defense attorney to explore whether the witness has an ax to grind witht the defendant.  COLLIER prevents the defense attorney from examining the state's witnesses for bias, effectively emasculating the defendant's right of cross-examination.  COLLIER does not wish to imperil the state's case by examining witness bias.


One of the most ingenious techniques, employed by COLLIER  during trial, is his personal demeanor before the jury.  Most jurors, because of their inexperience look at the judge as the god of the courtroom, as COLLIER well knows. Accordingly, when the defense attorney is examining witnesses, COLLIER rolls his eyes, stares up at the ceiling, gazes out the window, and places his head on the bench as if napping.  While this conduct is not reflected in the trial record, as COLLIER well knows, his conduct is intended to influence the jury and bias the jury against the defendant.


In all, A BLACK MAN IN A 1950'S COURTROOM IN MISSISSIPPI HAD A BETTER CHANCE OF RECEIVING A FAIR TRIAL THAN DOES ANY DEFENDANT APPEARING BEFORE COLLIER IN THE MEDINA COUNTY COURT OF COMMON PLEAS, WHO CANNOT EXPECT TO RECEIVE ANYTHING BUT BACKWOODS "JUSTICE"!


THERE IS MUCH, MUCH MORE TO COME...