LAPDOG JUDGE COLLIER, THE VILLAGE IDIOT AND TOWN WHORE, RULES THAT APPLES ARE ORANGES!

LAPDOG COLLIER, THE VILLAGE IDIOT AND TOWN WHORE, has effectively ruled that Apples are Oranges in a twist of logic that is absolutely astounding.  Not even a complete moron could equal LAPDOG COLLIER'S ridiculous ruling in the matter of the SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE.


Regular readers of this blog may recall that a court in the State of Hawaii quoted appellate law, decided in the State of Ohio, that A SPOUSE HAS AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT TO REFUSE TO TESTIFY AGAINST A SPOUSE. [ See http://medinacorruption.blogspot.com/2011/06/judges-in-state-of-hawaii-know-more.html ].


It bears repeating the content of Rule 601 of the Ohio Rules of Evidence:

EVID R 601 GENERAL RULE OF COMPETENCY

Every person is competent to be a witness except:

(A) Those of unsound mind, and children under ten years of age, who appear incapable of receiving just impressions of the facts and transactions respecting which they are examined, or of relating them truly.

(B) A spouse testifying against the other spouse charged with a crime except when either of the following applies:

(1) a crime against the testifying spouse or a child of either spouse is charged;

(2) the testifying spouse elects to testify.

Under Ohio Rules of Evidence Rule 601, the spouse testifying against the spouse charged with a crime is first presumed incompetent. 

UNDER THE PROVISIONS OF RULE OF EVIDENCE 601, A SPOUSE CANNOT BE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY A SPOUSE UNDER ANY CONDITIONS UNLESS HE/SHE IS THE VICTIM OF A CHARGED CRIME AT THE HANDS OF THE DEFENDANT.


Appellate courts in the State of Ohio have affirmed the ABSOLUTE RIGHT OF A SPOUSE TO REFUSE TO TESTIFY AGAINST A SPOUSE, UNLESS HE/SHE ELECTS TO WAIVE THE PRIVILEGE AND OFFER TESTIMONY. 


IN THE CASE BEING PROFILED HERE AT THIS BLOG,  THE DEFENDANT WAS NOT CHARGED WITH VICTIMIZING HIS WIFE IN ANY FASHION.  [ See http://medinacorruption.blogspot.com/2011/02/collier-slips-and-slides-past-sixth.html   for the precise language of the charge in the indictment ].

HIS WIFE WAS THEREFORE COMPELLED TO TESTIFY BY LAPDOG COLLIER, THE VILLAGE IDIOT AND TOWN WHORE, CONTRARY TO THE RULES OF EVIDENCE AND THE LAW.


In issuing his "ruling" on the matter of the Defendant's wife assertion of her spousal privilege and compelling the wife to testify, clearly with the intent to prejudice the defendant and to please CORRUPT MEDINA COUNTY PROSECUTOR DINO HOLMAN, AND SCOTT SALISBURY, THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR AND COLLIER'S HANDLER, LAPDOG COLLIER COMPARED THIS CASE WITH SEVERAL INAPPLICABLE CASES CITED IN OHIO LAW.


After LAPDOG COLLIER, THE VILLAGE IDIOT AND TOWN WHORE, ruled that the DEFENDANT'S WIFE MUST TESTIFY, Defense Counsel objected and drew LAPDOG COLLIER'S limited powers of comprehension to Rule 601 of the Ohio Rules of Evidence.


At this juncture, SALISBURY, THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, jumped up and offered this less-than brilliant  explanation of the SALISBURY VERSION OF THE LAW, found at Page 29 of the Trial Transcript:

"Well that’s wrong, because it’s her privilege to waive. If she waives it, he can assert it all he wants. I mean, that’s like if the Defendant in the case stands up, Judge, and objects to every single question because she’s asserting his privilege that his wife can’t testify. We all know in the court that’s not the ...."

Now, SALISBURY, THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, argued that only the Defendant's wife could assert her Spousal Privilege, making this argument after the  DEFENDANT'S WIFE HAD FILED TWO SWORN AFFIDAVITS WITH LAPDOG COLLIER AND SENDING A PERSONAL LETTER TO SALISBURY, THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, ASSERTING HER SPOUSAL PRIVILEGE!


LAPDOG COLLIER just let this argument from SALISBURY, THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR, slide by as if it made perfect sense.


I suppose it did make sense to LAPDOG COLLIER, THE VILLAGE IDIOT AND TOWN WHORE, who can only preserve his lifetime uncontested appointment to the Medina County court by doing as he's told by CORRUPT COUNTY PROSECUTOR DINO HOLMAN and his handler, SCOTT SALISBURY, THE PATHOLOGICAL LIAR!


At pages 55 through 66 of the Trial Transcript, LAPDOG COLLIER offered his hare-brained legal analysis, attempting to justify his ruling compelling the Defendant's wife to testify.

LAPDOG COLLIER cited to State v. Bryant, 56 Ohio App.3d 20 (6^th App. Dist. 1988); State v. Mowery, 1 Ohio St.3d 192 (1982); State v. Rahman, 23 Ohio St.3d 146 (1986); Trammel v. United States, 445 U.S. 40 (1980); and State v. Antill, 176 Ohio St. 61 (1964). Bryant had relied on each of the other four cases. 56 Ohio App.3d at 21-22. 

Not a single one of LAPDOG COLLIER'S cited cases applies to the facts in this case, except for Trammel, decided by the United States Supreme Court, which stands for the proposition that a spouse may not be compelled to testify against a spouse.

Bryant was charged with kidnapping his wife, so Evid.R. 601(B) did not apply.

In Rahman, the victim was the defendant's daughter, so that the spouse was competent to testify under Rule 601.

In Antill, that defendant was charged with assaulting his wife so that Rule 601 did not apply.

In Mowery, that defendant was charged with shooting his wife 3 times, so Rule 601 did not apply.

At Page 59 of the Trial Transcript, LAPDOG COLLIER offered this moronic comment:

… [Mowery] is really an interesting case, because it relates to an aggravated burglary case, like my case here, which resulted in the aggravated murder of a person who was there at the house as well. In this particular case, the question was before the Supreme Court, whether the appellee, the defendant, could successfully assert a privilege to exclude his wife’s testimony as to aggravated murder and aggravated burglary.

---

The reader will take note that, also unlike Mowery, it was not the Defendant who asserted a spousal privilege, but rather, THE DEFENDANT'S WIFE ASSERTED HER PRIVILEGE, WHICH LAPDOG COLLIER KNOWINGLY AND WILLFULLY DENIED TO HER, CONTRARY TO LAW, ALL FOR THE INTENDED PURPOSE OF DENYING THIS DEFENDANT A FAIR TRIAL!

SO, AT THE VERY OUTSET OF THE TRIAL RECORD, LAPDOG COLLIER, THE VILLAGE IDIOT, HAD DEMONSTRATED THAT HE IS A COMPLETE AND TOTAL WHORE!


MUCH MORE TO COME ....