Judge Changes Sentencing to Life from the Death Penalty, to Punish Prosecutorial Misconduct

Here.

Brazen display of shocking lawyer profession stupidity. This incredible stupidity is well known. More shocking is the stupidity of the people here whose intellect has not been decimated by a legal education.

1) A listening device is placed in a cell. It records the voluntary statements of a mass murderer. These statements are made under circumstances promoting candor, rather than the really stupid lawyer procedure that promotes the cover up. Not only is this really stupid lawyer procedure inducing a cover up, it implants false memories. So, 25% of exonerated people confessed to murders they had not committed by the incredibly stupid agents of the incredibly stupid prosecutor, the pigs. So, obtaining the reliable statement of the truth is a form of unethical misconduct;

2)there is no mention that the information skewed, or distorted any aspect of the verdict or of the sentencing process. So, this is misconduct that caused no harm, no reversible error, no effect on validity of any outcome;

3) what is the remedy by this incredibly stupid judge? He privileges a mass murderer, to punish a prosecutor who is completely unaffected, personally. But, the future victims of this mass murderers will pay the price instead. The judge fails to understand the Prince and the Pauper Effect that is the exclusionary rule. The Prince has been a bad boy. The Pauper is spanked. How does that improve the conduct of the Prince? I do not understand this incredibly stupid rule. If the evidence was obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment, punish the police, and the prosecutor, who is their master. Charge legal costs to their personal assets. Throw the police and the prosecutor in jail. Have them lashed and caned. But do not punish the future victims of the criminal they are loosing on the public, or in the general population of the state penitentiary;

4) as to the exclusionary rule, it embraces the Prince and the Pauper Effect. Prince is a bad boy, so spank the pauper, to teach the Prince a lesson, and to improve the Prince's future behavior. The whipping boy doctrine does not just violate the Fifth Amendment procedural (real) due process, behavioral principles, all common sense, but also the Establishment Clause. It was based on the idea that the monarch spoke with the voice of God (a delusional and psychotic doctrine), and had immunity based on his Divine Right. Students in Life Skills would disagree. If asked, who should get spanked, they would point with their spoons at the Prince if it were he that had been a bad boy.

This incredibly stupid judge must be impeached. Statutes should reverse all use of the exclusionary laws, and replace them with direct punishment of the offending police and prosecutors.