|
|
| Login |Home |Feedback | |||
|
Home > Judicial Misconduct & Cover up > Dr. Yue's analysis on Judge Highers rulingDr. Yue's analysis on Judge Highers ruling
The law is reason, without compassion Fraud: Any act, expression, omission, or concealment calculated to deceive another to his or her disadvantage. (Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary of Law, 1996). Dr. DX Yue, the author of the 15 point statement on Childer's ruling and the author of various other documents on judicial misconduct and other matters in the case has conducted a preliminary analysis on Judge Alan E. Highers' ruling. Dr. Yue will issue an anlysis on the Highers' ruling. The title of Dr. Yue's paper is tentatively set to be "Law, reason and judicial fraud". Unlike the Childers ruling, Judge Highers' ruling is cool-headed, comprehensive on the facts (some findings were based on credibility alone, such as "that day"), and thorough on analysis. Given the constraints posed by the "15-point", Judge Highers produced the same overall conclusions as Childers. This is a remarkable intellectual feat. It is like magic. Except there is nothing funny here. Folks of Tennessee will enjoy less rights because of it, there are lawyers citing this decision already. It is unfair, unjust and it is wrong.... but, can we catch the tricks? Judge Highers' line of reasoning carefully avoided the mined areas covered by the "15-point".
1) Deputy Astor testified that he told the Hes not to come back to the Bakers' home on "that day" of January 28th, 2001. He testified that the Hes could back later that night. 3) Although Childers' argument on INS calls and Hes' petition for custody was logically deficient, the Court of Appeals evaluates the findings de novo. Where Childers erred, Highers was able to make amended arguments based on other evidence before 2001: 5) The 14th Amendment does not provide protection against actions brought by private individuals. The above summary of Judge Highers' reasoning is presented here so legal experts supporting the Hes can quickly grasp the essence of the ruling and develop counter arguments. The Hes have sent invitations to many experts requesting help. Dr. Yue has completed the analysis, his paper can be downloaded from the link under "Key documents" on the left. The paper shatters Highers ruling. Note: the file has been encrypted with PGP, available for free download at http://www.pgp.com/downloads/desktoptrial.html . Dr. Yue will provide decipher key to select individuals and organizations. Due to the explosive nature of the document, Dr. Yue decided to not reveal the key content of his paper to the public at this point. However, he has provided some small pieces of secondary importance, for example, 2) The fact that Hes "willfully failed" to appeal the June 2000 Juvenile Court denial of their May 2000 petition for AMH custody seems to run against the argument that the Hes wanted AMH custody for the sole purpose to avoid deportation. (Let's see how Parrish can defeat this) |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
(C)2004-2005 LFJP | Contact email:
[email protected] Powered by Opteron technology and CentOS for AMD64
|