- Dołączono
- 9 Paź 2019
This is not that hard to decode. And also not that great. In fact it changes nothing.This is why I can't decide if Chupp is an idiot or a bureaucrat. Chupp writes bullshit judgements but then every once in a while he gets a glimmer in his eye and does something reasonable.
Somebody reviewed Chupp on a judge review site and said "the defendants didn't even show up." So he has a history.
Chupp's MO is simple: he refuses to even adress anything before the trial or hearing, while simultaneously making his mind up on the basis of little to know evidence, then he starts up the hearing with the goal of reaching that resolution with unflinching determination, like a bloody locomotive, in spite of the lack of evidence behind his reasoning and against all possible evidence.
He just did to lemoine in this hearing the same thing he did to TY on the prior one, only differenxe is with ty he had to expressely ask for unrequired bollocks, cripple him beforehand by rejecting his folder for no reason, reject the 2ap while not letting him argue at all and finally proclaim he didn't care about the legal definition. Meanwhile with lemoine he just quoted the legal definition. You may think this a contradiction but its not, the legal definition only matters because it agrees with him, if it didn't it wouldn't matter, that is the determining factor. In a prior case he got a writ for going so far as to say fucking CHURCH LAW somehow outweighed the constitution of the US of motherfucking A. There is no limit he won't sink to so as to avoid changing his mind.
So what does this mean for the future? Well that depends on HOW he makes up his mind. And if I was a guessing man, I'd say the paths of the chupp are inescrutable. Hope for the best, prepare for the worst, get some popcorn.