Related: Athena Dean Guides Counselor Setup
Motion to Arrest Judgement—July 23
On July 23rd Judge Lori K. Smith will rule upon Malcolm Fraser’s appeal to Arrest Judgment (nullify the jury’s verdict and Prosecutor Simmon’s corruption). Judge Smith will have the opportunity to do what the facts and truth demand in the real case of State of Washington vs. Sound Doctrine Church (Malcolm John Fraser). The odds are, of course, a long shot but the evidence in the trial screams for nullifying the outcome of the trial. (Motion To Arrest is located at the bottom)
Even in the movie To Kill A Mockingbird the judge does not have the courage to act morally but merely holds his anger and slams the door in disgust at the jury’s prejudicial verdict of “guilty.” At a later time I hope to develop for you why Judge Lori K. Smith cannot—because of the self-interest rampant in the courts—actually do what truth demands unless she is very bold.
The Motion to Arrest judgment of the jury can be read at enumclaw.com
Prosecutor Simmons, Accusations Alone—An Absurd Notion
Prosecutor Simmons lied when he stated that “Believable testimony is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.” Such empty headed logic would mean that a poor performance by a real victim of abuse would be proof that no abuse took place. Only governments out of control use accusation alone to condemn their neighbor. Many fought and died for the Constitution to restrain such men as Prosecutor Simmons.
Prosecutor Simmons called no expert, not a single expert witness because none could be found to refute the facts. Prosecutor Simmons whined early on as abundant evidence of innocence was placed in his face. Not only did he refuse to discuss the evidence but rather retorted that his office would bring a physician to refute the medical condition, Phimosis. As with many promises and threats such was never done. Simmons knew from the beginning the only way this case could be won was by way of an appeal to bad emotions. Since all the physical evidence (from time frame to house layout and beyond) pointed to innocence, a hate crime, and a false accuser, all Prosecutor Simmons was left with was to stir everything up to a lynch mob mentality.
Again, Simmons brought not a single expert witness but loaded the docket with mob accusations. The reason is obvious. The crimes Mr. Fraser was accused of, because of his physical condition, were absolutely impossible. A man with a wooden leg might get along in life, but only hatred of his neighbor would accuse him of the absurd—running in the Olympics for self-glory—and hope to incite others to hatred.
Only one thing could persuade a jury to ignore or apply the most flimsy of excuses to the overwhelming evidence of innocence…emotional bigotry. Prosecutor Simmons knew that was all he had and he employed it well.
Later I hope to explain to readers why the State, after months of delays by Detective McCall and the Prosecutor’s Office, all of sudden quickly shoved this case to trial. As Prosecutor Simmons ate up the days for justice with bigotry, no time remained to take the jurors to visit the bedroom in question. Barring a judge allowing such a common sense examination of the truth by having a 10 year old scream “at the top of her lungs,” kick and thrash about to demonstrate the False Accuser’s absurd testimony, justice was denied by the Prosecutor’s Office. To have seen the house, listened to the screams, and stood where the parents of the False Accuser said they slept would have been to wonder why these parents have not been arrested for child neglect.