"The behavior that neither resulted in a conviction nor even an arrest but that was facially unlawful, and in any event a very chilling indication of the consideration as to how likely it is that he would commit further crimes is that he undoubtedly and indisputably set up this killercop.com web site;"

--Judge A. Howard Matz. April 15th, 2004

"Only one tribunal ever adopted a practice of forcing counsel upon an unwilling defendant in a criminal proceeding. The tribunal was the Star Chamber."-U.S. v Faretta , 422 U.S. 806 (1975)

OUTSIDE, IT'S AMERICA

REASONABLE DOUBT

"Silence in the face of evil is itself evil: God will not hold us guiltless.
Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act." ― Dietrich Bonhoeffer

(c) 1995-2026

All Rights Reserved

Facially Schmachally:

KILLERCOP'S REPLY TO REAL PARTY IN INTEREST'S ANSWER TO PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

On March 14, 2003, when advised that (1) petitioner would not waive time for a speedy trial (as requested by his court-appointed attorney) and (2) that petitioner was not willing to be a "slave" to the "master" court-appointed attorney by not making or addressing objections to the court that his court-appointed attorney would not or refused to make, Judge Matz announced he had received the writ of habeas corpus and that it was denied because it was "facially defective." [Minute Order of March 14, 2003 attached to original writ petition.]

When Killercop requested that Judge Matz recuse himself from considering the writ, he was told, in essence, to sit down and shut up, whereupon Judge Matz denied the writ and ultimately directed that petitioner be removed from the courtroom.

Now, after the filing of an appeal in pro se, and the filing of a writ of mandate, Judge Matz has issued an order "correcting" his earlier "ruling" on the writ of habeas corpus.

It seems that he was incorrect and that petitioner's writ was properly filed; an interesting admission from a jurist whose exercise of discretion regarding the "competence" (or lack thereof) of petitioner is being questioned.

SEE ALSO:

Pre-Pre-trial

Pre-trial

A Cold Winter's Night 1

A Cold Winter's Night 2

Trial

Sentence

Appeal

Schmeal

Suspicion that viewpoint discrimination is afoot is at its zenith when the speech restricted is speech critical of the government," Ridley v. Mass. Bay Transp. Auth., 390 F.3d 65, 86 (1st Cir. 2004)

CONTACT

COLLECT A BOUNTY

COLLECT A REWARD

FILE A COMPLAINT

TO PURCHASE KILLERCOP.COM™ CLICK HERE

(c) 1995-2026

All Rights Reserved