A QUOTE BY HIZZZZ ODER.

"The intent of a person or the knowledge that a person possesses at any given time may not ordinarily be proved directly because there is no way of directly scrutinizing the workings of the human mind.

In determining the issue of what a person knew or what a person intended at a particular time, you may consider any statements made or acts done or omitted by that person and all other facts and circumstances received in evidence which may aid in your determination of that person's knowledge or intent.

You may infer, but you are certainly not required to infer, that a person intends the natural and probable consequences of acts knowingly done or knowingly omitted. It's entirely up to you, however, to decide what facts to find from the evidence received during this trial.

Intent and motive are different concepts and should never be confused.

Motive is what prompts a person to act or fail to act.

Intent refers only to the state of mind with which the act is done or omitted.

Personal advancement and financial gain, for example, are two well-recognized motives for much of human conduct. These motives, however, may prompt one person to voluntary acts of good while prompting another person to voluntary acts of crime.

>Opinion testimony should be judged just like any other testimony. You may accept it or reject it, and give it as much weight as you think it deserves, considering the witness's education and experience, the reasons given for the opinion, and all the other evidence in the case." ~Judge A. Howard Matz, criminal trial of Killercop, for speech and thought crimes.

"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

You should have let me finish...

Spoken Like A "True" Attorney For The Government. A.K.A. The case of Judge Matz protecting everybody's rights, but the accused!!

JUDGE MATZ: There are other participants in this trial, very much including the jurors, who have a right to make sure that the case is prosecuted in a fair, balanced, and efficient way. Please proceed.

KILLERCOP: Maybe the Court could give me some guidance.

JUDGE MATZ: No, I'm not in a position to give you guidance!

Ask your next question. I am not anybody's lawyer in this case!

KILLERCOP: Your Honor, I'm trying to establish -- the witness's testified that the website went up and down -- excuse me, if you will.

JUDGE MATZ: No, no. It would not be appropriate for you to tell me what you are trying to establish. Just go about trying to establish it, please.

KILLERCOP: Establish what?

JUDGE MATZ: Whatever you -- ask your next question.That's what I'm trying to tell you, Killercop.

KILLERCOP: >I'm trying to establish something, but you --

JUDGE MATZ: Ask your next question. I have made my decree.

A QUOTE AND AN UNDERSTATEMENT:

"Killercop.com will have very limited application in this case. But I have issued a motion in limine. And I do anticipate there will be some evidence."

FACT: NONE WAS EVER SHOWN TO THE JURY. GOSH, HE'S BAFFLED?

I KNOW, LET'S SHOW IT TO HIS JURY!!

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