Talk:Judicial tyranny

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] delete archive

I think this article is rather pointless and could be deleted without losing anything.

I agree. AFAIK, the idea of judicial "tyranny" is as nonsensical as legislative "terrorism". The article would probably also become hopelessly embroiled in a POV war. --Mtrisk 06:32, 22 August 2005 (UTC)

This article was nominated for deletion on 20 August, 2005. The result of the vote was keep. An archived record of this vote can be found here.

[edit] Inaccurate duplicate of judicial activism

Go to www.adbmich.org and search "bribe" for specific examples of judicial tyranny and corruption

Obstruction of justice is misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance by a government official. Judicial tyranny is obstruction of justice by a judge, misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance.

A big problem in government is that prosecuters and attorney generals have prosecutorial discretion. However, failure to prosecute a judge for judicial tyranny is obstruction of justice by a prosecutor, misfeasance, malfeasance or nonfeasance in conduct of the office of the prosecutor or attorney general. In order to prosecute obstruction of justice by a judge who has established a network with a prosecutor or attorney general the judicial or executive branch must appoint a special prosecutor. Obstructioin of justice by the judicial branch in league with the prosecutor or attorney general is in fact a silent, coup, treason and insurrection by conspiracy.

For more information on judicial tyranny google Forensic Intelligence International, LLC:

Bureaucrats of the Departments of Attorney General and Environmental Quality Attempt to Seize Unbridled Power over a Hapless “Criminal” Citizenry

by Stephen P. Dresch, Ph.D.

Judicial tyranny is a crime and judicial crime is endemic. Judge Bronson a Michigan Appellate Judge had the Hubris to demand more than $20,000.00 in bribes according to newspaper articles. His suicide in 1986 ended the criminal investigation. See "Grievance Administrator v Lopatin", 462 Mich 235, 260; 612 NW2d 120 (2000). (Wikiywry1947 16:57, 5 April 2007 (UTC))

There's nothing in this article to distinguish it from the judicial activism article. Even the books list is the same. This is inaccurate: there are criticisms of judicial activism that don't use the "judicial tyranny" label, which is associated with more extremist movements and polemics. -- FRCP11 19:29, 17 April 2006 (UTC)