When you appear before a judge or a DA, you can identify their sex, their race and perhaps their country of origin by accent.

What you cannot detect of the judge or DA is his/her religious orientation. What if you are a known atheist, but the judge or DA decides not to recuse him/herself because of a conflict? What if you are also a police critic and the judge and DA is not impressed with your free speech but do not say it and do not recuse themselves on that point.

Religious orientation of judges and DAs should be clearly documented in the interest of justice and impartiality. Can you provide a reason to not reveal such information?

It is not my intent here to dwell on the absurdity of an educated adult man in a position of considerable authority holding a view essentially equivalent to believing in Santa Claus. The Massachusetts Judiciary should be embarassed by this man.

Judge David W. Cunis is a grown man, in a position of serious power and he was described by a friend of his as a devout orthodox catholic which implies that he believes in something that is utter nonsense. It would be one thing if David W. Cunis sold pizza for a living, but this is a man employed by the Massachusetts Judiciary that we go to to interpret our ill-defined laws.

The following is a statement made to me by Judge David W. Cunis:

The burden of proof rests exclusively with the Commonwealth to prove that you are guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. The burden of proof is a strict and heavy burden. The burden of proof is proof beyond a reasonable doubt.

The statement is incompatible with religion which is based on total falsehoods. It stands to reason that judges and DAs should not be associated with religion since it is incompatible with their mission in the courts. As an aside, the term beyond a reasonable doubt seems highly ambiguous and is one of those bullshit terms.

If the mission or purpose of a judge and DA is to prove facts beyond a reasonable doubt in our adversarial and inquisitorial justice system, then the concept of either the judge or DA having strong religious beliefs is a direct contradiction to that mission.

Having a judge like David W. Cunis in the Massachusetts Judiciary is like having Hitler and Himmler as judges in the Nuremberg trials.

To have someone like David W. Cunis actually verbalize such a statement is an absolute insult to intelligent people. For David W. Cunis to even suggest that defendants get a mental evaluation is preposterous. He is the one who should get a mental evaluation.

Every court case should begin by the judge and DA clearly stating their religion or lack thereof. To do otherwise is to hide their personal biases which will warp any sense of justice or impartiality. Every defendant in a court case has the right to know the religious biases of a judge or DA.

Question:
How many judges and DAs in the Massachusetts judiciary are members of a monotheistic religion? (catholic, protestant, jewish, muslim, sikh....). Is the Massachusetts Judicary a hotbed of Christian and Islamic lunacy?

Question:
Has any judge or DA ever recused themselves in a case due to religious conflict? If so, can you specify the judge's name, date and nature of the case?

Question:
Do you have any judges or DAs who believe in God, the creator of Heaven and Earth ?

Question:
Is there proof of his existence beyond a reasonable doubt?

Question:
Do you have any judges or DAs who believe in the devil, otherwise known as Satan?

Question:
Is there proof of his existence beyond a reasonable doubt?

Question:
Do you have any judges or DAs who believe in angels, those invisible magic bird-people?

Question:
Is there proof of their existence beyond a reasonable doubt?

Question:
Do you find it acceptable that any member of the Massachusetts Judiciary believes in these creatures but has no verifiable proof of any of them over the course of over 2,000 years?

Question:
The concept of the Holy Eucharist implies that those who eat communion wafers believe that they are eating the body of Jesus Christ and drinking the blood of Jesus Christ. This constitutes virtual cannibalism . Is this actually a rational belief in the eyes of the Massachusetts Judiciary? Or are these people stone cold fucking nuts?

Question:
Do any judges or DAs say confession to a priest hoping to be absolved from their sins? What is a sin to begin with?

Question:
Can the Massachusetts Judiciary explain this to the public? I think not!

Question:
Do any members of the Massachusetts also believe in fairies, goblins, ghosts and flying horses?

Question:
How can you expect people to have confidence in the Massachusetts Judiciary that has such religiously biased and bigoted people?

Question:
Is it the opinion of this body that these people need psychiatric assistance?

Question:
Do you believe that silly superstitous religious beliefs belittles the Massachusetts Judiciary as a whole in the eyes of the public?

Doesn't the presence of so many catholic judges represent a christian (Catholic) sharia?

Question:
Why do you people continue to criminalize blasphemy , fornicating , and adultery . As time goes by, it only makes the Massachusetts Judiciary look like complete idiots.

Question:
If you do not intend to enforce a law, why are there these religiously oriented laws on the books? Just to make you look like fools? I thought you might be grown and intelligent men but these laws tell me that I am in error.

Any individual who has very strongly held, but unveriable religious beliefs should be disqualified as a judge or DA. Deliberately hiding these beliefs as a judge or DA, should be criminal.

As long as David W. Cunis remains on the Massachusetts Judiciary, he will be a reminder of its stupidity and lack of impartiality and fairness within the Massachusetts Judiciary in the advocacy of real justice and fairness. Perhaps he should become the latest member of the Massachusetts Judiciary Federation of Sociopaths and Psychopaths, another special interest group of the Massachusetts Judiciary.

Any level of religion in our court system, either known or deliberately hidden and supressed, is funda>entally incompatible and should be looked at as sheer stupidity and ignorance.

Send comments to: hjw2001@gmail.com