Every judge should have

  • a recent picture of themselves
  • their home address,
  • their home/work telephone numbers
  • their email address

They are all public servants and they are paid above $160,000 a year. We the taxpayers deserve better from these overpaid, underworked miscreants.

Any judge that is infected with religion is terrified of disclosing that religion because they know (beyond a reasonable doubt) they would be ridiculed for their beliefs.

They are just a bunch of little pompous pretentious cocksuckers and pussies who want to stay about as anonymous as they can. As a general rule, they also fail to show any sense of compassion, humanity or empathy and they definitely believe in their own superiority.

If you have been to court, you will note that they DO NOT introduce themselves in the courtroom.

They demand that you stand in court when they come in or out. They demand respect. Try not standing up, see what happens.

There is no law that requires you to stand up in court.

Some judges are on a first name basis with the police department.

If you know the religious affiliations of any judge, please contact me, in some way to pass along that information to me and I will document it.


Once a judge is selected to be on the court, (s)he gains the title of Honorable. Imperical evidence suggests that once an individual is selected by our schmuck governor to be on the judiciary, and the governor's pick is approved by the Governor's Council, they invite the new judge to have the word Honorable branded/tattooed on his/her ass.

We should be thankful, they did not take on the the following titles:

  • Your Lordship
  • Lord Of The Realm
  • Glorious Leader

A large collage of all the faces of Massachusetts judges would show pretty much a lilly-white organization. We could place the darker judges in the back of the collage, so to say.

Judges have traditionally worn black robes, the color of evil, the color of darkness, the same color as priests and satanists. Gang colors :-)


Every judge's web page should also show

  • How many cases they have had for each year (work ethic)
  • the racial makeup of the defendants in their cases,
  • how many defendants they have sent to jail (by race) in any given year.
  • how many defendants they have sent to jail (by religion) in any given year

These people think very highly of themselves, but I would like to see one of these arrogant little pussies get themselves a Master's Degree in Computer Science like mine.

Judges are simply lawyers who have done enough politcal favors to get a life time job with the state. Most were probably too inept to start their own law practice so they take the easy path of political favoritism. Kiss an ass here and there, and POOF! You have an easy peasy job for life.

Lawyers are there to argue the points of law in case the supposedly knowledgable judges have conveniently forgotten the law and the concept of justice and they exercise their religious biases on public atheists.

There does not seem to be any state agency that in any way monitors the presence or absence of judges in any Massachusetts courtroom. Judges are presumed to be responsible enough to monitor themselves. Bullshit.

My experience in the courts shows that in the summer time, judges tend to be absent mostly on Fridays and Mondays. This provides them with long weekends on the cape, an escape from their tiresome, stressful and underpaid ($160,000) job, as we are constantly told.

There should be as many judges in a given courthouse, as there are courtrooms. Framingham has three courtrooms and a traffic courtroom. On most summer days, only Courtroom 1 is operational.

It should be a requirement for a new judge to spend three months in an MCI prison, including one month in solitary confinement, as a condition to accept a lifetime job getting paid over $160,000 a year.

They demand that you stand in court when they come in or out. They demand respect. Try not standing up, see what happens.

Every lawyer (defense attorney, DA or judge) that I have seen allow for the corruption of the courts. Each time the court bailiff (the court security officer, usually a big goon) tells those in attendance in the courtroom to stand up, these lawyers, DAs and judges are knowingly promoting the corruption of the judiciary. There is no law requiring anyone to stand up in order to show respect to the court. I have not seen a single lawyer/DA or judge ever object to this corruption. The stupid bailiff in the Framingham court will object if you are reading a book while waiting your turn. There is no law that states I cannot read a book in court.

This corruption shows that judges just enjoy pounding their judicial breasts like drummers on soggy drums.

Any judge who does not comply with his oath to the Constitution of the United States wars against that Constitution and engages in acts in violation of the supreme law of the land. The judge is engaged in acts of treason. The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "no state legislator or executive or judicial officer can war against the Constitution without violating his undertaking to support it".
In Re Sawyer, 124 U.S. 200 (188);

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land; and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the constitution or laws of any state to the contrary notwithstanding.
Supremacy Clause: Article 6, Clause 2

The United States is entirely a creature of the Constitution. Its power and authority have no other source. It can only act in accordance with all the limitations imposed by the Constitution.
Reid v Covert 354 US l (1957)

Every judge in every court of the States is under oath or affirmation to support the Constitution of the United States. When any litigation arises out of the constitution of his State or out of any of its laws it is by this clause made his duty to "be bound" by the National Constitution and laws and in a proper case to hold the State constitution or law to be void for conflict with "the supreme law of the land."

When a judge acts intentionally and knowingly to deprive a person of his constitutional rights, he exercises no discretion or individual judgment; he acts no longer as a judge, but as a "minister" of his own prejudice.
Pierson v. Ray , 386 U.S. 547 at 567 (1967).


As a public militant atheist, I would like to do some biblical cherry picking much like these alleged judges. First, the bible (holiest of the holies) is accepted as the word of God, which is perfect in every way (Psalm 19:7).

The First Commandment says "Thou shall have no other gods before me". Deuteronomy 17:2-5 states that atheists should be stoned. Leviticus 24:16 states that those who commit blasphemy should be stoned and Exodus 31:15 states that those who work on the sabbath should be stoned. This lovely bible commands its followers to kill millions. The koran is even worse. These books define the morality of its followers.

How dare the jews complain about anti-semitism (a vague term meaning anti-jewish) when their holy book commands its followers to kill me and millions of others and allows slavery. The penalty for apostasy and being an atheist in the koran is death.

There is nothing wrong with inciting intense dislike of any religion (jews, christians, muslims, sikhs) if the activities or teachings of that religion are so outrageous, irrational or abusive of human rights that they deserve to be intensely disliked?

Send comments to: hjw2001@gmail.com