@@hazybrneyesmdnothing. That is my point. I know people who tell the truth and act with integrity as much as anyone, even when they think no one is watching. Some of them have uncomplicated lives and some of them have really, really complicated lives. Certainly lies and deceit can make life more complicated. I am not questioning your experience. Just suggesting sometimes complications happen on their own.
One thing that stands out to me is that the defendant is in court while his attorney is on Zoom. The defendant must have felt all alone up there. That should not be allowed during such a vital process. If it were me, I would have demanded that my attorney be there at my side.
The be fair the charge is leaving the scene of a minor car accident….likely a fine….maybe probation at most…. It just suddenly turned into something outragous
The parties agreed to sentence and thought this would be a formality. This was a stunning move by an amazing judge who lost his impartiality and he knows it.
judge said something about showing up two hours late. perhaps attorney forgot about the hearing and that's partly why Judge was taking a closer look...a little riled up. he may be right. I don't know.
@@IGNANT4LIFE the obvious anger about the attorney being two hours late should have been enough to just adjourn the proceeding to another day, vs even risking the appearance of letting your irritation with the attorney color your judgement towards the defendant. This could be a slam dunk on appeal.
Thank you for all your time setting this up for us out here in la la land. I know you work hard so we don’t have to. Thank you for all you do. Judge Simpson is a great person and Judge.
You did a racism then you did a microaggresion. This makes it difficult to analyze your arguments (it is hard to think cogently and well while sobbing in the fetal position on the floor). That said, I give you all the credit in the world for being a Marine Ranger. Semper Fi!
@@TheIncognitusMeactually not correct. The judge is to remain neutral. It’s the state’s burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Just like he had the tape to listen to, so did the state and they didn’t bring it up during the trial. At the time of sentencing, it’s too late AND it’s not up to the judge. The defense did a good job standing up for his client.
I completely agree with the defense attorney. The state chose to charge this defendant, and its *THEIR* job to make sure they conducted a thorough investigation. They (investigators) failed to find these things out, and its not the defendant's job to help their investigation. If they believe he has lied under oath, then charge him with perjury, but you cant look at evidence AFTER a person has been convicted or pleads guilty, and use that to determine a sentence.
Generally, a judge can give any sentence within the range provided by statute. He or she doesn't even need to explain it. If I were the judge here, I would have just pronounced the sentence without the 20 minute speech.
@@kcgunesq I assume the plea deal included no jail time as part of the agreement. If the judge wants to depart from that he needs to make a record as to why he is doing it and give the defendant a chance to withdraw his plea.
Judges do not have to follow plea agreements. They determine the punishment. Also, all jufged read reports and review material before sentencing. The o ly thing he did was explain his reasoning. Maybe he should have thrown him in jail for killing 2 girls by chasing them down for no damn reason. 2 women against an angry man who then follows then AFTER he has their info are not wrong for acting in fear.
@@meekomio The defendant also has the right to withdraw their plea if the judge doesn't stick to the plea agreement. The woman fled the scene of an accident. He only chased because they hit him first and allegedly sped away. Most importantly though, he wasn't charged with any crime relating to their deaths.
This defense attorney crushed it. I really like Judge Simpson, but he was outrageously wrong on this, and the defense attorney handled it extremely well. He stayed respectful, but he also said everything that needed to be said on the record for his client. I really get the sense that if Mr. Torres didn't have a good attorney representing him at this sentencing, he would have been run over by Judge Simpson. This attorney was prepared for Judge Simpson to blow up at him and stayed firm. This is a good lesson that no matter how decent you think the judge is, you can still get burned without a good attorney. Even if the scenario was 100% exactly how the mothers imagined it to be, even if Mr. Torres did everything they imagined he did, the way Judge Simpson handled this was not the proper administration of justice.
100% I was increasingly amazed at this video, as this is absolutely & critically forbidden action by any judge. The defense attorney presented very well, and made the most critical argument. Judge Simpson is presenting evidence of possible fraudulent claims for something the defendant may or may not have done, but that he wasn’t charged with. There’s no possible way a sentence for an uncharged crime could ever be allowed to stand. The only surprise from the defense for me, was that he didn’t demand time for an interlocutory appeal of the judge’s actions, which would have been 100% appropriate and my first move in his place.
The defense attorney needs to sit the f**k down. His stupid camera is bouncing around the whole damn time, he needs to get a tripod or phone stand. If I was a judge I wouldn't allow any more Zoom appearances until this was remedied (same goes for attorneys appearing in a car). If you can't keep your device from moving then appear in person. You're probably right about the case, the prosecutors really dropped the ball on this one. Idiot vigilante tries to chase down a fender bender hit and run and ends up getting people killed. The prosecutor needed to do better investigation and not just offer a slap on the wrist when people die.
Judge Simpson was wrong on this so yes, defense attorney was absolutely correct. Simpson overreacted and he talked right over the guy. It wasn't impartial and Simpson is speculating.
I can't say I disagree with the attorney. Sentence him for what he pled to, not how you interpret something that the defense was ambushed with at the request of victim's family.
@kt-4383 yes he been ambushed from day one .... that the mother's started telling the judge of what he already knew.... if you tell me you are going to jail for breaking the window 🪟 not for the building falling.... the judge is taking this personally
Lol thats the deal with plea deals. The judge is not bound to the deal in sentencing. If he is so sure of his innocence it should be brought before a jury. Which perhaps is what the judge wanted. There are things being concealed & hopefully it all comes out ....
I still don't understand Mr. Torrez connection to the crash that killed the girls. Did he cause them to go off the road? If not why are their deaths mentioned with such jugement towards Mr.Torrez?
@@WukongTheMonkeyKing as Judge Simpson stated himself in the first hearing his only job was to go by the first accident (The girls hitting Torres’s car and fleeing). He flat out told the mothers he could not go back and base anything on what happened after that. Him going back and go over things that happened after that and coming to a conclusion without getting any evidence the defendant may have is dead wrong.
@@bouncingback3 unless he didn't need to get new evidence, and could infer from the evidence given. Things like looking at maps are not getting new evidence, provided location details have been entered into evidence. Simpson could be overruled on appeal. We'll see.
I love judge Simpson. Love the man. I think he's a titan. However, this defense attorney is 100% correct - he's not merely advocating for his client. This is highly irregular. The attorney was given NO time to respond to the judge's presentation (what a weird thing to say, "judge's presentation"). I think the mothers in this case got in his head. He should recuse himself for his own well-being. Watch how quickly he angers when the attorney brings up a totally valid point.
Not irregular, unlawful. Simpson is being prosecutor and judge by investigating. Even worse, he investigated the wrong crime. The charge was leaving the scene, not whether he saw it or caused it.
@@derekbootle8316 Just remember that Judge Simpson was already guilty of judicial misconduct. And the minority opinion of the Michigan Supreme Court wanted to not just charge him with fine and suspension but to also remove him from the bench. Sometimes he gets too riled up and also has too much of an ego issue when riled up.
I think Simpson should step down from his position, or be forceably removed from whatever agency in Michigan can hold judges accountable. I thought he was a good judge, but he needs to be removed before he gets worse. He doesn't sound that he is mentally all there anymore.
@@boooster101 His ego does get in his way and that's why I can only take him in small doses. It's his way or the highway. I think in this cases he was haunted by the mom's grief and wanted to deliver some justice but that may have been beyond his role (I don't know enough to say one way or the other whether it was inappropriate).
Totally agree. Judge Simpson is fun to watch but he has a job to do, and impartiality is central to that job. In this case he's lost that impartiality, seemingly due to the victims' parents. He can't be so easily swayed by emotion if he wants to be a judge. He's gone off on a wild goose chase of his own, essentially investigating the crime himself. It's not his job and if he doesn't know better, he should retire or have his title removed
Defendant got fines ans had to serve 90 days[45 days with parole] but had to present himself to jail on the anniversary of the girls death. @@leo2md786
@jamesrowden303 It's still only technical bullshit that allows a criminal to walk off scott free despite having committed a crime. Same as finding a boatload of drugs but having to let the smuggler go because you didn't have probable cause for the search. It's absolute insanity to love rules so much that you're willing to abandon the very notion of common sense.
@jamesrowden303 And that, my friend, is exactly the problem. It's not justice, it's blind obedience to the rules without question. And that *never* ends up going down on the right side of history.
From the very first hearing on this case, I have been very upset with the way it went. These teenage girls, who were implied to not be sober, rear-ended a man. They then took off at a high rate of speed. That man followed them. They continued to choose to drive recklessly and got into an accident. Nothing he did caused any of their actions. That is so much of the case, that any charges related to the second accident were dropped before The Plea was even entered. Not because of the plea, before the plea. Now, for the judge to come back and try to sentence him based on charges that he's not even charged with is a travesty of Justice I'm in stark agreement with Van Laan. The 2nd accident has no bearing on the first. The fact is, these girls parents don't want to give them any responsibility for their own actions. It was already implied that these girls weren't exactly sober. They took off from an accident they caused at a high rate of speed. Just because he followed them doesn't mean he is responsible for them initially driving away and then getting into an accident when they continue to do so. The fact that he's not even charged with that and that charge was dropped prior to the plea but the judge is still trying to sentence him based on a charge that was dropped is ridiculous. Then, when the attorney tries to make a record based on the fact that the judges actions here weren't exactly appropriate, he blows up at the attorney for even implying that what he did was wrong. The attorney was not rude in any way and yet judge Simpson was in response. He completely interrupted the defense attorney with yelling and then would not let him make a record of his objection to the judge's actions. I think that he did so because of the fact that he knows what he did was wrong. That was the reaction of a man who knew he messed up. It is a tragedy that those girls died. It's a tragedy that the other girl was in the hospital for so long. That tragedy is not at the feet of this man who was the victim of these girls Reckless actions that day.
I'm VERY confused by the accusation that he had to have seen the 2nd accident that he wasn't involved in. First, I don't think the judge can determine where his eyes were, and second what would it matter if he did see it? He doesn't have an obligation to stop or report an accident.
actually, one does have an obligation to stop and report, and all have laws called, "Good Samaritan or Duty to Rescue" Laws. I know each states laws are written differently, here in Nebraska, you can be put in jail and pay a fine if you pass an accident.
@blakepenberthy5698 but none of that has ANYTHING to do with what he's charged with or pleading to. The charges related to the 2nd accident were dropped way early in the process.. Then they dropped any other charges with the plea. He's only pleading guilty to leaving the scene of the 1st accident where they rear-ended him. They drove off from that accident and got into an accident. Now, he's being sentenced based on whether he could see that 2nd accident or not, which is irrelevant.
@@Mewse1203 ,I was answering the person above me. I agree 100% This poor guy is being railroaded and this is not justice at all. Most cases is the person fault that hits a person from behind not the other way around!
Omg I hope we get to see the next one! That lawyer is pissed at the judge! Could be fun to see that hearing, especially as the lawyer asked the judge to refuse himself!
I like judge Simpson, but he was wrong. The whole time he was going through his thoughts I kept saying “you can’t do that” over and over. He knows better.
I listened to the 911 calls and cross-referenced them with a map. I'm not investigating. I mixed flour, yeast, salt, sugar, and water together and put them in an oven. I'm not making bread.
Hrs reading what's given to him and he's making statements based on hard cold facts judge Simpson went about it wrong yes but he was trying to do the right job
@@brandenantonino23Those aren't facts because they haven't been analyzed by actual experts and cross-examined by the defense. You can't take call location data at face value and it is irrelevant to the charges.
@@nobodyimportant7804 doesn't matter the dude waved his rights and that means he doesn't get his trial he gets what's coming to him when he waves those rights it's not my fault or the judges that the idiot threw away his rights
@@brandenantonino23 He didn't throw away his rights and didn't give the judge the right to try him on something he wasn't charged for. The judge was using evidence improperly, from a legal and scientific perspective. This is clear judicial misconduct, something Simpson has been suspended for in the past. He is a bad judge.
This judge needs taken off the bench. He should be prosecuted himself for his actions on a lot of his cases he has judged. You can tell by almost every single interaction on his videos the lawyers have zero respect for him. Hopefully someone wakes up and gets this guy off the bench for good and maybe spends some quality time behind bars himself. As a judge you are not supposed to let your emotions become a factor in your sentence and he clearly does. Judge Simpson you need to resign from the bench
Exactly The parents pulled at his emotions and he investigated. He lost sight of his role . He was wrong on this one. This was merely a formality to a plea. Done.
@shreev9671 wrong. A judge is not a finder of fact during a trial, never mind during sentencing for a charge that does not even exist. The best I can say for the judge is he is suffering from temporary insanity.
This video reminds us that judges are human. I definitely respect Judge Simpson but this defendant's attorney is on point. It's a difficult case for everyone, definitely not one I'd want to judge but, I do believe feelings and emotions took the gambit on this one. Sad circumstances, all the way around.
The attorney is correct . Simpson was wrong. Simpson knows he’s wrong too… that’s why he’s so angry. This is where Simpson lets his emotions overtake his duty.
@@pameliahartsfield4572 The judge was so wrong that he was lawless. He was acting as a judge, investigator, and prosecutor and applying what he thought were facts but were outside the scope of the charges. You can't take a crime and use facts from outside that crime to prove and sentence. Simpson was acting illegally and trying to deny due process to the defendant.
@@nobodyimportant7804 he was reading what was given to him he's not wrong at all but the attorney isn't wrong either in the fact that the judge shouldn't have used the second accident against him
The Judge was wild and caught off guard when he was called out by the defense attorney. He knew he had stepped over the line with his long winded analysis.
my .02, for whatever it’s worth, I didn’t think the explanation was that long winded but he had to put his reasons for his sentencing “on the record”..right OR wrong. judge;s are not bound to sentencing recommendations on plea deals and this is why…
@@OSGCourtWatchcmon, judge Simpson is always long winded and him turning into Mattlock with no evidence, just his personal opinion is totally out of line. And he knew it. That’s why he got so angry.
Judge Simpson slipped a few gears. I am not doing an investigation, I am just investigating the 911 calls, the geography of the area, what the defendant could see or not see, traffic patterns and then making findings of fact without any ability for the the defense to dispute the evidence the judge just pulled out of his ass at sentencing of all places. It is insane. Not every tragic accident requires finding someone to punish.
The defendant told the 911 operator where he was when calling. What was placed in evidence by his attorney was a lie. The judge was not going to accept a plea based on lies. Once the lawyer spoke with his client he realized that the judge was right and asked to withdraw the plea. The 911 call was placed into evidence and all the judge had to do was realize that it contradicted what his lawyer presented to the court. It didn't take an investigation to understand he was lying just simply listening to his own words on the 911 call. Something the prosecutor should have figured out without the judge pointing out. He didn't pull anything out of his ass. He just proved he was lying. When he called 911 he said where he was and that contradicted what his lawyer presented. He was not farther back and unable to witness what happened. 2+2 still equals four dude. As the judge said he wasn't making a ruling just giving the lawyer a chance to realize the plea agreement was based on inaccurate information and withdraw it. Which he did. Case closed the fools going down.
@@jimsachtjen119 just because the Judge thought he was lying does not make it fact. Thats why we have trials so evidence can be brought up and refuted if need be. He honestly may have been mistaken or the pinged location not accurate.
Yes. He is making novel accusations from his own investigation in a position of the case where it would be wildly inappropriate for the defendant to have to defend all the accusations and evidence presented. What if he got it wrong about where he was and it was not a either here nor there situation but a third place. The 911-responder saying that is not where they have him is not a fact that can be responded to. How good is the tracking? Depending on cellphone-positioning triangulation can be tricky. What if both wasn't at A or B but at C and it covered a tower giving only two towers in a shallow direction? More or less pointing at the same spot which would sorta work like one tower in that direction. Or something completely novel. He is the judge. Not the prosecutor. And how are the defendant supposed to act towards the allegations? Try to defend against them against the judge? Then he will be pissed and biased. This is a situation where he is to allocute not defend from verbal accusations without any due process.
@@peope1976 The defendant told the 911 operator exactly where he was. That didn't coincide with what his lawyer put into to the record. Damn how stupid are you.
@@tonettesherman4323 On the 911 call the dude said exactly where he was. That is not what his lawyer put into the record. Damn his own words prove the plea agreement was based on a lie. He wasn't farther back his own statement to 911 proved it. Damn dude wake up. The judge is not going to accept a plea agreement based on lies. Might be why the lawyer advises his client to withdraw his plea. He realized the judge was right. The judge made no ruling he simply proved that he was lying and gave the lawyer the opportunity to withdraw the plea.
This is sentencing, not a trial. The judge has *wide* leeway in what he takes into account, including testimony from people who weren't even there. He's allowed to believe or not believe testimony based on what has been submitted. I guess you could argue that looking at a map is doing an investigation but, again, judges have a fairly wide leeway in what they can do here.
@@annepence4351 The defendant pleaded guilty to not stopping at the _first_ accident (where the girls rear-ended him), not the accident where the girls rolled their truck over at the railroad tracks. Whether the defendant saw the second accident is irrelevant to this charge and should therefore be irrelevant to the sentence. The plea agreement did not contemplate jail time, as it’s very unusual to give jail time for leaving the scene of a minor fender-bender that you didn’t cause. After having already given their victim’s impact statements, the mothers begged the court to conduct its own investigation into the facts surrounding the second accident - an accident he was not being charged with. The judge is trying to appease the grieving mothers, who are unwilling to accept that their daughters caused their own deaths, by sentencing the defendant to jail time based on his determination that the defendant must have seen (not caused) the second accident.
@@amicaaranearum however the judge does have the discretion for jail time in this case… And Judge Simpson allowed a motion to vacate the plea, so he will have his day in court yes? Let a jury decide.
If Defendant pled to failing to stop for an accident that occured before the young ladies losing their lives and the Judge is all but saying he's going to sentence him harsher after considering things that occured afterwards, Judge Simpson absolutely needs to recuse himself. I love this Judge and the way he conducts his business, but this is just proof that even Michael Jordan had an off game periodically.
the harsher sentencing wouldn't have been based off of events after the accident, it would have been based on the fact that defense was lying to the court.
@@WlknTlknStvnHwkn While true, a judge has to be above that. I really hope he corrected this mistake or owned up to it. He was simply wrong on this and should own up to his mistake.
The judge is completely wrong. The defendant pled to not stopping an accident when he was rear-ended. The judge is upset about these girls losing their lives and wants to appease the parents. This is just wrong. He literally conducted his own investigation, which is prohibited. The judge should recuse himself. I like Judge Simpson, but he is dead wrong on this one. The judge cannot control what the prosecution charges and wants to give this man jail time to appease the parents. That is not justice.
You’re confusing the law with justice. Judge Simpson may not have followed the law to the letter, but he’s definitely concerned about getting justice for these girls and their parents. What the judge did was justice.
@@Just_Smile-n2wHe was wrong. This guy did not cause the accident. He had nothing to do with their death or he would have been charged for it. You are the one confused.
@@richardspearman6899What did the judge do wrong? Look and listen to the evidence? He was chasing them at a high rate of speed! If he would have backed off immediately after getting their plate #, this probably wouldn’t have happened.
Yeah I'm glad that both the video maker and the comments are pointing this out- the attorney is making a good point and I think that the Judge is probably overextending appropriate bounds.
Agreed. I love Judge Simpson, but he is dead wrong in this situation. Which attorney produced and presented that map he showed? Neither of them? Oh that's right, the judge just produced and presented that evidence himself. Wildly innapropriate.
how do you figure the guy said it on a statement what happen he said he was there, watch it again that lawyer has been in trouble a lot of time on different cases
@@isthisbetterwell9958Ds I’m not even talking about the facts of the case I’m talking about the fact that the judge is doing his own investigation which is so unbelievably improper. He should be sentencing on the charge the guy pled to. If he didn’t like the plea he could deny it but he didn’t. And now he wants to do his own thing and investigate and sentence the guy based on emotion. It’s not right.
@@Sara-bv9ui Is it just that a man responsible for contributing to an accident resulting in death should get off with a minor fine when the evidence shows he is misrepresenting his level of involvement?
I hate to say this,but I was thinking the same thing that the attorney was. It just appeared to me that JS didn’t stay in his lane, but I’m just a lay person. I was wondering if this would come back to bite him in the butt. I was not expecting that attorney to come out swinging the way he did, however.
i found this video fascinating on many fronts...i tend to agree with ya but sentencings on pleas are not guaranteed by the court and clearly the judge didnt feel the defendant was being honest. i dont fault the deendant for withdrawing the plea IF thats what they chooseto do..make the state prove the case.
@@OSGCourtWatchyou're not wrong that sentence lengths aren't guaranteed on plea agreements, but in this case it's very clear the basis for the sentence that Judge Simpson was considering was centered entirely on things that had nothing to do with his actual charges and I'm guessing that's why the attorney was so heated
@@pendragon3434 Yup, he's attempting to sentencing him on a totally different set of facts from the charges at hand. Defense has called it out at every stage rightfully so. They objected to the statements, they objected to the facts being brought in, they objected to the 911 calls, they objected to his review of the evidence. Defense was entitled to a contested hearing on these facts if they were going to be used at sentencing.
To me, it looked like van Laan was out of control. His facial expressions were hysterically child-like, reminding me of my baby brother holding back a full, hyperactive fit.
@@distriawhirlwind7367 The judge was out of control here. If the lawyer doesn't file a complaint against Simpson, he is not doing his job. The judge was so out of line here.
@@distriawhirlwind7367 I would agree that the facial expressions were ridiculous.. But to play devils advocate here, I think that's one of the big problems I have with zoom-based meetings of any type.. I think people forget that, while they're in their own private place or wherever, that other people can see them.. I don't think he'd have made those faces in an actual courtroom.. They really need to stop allowing virtual court appearances, except in very specific circumstances. I do think his tactic, when he spoke to the judge, was a bit over the top, which made the judges temper flare because he took it personally. I like Judge Simpson a lot -- he doesn't put up with any nonsense -- but in this case, I do think he was a bit over the top as well.
I usually agree with this judge and feel sometimes he is too easy on people, however, he is out of line to consider anything beyond the accident he is charged with. The girls are responsible for their fatal accident as hard as that is for their families.
Yup, I feel the same way. Simpson is typically awesome, but let me ask you something, if he didn't have the plate and followed them to get it, would their fleeing the scene and crashing while running to avoid the responsibility for the crash THEY caused mean that the defendant should be charged? In the end, I'd say no. Those poor kids caused a minor crash, then turned a citation or misdemeanor, at worst, into a felony. Then, their fleeing caused an even bigger crash that got them killed. It's not OK, and the poor dead kids are the ones who were wrong from the word go. I don't feel bad for the parents of the driver, they raised a monster that got her friend killed. If they had taught her personal responsibility for her actions, she'd never have run from the first crash and they'd just be dealing with insurance headaches right now. Lastly, Simpson was flat wrong. He does not get to introduce evidence to himself after the plea with no opportunity for the defendant to respond. He is now irrevocably tainted and should recuse after allowing the plea to be withdrawn.
What's going to be fun is that at the trial it's going to come out that the girls were not sober. The defense attorney has already implied as such, he just didn't feel the need to go into it at the time because he thought everything was reasonable and right and this guy would get a good sentence based on the charges he's actually plead to. Now, if this goes to trial they're going to talk about how these girls were not sober and this guy shouldn't be getting punished for their actions.
I would think so, because the judge is basically testifying and virtually retrying the defendant and that's no allowed for a judge who is to be impartial when trying the case.
@@kikatx I agree. Also, shouldn't the judge have reviewed all of this prior to the last hearing? This was a plea deal , right? I'll have to go back and watch the older video again. If it was a plea deal the judge could have rejected it. I'm confusing myself 🤦🏽
@@kikatxYup, and I think he let his emotions get the better of him with the family’s statements. And I think the defense attorney has not been happy with this for a while and it boiled over today.
Yeah, I'm on the attorney's side here too. You can't expect a judge to disregard something he already knows - like if the defendant claimed he walked from point A to B in seven minutes when the judge knows those locations are five miles apart - but to listen to 911 evidence that wasn't presented by either side, to go out of his way to study a map (also not presented by either side) to determine whether one could see point B from point A ... that doesn't seem right, and I think he should recuse.
@@davidohara7669 Seeking justice is giving both sides the ability to present their case. A judge making up his own evidence, declaring it irrefutable, ambushing the defense with this new evidence and then getting mad at the defense for pointing out that ambushing someone with new evidence is not allowed is not "seeking justice", it's being emotionally invested and seeking a predetermined outcome, and doing everything necesarry to reach that outcome. That's not justice. That's called a show trial.
Lol armchair judges are hilarious!! I highly doubt he will be removed etc. Learn the law before you assume you know everything about it. Judge Simpson ain't going NOWHERE 😂😂😂
@Kell4088 all people who live in this country are afforded basic legal protections from an overzealous, overreacting govt. One's criminal status has no bearing on those rights. It is the prosecutions burden to prove what happened. If the judge feels that strongly, he should refer the matter to the state atty for perjury charges.
@@Kell4088not at all they are not all criminals my son was accused of something he didn’t do by an ex and would be in prison now if it wasn’t for his great defence lawyers.Everyone deserves a fair trial with their side put across.
He wasn't though, the judge was reviewing the facts and evidence brought before him by the prosecutors and he admitted that something didn't add up, that's what a judge is supposed to do.
The judge is on his own accord implying that the charges aren't harsh enough apparently. Or is he implying that the defendant caused the accident by running them off the road? This was crazy. Clearly the judge was not being unbiased in this case. He was emotionally invested in the deaths of the victims & didnt like that Torres was only charged with leaving the scene. But he HAD called it IN? BIZARRE.
He never ran them off the road. The teens caused a minor fender-bender by rear-ending Torres. The teens immediately fled the scene at high speed. Torres attempted to follow them. He caught up to them after they went airborne at the railroad tracks, flew through a thicket of trees, and rolled into a field. Again, he didn't catch up to them until after they caused their own fatal accident. It's a tragedy, but one of the teens' own making.
Believe it or not, it's illegal to drive recklessly or speed, even to follow a hit and run driver. If he misled 911, that might be a crime too. It appears they were contemplating charging him with these things but they pled it to leaving the scene of an accident. As long as the judge stays in the limits for the crime pled to, I think he can consider the extenuating circumstances around the crime. You certainly wouldn't take issue if a judge considered something heroic surrounding a crime to give the minimum, right? If he was saving a little girl, and got angry and punched someone he shouldn't have, you would want the judge to look at what was going on and give him a break, right?
@@ED-es2qvThe problem is that none of that are things that were plead guilty to or accepted as facts in the case. So for the judge to choose to take those as facts, and also insert partly their own investigation on distances, sight lines, etc... is wrong. If they were agreed upon facts surrounding their charge then sure. Otherwise no. If he doesn't like where the prosecutor left it then he can take that up with them.
Calls to 911 are not sworn statements. They can be used like uttered statements by the opposing party. The police report and actual testimony would be sworn to if there was a trial. Falsehoods in those could result in other charges. The prosecutor can contemplate all she wants, but she accepted leaving the scene of a property damage accident where he was, in fact, the victim. A crime with a maximum penalty of 90 days in jail, a $100 fine, and 6 points on his license. There is no real case against Torres; regardless of how everyone feels, there isn't the evidence to charge him.
@@ED-es2qv But he didn't stay within the limits of the crime he pled to. That's exactly why the defense attorney flipped out. Simpson is kind of stuck with the State's decision to charge him in a very limited fashion. If Simpson has a problem with the Prosecuting Attorney's Office, then he should leave the bench and go set that Office straight.
The brilliant mind of the judge, had the red flags go off. His job is to give proper sentence for crime. That's why he had to call out the truth. That is why he is judge, he has done his attorney time. Plus this is loss of lives, morally he's following his integrity and fairness. Good on the judge for picking up for the other less attorney that was not good enough. Bravo
It does seem like the judge is done his own investigation I think if this judge deeply feels that way he should remove himself this judge has got too much pride to let anything like that happen
I wish u'd put all of this court case together, the ending is nice to have with this. I pick through & usually only watch thoughs that have them all together. Now I remember why, this sucks not knowing what happened!
Judge Simpson has taken some Ls before with me, usually when he had a bad day and gets a little emo or something, but yea this one is pretty shocking. I'm with the attorney.
@@clark-ul7tpI was JUST gonna say that, he needs to stay as far away from LL/Tenant as possible. Sadly for the LL's in this county he can't, they eat so much money because JS will allow a tenant to stay for over a year because of last minute claims of mold or damage not even having the tenant put rent into escrow. He gave a tenant who was down over $10,000 the chance to get caught up paying only $50 extra a month. That would take years but he doesn't care.
I completely disagree. All he did was look at the police report, listen to the 911 call and look at a map. A judge doesn't have to rubber stamp a plea deal. If defense counsel is correct in that he was referring to a charge that was dropped, that's a completely different issue, and a legitimate one. But as an attorney, I saw nothing wrong with what the judge was doing in terms of concluding that the defendant lied about the first accident. The only issue is that the plea appeared not to be related to the first accident. The defendant will get his day in court. Judge Simpson has enough of a history of being fair and impartial that I will give him the benefit of the doubt
Judges can take judicial notice of their personal knowledge of a location and it has been ruled that judges can take judicial knowledge of Google maps and distances.
The defendant already pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. This was just sentencing. The mothers of the 3 young lady’s that lost their lives demanded more.
@@ktkilntime1586 I think we all agree that a judge has the right refuse a plea agreement. This, to me is troublesome: "But as an attorney, I saw nothing wrong with what the judge was doing in terms of concluding that the defendant lied about the first accident." As a non-attorney (but son of one), it would seem the defense should have the ability to challenge the police report, challenge 911 call or the the location device(s) used, and the accuracy of Google maps. These are issues that (IMO) should have been presented by the prosecution, and were not, possibly because that evidence was found to be flawed or inaccurate? I would not be as quick to accept the judge's conclusions a facts. Where is the due process? To give any judge the power to unilaterally investigate, try, convict and sentence (and ignore attorney objection) is, in my mind outrageous. In any case I understand your opinion, but mine remains unswayed.
@@benjst1 This was sentencing on a plea agreement - and since they did not like the sentence, they can withdraw the plea and then have an opportunity to do all of those things
Totally agree. Looking at my house in Google Maps you don’t perceive the nearly impassable, steep hill behind it. If I said I couldn’t see something down the hill behind my house you’d think I was lying.
He is, he's not however, allowed to agree to the plea deal, but instead of following through, charge you with a crime you're not charged with, try and find you guilty of said crime without a hearing, make his own set of facts, and sentence you for said crime instead of what is currently on the table.
Very bad verdict. He was just looking for anyone to blame other than the girl who was recklessly driving the car, lost control, crashed, taking out herself and her friend. Unfortunately this is the case with the majority of cases where the person who died was to blame. Just finished watching a video about some Nordic deep sea divers where 1 of them opened a pressurised door without decompressing and killed 5 out of the 6 guys onboard. Who was to blame for this professional opening the door when he wasn't meant to? After years of dragging it through the court, the Norwegian government took responsibility and gave the families a ton of money to go away. Like this case, it was not about accepting responsibility and the truth. It's about making money and shifting the blame on to someone else.
Very disappointed in Judge Simpson in this matter! He completely overstepped based on his emotions. The parents of the girls are wanting to hold everyone else countable instead of accepting the fact that the girls would still be here if they would have stayed at the site of the accident!
Yes and no. I guess it's fair to say he probably WANTED to sentence him on something higher... because he doesn't believe the story that secured the plea deal, but that doesn't mean the sentence isn't warranted. There are two important factors to consider: 1) Sentencing guidelines are called guidelines for a reason. Upward departures (i.e. sentencing more strictly than the guidelines suggest) happen all the time, as do downward ones. There's nothing remarkable about that. 2) When defendants make plea deals to lesser charges, they are warned ahead of time that the judge does not have to accept the sentence recommendations made as part of a plea deal. This is such an established thing that defendants actually get back appeal rights that they normally lose by pleading if it's done (and I've seen Judge Simpson warn people about this himself many times.) So in other words, he plead to a lesser charge to get a lesser sentence recommended, but it was never guarenteed and he knew that ahead of time. You don't have to agree with the sentence, but there is ample precedent to support his ability to do so. Now if they feel it wasn't fair, they can appeal.
@@KaiserSoze679 The issue isn't that the judge didn't agree to the plea deal, it's that the judge provided his own evidence, decided his own evidence was irrefutable, then based his sentence on this evidence he himself provided, and when the attorney said that it was unfair of the judge to provide new evidence, base his judgement on it and not give the defense any time to prepare for that, then the judge got angry and said "Oh yeah? If you have a problem with my self-procured irrefutable evidence then refute it RIGHT NOW; RIGHT HERE, and if you can't the defendant is guilty" and that is just NOT how court is supposed to work. At the very least Judge Simpson should have given the defense time to evaluate and form a response to the new evidence the judge offered in the case. This was wildly inappropriate.
The problem is the judge went out his line and admitted it influenced his sentencing. At this point whether you agree with the deal or not, you are cooked more or less. Because of judge's actions you get worse sentence in a plea or need to retry, which puts you in a worse position either way. Where does the map came from and crossing it with the 911 call? That's prosecution's job... AFAIK judge can't introduce new arguement and say disprove my finding on the spot please. The judge effectively trashed the plea bargain... Didn't he?
I completely agree with the defense attorney. The judge got too involved on this one and needs to recuse himself. I love Judge Simpson, he’s fair, but this time he made it personal and wanted to add more than what’s before him. I hate what happened in the case.
His compassion (which we all admire) allowed him to fall victim to the mothers' statements and he lost his impartiality. I hope he can get himself out of this with a clear head and let the matter resolve on the plea deal because if he doesn't it will most certainly be overturned on appeal.
Judge Simpson didn't put himself in the position of the real victim here. Mr. Torres did exactly what any normal person would have done. His car was hit by the truck, at no fault of his own. The truck runs away. He follows (chases) the offenders, maybe just to get the license plate number for the police report. Tben, for whatever reason, he TERMINATED the pursuit. If POLICE terminate a pursuit, THEY aren’t held responsible for any subsequent accident caused by the fleeing vehicle. Why was this victim held accountable for the actions of the criminals when POLICE aren’t held accountable in the same situation? I love jhdge Simpson, and he's a fallible human like any of us. He's absolutely wrong this time.
At one point it is mentioned he had the plate. Insurance could have gotten the plate and gone for the person’s insurance without the need to chase. Police are treated different than regular civilians. If you call 911 when chasing someone, they tell you to stop.
@@mmmangel1985 The problem is that he wasn't charged with the accident and there wasn't a trial to decide at which point the defendant became aware of the plate number.
@@mmmangel1985 And he DID stop chasing, deciding to return to the scene of the original incident. I would have done exactly what he did. This is incredibly unfair
I don't even think you could make that argument considering there is no one disputing the facts of what the defendant actually pled guilty to. Both the state and the defense stipulated to those facts, the defendant was rear ended and then left the scene
Respect a lawyer that will challenge a judge he thinks he or she is wrong when representing you because those decisions effects you as a defendent it save your ass
I am commenting on the alleged position of Torres's vehicle. It is a huge mistake to assume a GPS pin is exact. It is not. They are using the cell tower as a pin. A cell tower can be a mile away from the phone. Unless the cell phone is broadcasting its location, the pin could be off by a long distance. It is rare that cell phones broadcast their exact position, unless the owner has it specifically set up that way. I have an example of this. The trucks my company uses to deliver have built in GPSs. A truck broke down in Warren, Vermont. The GPS showed the truck 50 miles away from the actual location. This is common.
There's some truth to what you say - a cell phone's GPS can be off, but that is highly uncommon. It almost entirely happens when there is GPS signal interference, like in cities with tall buildings. Today's GPS are extremely accurate and reliable. The OTHER location sensing is from the cell tower(s) themselves...this is less accurate than a phone's GPS because it may use triangulation from several towers or newer techniques available in 5G. The prosecution has the ability to research and determine which location method was used, and can subsequently determine (through testing) what the accuracy range was.
@@Dub-ro9tk Judge Cedric Simpson was ordered by the Michigan Supreme Court to serve a nine-month suspension without pay for interfering in the police investigation of his intern, who was arrested for driving under the influence in 2013.
i think this is the first time ive seen judge simpson wrong. if the charges are about him leaving the accident scene for the defendants accident and not the accident of the girls then the girls accident doesnt matter in these charges. and judge simpson cannot do anything about the girls accident because its irrelevant to the current charges. judge simpson should also recuse himself from the case because he was going to give a ruling on things that aren't part of the case. judge simpson is too emotionally involved now because he promised something would happen in the case but again the girls running off the road and dying are not part of the current charges. and whether the defendant say the accident or not is irrelevant.
This judge is not only inappropriate, but he is loud and wrong! He keeps interrupting after telling the attorney he can speak. Is this justice or the schoolyard?
Apparently you don’t watch much judge simp. He quotes himself often enough, that he can only try what’s in front of him, even saying it here. lol then in the same breath, continues to try and use the actual case in front of him to pass judgment on this separate case that this defendant is not on trial for. Just bc a bunch of Karen’s want to blame someone else with their dumb kids death. probably the very reason the kids died to begin with. Nothing is ever their precious kids fault; always someone else’s. I mean, if judge simp is so concerned about this, then why is he even contemplating taking this man’s plea, knowing the defendant is lying? Judge simp has thrown out pleas on many occasions for a defendant lying, specifically at sentencing hearings. If this judge truly believed this man was culpable in someone’s death, and then not a peep about admonishing the prosecution for not bringing the applicable charges to hold this person accountable, pathetic! I think his constituents wouldn’t be very happy about allowing such an injustice to side. Not to mention what a horrible disservice to the families to allow this man whom “killed” their loved ones; continue to lie at his sentencing. While also completely skirting any charges related to their loved ones untimely deaths. lol you think anything positive about this absolute judge Judy act he’s doing? Pretending that it resembles any kind of American Justice. lol this is a case of a judge fingering the scales of Justice. The judge brought facts from an unrelated case, which this defendant was never tried for; and neither the defense nor the prosecution argued a motion to have these facts heard in this case. The only thing sad here is the poor defendant who’s tied up bound and gagged to the tracks of this court to be railroaded by the unwitting American Justice system. Judge was completely emotionally involved. Van Laan is the gd man here. The only victim on screen is the defendant. And it’s utterly sad how many people are just “headline” junkies ready to convict a man bc a gaggle of Karen’s pulled on the judge heart strings. Keep in mind “head line” junkies is responsible for the likes of flat earthers. Your non critical thinking is absolutely analogous here. Tata, bunch of people being high off this line of thinking these days. That’s what’s truly sad. Dumb kids got them selves killed, and even in death will forever affect this defendants life. Appeals will overturn any injustice here; judge simp will regret this one day soon. 💯
The judge doesn't even let the attorney finish his comments before going off. And the judge did investigate, Sorting through evidence and coming up with a conclusion is an investigation.
Judge Simpson is also bringing in his local knowledge. I'm not a lawyer, but I believe Simpson overstepped. He should have forwarded the information from the victim's families to the prosecution and defense, and let them figure it out. The Goggle map was the final nail in the coffin for me: He was effectively entering new evidence which is not the Judge's place, I don't believe.
I suspect they did, but given the totality of the circumstances (including the fact that the decedents rear ended the defendant and then raced away) concluded the plea deal was the best they could do. Surely Simpson is experienced enough to understand that.
@@Dub-ro9tk There were also allegations that the “victims” may have been under the influence when the accident occurred. All things considered, it sounds like it would have been difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant caused the second accident.
What is wrong with the male attorney looks like he is on something he can maintain still and keeps looking around,and moving like he’s ready to run out
I don't think there's anything wrong with the defendants attorney here, besides the fact that he's F-ING BEYOND ANGRY AT JUDGE SIMPSON & RIGHTFULLY SO, THERE'S NO SHOT THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING JUDGE SIMPSON SHOULD'VE EVER DONE..... CONSIDERING THAT JUDGE SIMPSON HAD ALLUDED TO THE FACT THAT THIS ISN'T IN HIS JOB DUTIES NUMEROUS TIMES, WHILE HE WAS TESTIFYING ABOUT HIS OWN INVESTIGATION!!!
The best advice I got in law school was: when you are pissed off at the judge to always ask for a moment to confer with your client so you can cool off and think through your argument. Had the defense done this, it would have really helped him. I do appreciate how this clip shows just how contentious and emotional litigation is. Most people never see it. The defense and judge are both having intense emotional reactions, which isn’t uncommon. In fact, this is exactly why I knew litigation was not for me
yes Amanda…agreed. when I first starting watching the day to day magistrates & disctrict courts vs just the big tv trials it was extremely eye opening…
This judge was going to be the prosecution and jury on this regardless. This is clear. The attorney did a great job. The judge needs to recuse himself. He is defying his duty.
@@kimsy520 no need to appeal yet. There is no longer a plea…… they need to get before a different judge. This judge went and looked up his own “evidence.” He needs to be recused.
The judge said the intersection where the defendant was at the time of the crash and the location of the crash are about 1,000 feet apart so there's no reason the defendant didn't see it happen. That's 330 yards folks. How many people are really focused on what's happening over 300 yards ahead of them when traveling less than 50mph?
Most of these are cut and dry with outbursts, people in court being disrespectful , but this makes the judge look BAD. What does the judge mean he wasn’t investigating? He clearly went over facts, discussed what he did after a plea was reached/seemed to be reached, and wasn’t happy with what the plea was. ALSO the defendant’s attorney telling him to recuse himself was SPOT ON! The judge was letting emotions get in the way of LAW. If the prosecution was all set and could go as far as they did with charges THEY DID! Unless they’re terrible at prosecuting! Something definitely isn’t right about this one.
This is crazy the is going to far..... the ladies took over the judge mind and he has not stop trying to help the ladies get the man located up for who knows what .. its not about pleasing the mothers it's about the law ....
Love your commentary and that you don't interrupt the cases! Your videos are great!
@Chris- 3ykb- I agree.👏
@@GinnySmith-m1eYes! Great job!
I've found that life is really not that complicated when you just tell the truth and act with integrity, even if you think no one is watching.
This!
@@Athena124 also, some lives just are less complicated than others
@@antaguanahuh? I’m confused …….what does that have to do with acting with integrity?
@@hazybrneyesmdnothing. That is my point.
I know people who tell the truth and act with integrity as much as anyone, even when they think no one is watching. Some of them have uncomplicated lives and some of them have really, really complicated lives.
Certainly lies and deceit can make life more complicated. I am not questioning your experience. Just suggesting sometimes complications happen on their own.
One thing that stands out to me is that the defendant is in court while his attorney is on Zoom. The defendant must have felt all alone up there. That should not be allowed during such a vital process. If it were me, I would have demanded that my attorney be there at my side.
The be fair the charge is leaving the scene of a minor car accident….likely a fine….maybe probation at most….
It just suddenly turned into something outragous
The parties agreed to sentence and thought this would be a formality. This was a stunning move by an amazing judge who lost his impartiality and he knows it.
judge said something about showing up two hours late. perhaps attorney forgot about the hearing and that's partly why Judge was taking a closer look...a little riled up. he may be right. I don't know.
I agree. Being in court is scary enough; being there alone shouldn’t happen.
@@IGNANT4LIFE the obvious anger about the attorney being two hours late should have been enough to just adjourn the proceeding to another day, vs even risking the appearance of letting your irritation with the attorney color your judgement towards the defendant. This could be a slam dunk on appeal.
Thank you for all your time setting this up for us out here in la la land. I know you work hard so we don’t have to. Thank you for all you do. Judge Simpson is a great person and Judge.
The defense attorney is right. The state should be trying to prove he’s lying, not the judge.
You did a racism then you did a microaggresion. This makes it difficult to analyze your arguments (it is hard to think cogently and well while sobbing in the fetal position on the floor). That said, I give you all the credit in the world for being a Marine Ranger. Semper Fi!
@@RichardSpringer-h7z 😆👏
Perjury is perjury
A judge can come to the conclusion that a defendant is lying without an attorney raising the issue.
@@TheIncognitusMeactually not correct. The judge is to remain neutral. It’s the state’s burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Just like he had the tape to listen to, so did the state and they didn’t bring it up during the trial. At the time of sentencing, it’s too late AND it’s not up to the judge. The defense did a good job standing up for his client.
I completely agree with the defense attorney. The state chose to charge this defendant, and its *THEIR* job to make sure they conducted a thorough investigation. They (investigators) failed to find these things out, and its not the defendant's job to help their investigation. If they believe he has lied under oath, then charge him with perjury, but you cant look at evidence AFTER a person has been convicted or pleads guilty, and use that to determine a sentence.
Generally, a judge can give any sentence within the range provided by statute. He or she doesn't even need to explain it. If I were the judge here, I would have just pronounced the sentence without the 20 minute speech.
@@kcgunesq I assume the plea deal included no jail time as part of the agreement. If the judge wants to depart from that he needs to make a record as to why he is doing it and give the defendant a chance to withdraw his plea.
Judges do not have to follow plea agreements. They determine the punishment. Also, all jufged read reports and review material before sentencing. The o ly thing he did was explain his reasoning. Maybe he should have thrown him in jail for killing 2 girls by chasing them down for no damn reason. 2 women against an angry man who then follows then AFTER he has their info are not wrong for acting in fear.
The judge is a joke. He shouldn't even be a judge with what he did in the past. Just look him up
@@meekomio The defendant also has the right to withdraw their plea if the judge doesn't stick to the plea agreement. The woman fled the scene of an accident. He only chased because they hit him first and allegedly sped away. Most importantly though, he wasn't charged with any crime relating to their deaths.
This defense attorney crushed it. I really like Judge Simpson, but he was outrageously wrong on this, and the defense attorney handled it extremely well. He stayed respectful, but he also said everything that needed to be said on the record for his client. I really get the sense that if Mr. Torres didn't have a good attorney representing him at this sentencing, he would have been run over by Judge Simpson. This attorney was prepared for Judge Simpson to blow up at him and stayed firm. This is a good lesson that no matter how decent you think the judge is, you can still get burned without a good attorney.
Even if the scenario was 100% exactly how the mothers imagined it to be, even if Mr. Torres did everything they imagined he did, the way Judge Simpson handled this was not the proper administration of justice.
100% I was increasingly amazed at this video, as this is absolutely & critically forbidden action by any judge. The defense attorney presented very well, and made the most critical argument. Judge Simpson is presenting evidence of possible fraudulent claims for something the defendant may or may not have done, but that he wasn’t charged with. There’s no possible way a sentence for an uncharged crime could ever be allowed to stand. The only surprise from the defense for me, was that he didn’t demand time for an interlocutory appeal of the judge’s actions, which would have been 100% appropriate and my first move in his place.
The defense attorney needs to sit the f**k down. His stupid camera is bouncing around the whole damn time, he needs to get a tripod or phone stand. If I was a judge I wouldn't allow any more Zoom appearances until this was remedied (same goes for attorneys appearing in a car). If you can't keep your device from moving then appear in person.
You're probably right about the case, the prosecutors really dropped the ball on this one. Idiot vigilante tries to chase down a fender bender hit and run and ends up getting people killed. The prosecutor needed to do better investigation and not just offer a slap on the wrist when people die.
Judge Simpson was wrong on this so yes, defense attorney was absolutely correct. Simpson overreacted and he talked right over the guy. It wasn't impartial and Simpson is speculating.
I can't say I disagree with the attorney. Sentence him for what he pled to, not how you interpret something that the defense was ambushed with at the request of victim's family.
@kt-4383 yes he been ambushed from day one .... that the mother's started telling the judge of what he already knew.... if you tell me you are going to jail for breaking the window 🪟 not for the building falling.... the judge is taking this personally
Judge is cowtowing to the family.
Lol thats the deal with plea deals. The judge is not bound to the deal in sentencing. If he is so sure of his innocence it should be brought before a jury. Which perhaps is what the judge wanted. There are things being concealed & hopefully it all comes out ....
I still don't understand Mr. Torrez connection to the crash that killed the girls. Did he cause them to go off the road? If not why are their deaths mentioned with such jugement towards Mr.Torrez?
What did the defendant do?
You can see the defense attorney amping up for the ruling.
The defense attorneys facial reactions were rude and dismissive. Unprofessional.
@@North_West1 wrong he was outraged and had every right to be! Judge Simpson was totally out of line…
@@bouncingback3 In what was was the judge out of line?
@@WukongTheMonkeyKing as Judge Simpson stated himself in the first hearing his only job was to go by the first accident (The girls hitting Torres’s car and fleeing). He flat out told the mothers he could not go back and base anything on what happened after that. Him going back and go over things that happened after that and coming to a conclusion without getting any evidence the defendant may have is dead wrong.
@@bouncingback3 unless he didn't need to get new evidence, and could infer from the evidence given.
Things like looking at maps are not getting new evidence, provided location details have been entered into evidence.
Simpson could be overruled on appeal. We'll see.
This is the one time I feel like Simpson got it wrong and using the family's emotion over what the law requires
Agree. Disappointing.
They don’t call him Simpson the softy for nothing
Yes, attorney was professional and appropriate.
I love judge Simpson. Love the man. I think he's a titan. However, this defense attorney is 100% correct - he's not merely advocating for his client. This is highly irregular. The attorney was given NO time to respond to the judge's presentation (what a weird thing to say, "judge's presentation"). I think the mothers in this case got in his head. He should recuse himself for his own well-being. Watch how quickly he angers when the attorney brings up a totally valid point.
Not irregular, unlawful. Simpson is being prosecutor and judge by investigating. Even worse, he investigated the wrong crime. The charge was leaving the scene, not whether he saw it or caused it.
@@derekbootle8316 Just remember that Judge Simpson was already guilty of judicial misconduct.
And the minority opinion of the Michigan Supreme Court wanted to not just charge him with fine and suspension but to also remove him from the bench.
Sometimes he gets too riled up and also has too much of an ego issue when riled up.
I think Simpson should step down from his position, or be forceably removed from whatever agency in Michigan can hold judges accountable.
I thought he was a good judge, but he needs to be removed before he gets worse. He doesn't sound that he is mentally all there anymore.
@@boooster101 His ego does get in his way and that's why I can only take him in small doses. It's his way or the highway. I think in this cases he was haunted by the mom's grief and wanted to deliver some justice but that may have been beyond his role (I don't know enough to say one way or the other whether it was inappropriate).
Totally agree. Judge Simpson is fun to watch but he has a job to do, and impartiality is central to that job. In this case he's lost that impartiality, seemingly due to the victims' parents. He can't be so easily swayed by emotion if he wants to be a judge. He's gone off on a wild goose chase of his own, essentially investigating the crime himself. It's not his job and if he doesn't know better, he should retire or have his title removed
I've been thinking about this one so really appreciate the update, OSG! Thanks.
Do you know what happened in this case? Is there any news articles?
@@leo2md786 i don't have any info. Hope we get a follow up.
Defendant got fines ans had to serve 90 days[45 days with parole] but had to present himself to jail on the anniversary of the girls death. @@leo2md786
I think Judge Simpson went way out of bounds on this one. I completely agree with the defense attorney and this is just wrong.
Great job to the defense attorney for advocating and properly advising his client …
The attorney us absolutely right. I love judge Simpson.
You love a corrupt judge?
The defense attorney was correct the judge overstepped and he did his own investigation! The judge allowed the parents to sway him!
@jamesrowden303 do you have a link of the follow up?
Yeah, this definitely sounds like prosecutor closing arguments. Should be an easy appeal for the defendant.
It's a sad day where justice is stayed because of bullshit legal technicalities and a disgusting plea deal. I'm with Simpson on this one.
@jamesrowden303 It's still only technical bullshit that allows a criminal to walk off scott free despite having committed a crime. Same as finding a boatload of drugs but having to let the smuggler go because you didn't have probable cause for the search. It's absolute insanity to love rules so much that you're willing to abandon the very notion of common sense.
@jamesrowden303 And that, my friend, is exactly the problem. It's not justice, it's blind obedience to the rules without question. And that *never* ends up going down on the right side of history.
Simpson got too emotionally involved in the tragedy of those two girls dying. I think he's way out of line here.
i know i would have a hard time not being somewhat emotional if i was sitting on the bench too...
@@OSGCourtWatch yeah, me too, but I'm not a judge.
Why was he out of line, he wasn’t going to go soft on a guilty man
@@GA-wq8xq Guilty of what?
The girls were guilty not the victim. The girls should have stopped after they hit the victim
Thanks for your dedication to your channel Squishy. We appreciate it. Keep up the great work. 🤘
From the very first hearing on this case, I have been very upset with the way it went. These teenage girls, who were implied to not be sober, rear-ended a man. They then took off at a high rate of speed. That man followed them. They continued to choose to drive recklessly and got into an accident. Nothing he did caused any of their actions. That is so much of the case, that any charges related to the second accident were dropped before The Plea was even entered. Not because of the plea, before the plea. Now, for the judge to come back and try to sentence him based on charges that he's not even charged with is a travesty of Justice
I'm in stark agreement with Van Laan. The 2nd accident has no bearing on the first. The fact is, these girls parents don't want to give them any responsibility for their own actions. It was already implied that these girls weren't exactly sober. They took off from an accident they caused at a high rate of speed. Just because he followed them doesn't mean he is responsible for them initially driving away and then getting into an accident when they continue to do so. The fact that he's not even charged with that and that charge was dropped prior to the plea but the judge is still trying to sentence him based on a charge that was dropped is ridiculous.
Then, when the attorney tries to make a record based on the fact that the judges actions here weren't exactly appropriate, he blows up at the attorney for even implying that what he did was wrong. The attorney was not rude in any way and yet judge Simpson was in response. He completely interrupted the defense attorney with yelling and then would not let him make a record of his objection to the judge's actions. I think that he did so because of the fact that he knows what he did was wrong. That was the reaction of a man who knew he messed up.
It is a tragedy that those girls died. It's a tragedy that the other girl was in the hospital for so long. That tragedy is not at the feet of this man who was the victim of these girls Reckless actions that day.
. EXACTLY WELL SAID
I'm VERY confused by the accusation that he had to have seen the 2nd accident that he wasn't involved in. First, I don't think the judge can determine where his eyes were, and second what would it matter if he did see it? He doesn't have an obligation to stop or report an accident.
actually, one does have an obligation to stop and report, and all have laws called, "Good Samaritan or Duty to Rescue" Laws. I know each states laws are written differently, here in Nebraska, you can be put in jail and pay a fine if you pass an accident.
@blakepenberthy5698 but none of that has ANYTHING to do with what he's charged with or pleading to.
The charges related to the 2nd accident were dropped way early in the process.. Then they dropped any other charges with the plea. He's only pleading guilty to leaving the scene of the 1st accident where they rear-ended him. They drove off from that accident and got into an accident. Now, he's being sentenced based on whether he could see that 2nd accident or not, which is irrelevant.
@@Mewse1203 ,I was answering the person above me. I agree 100% This poor guy is being railroaded and this is not justice at all. Most cases is the person fault that hits a person from behind not the other way around!
I’d love to know what Judge Simpson was thinking when the camera went off?
❤ this Man 😊
Omg I hope we get to see the next one! That lawyer is pissed at the judge! Could be fun to see that hearing, especially as the lawyer asked the judge to refuse himself!
And especially especially since the lawyer is actually right.
Thanks!
This judge is wrong. Recuse yourself; you are emotionally involved. This is not just.
I like judge Simpson, but he was wrong. The whole time he was going through his thoughts I kept saying “you can’t do that” over and over. He knows better.
THIS judge is corrupt AF. look him up. ,he was investigated for favorably helping friends on matters and tried to influence police officers in that.
I listened to the 911 calls and cross-referenced them with a map. I'm not investigating.
I mixed flour, yeast, salt, sugar, and water together and put them in an oven. I'm not making bread.
Hrs reading what's given to him and he's making statements based on hard cold facts judge Simpson went about it wrong yes but he was trying to do the right job
@@brandenantonino23Those aren't facts because they haven't been analyzed by actual experts and cross-examined by the defense. You can't take call location data at face value and it is irrelevant to the charges.
@@nobodyimportant7804 doesn't matter the dude waved his rights and that means he doesn't get his trial he gets what's coming to him when he waves those rights it's not my fault or the judges that the idiot threw away his rights
@@brandenantonino23 He didn't throw away his rights and didn't give the judge the right to try him on something he wasn't charged for.
The judge was using evidence improperly, from a legal and scientific perspective.
This is clear judicial misconduct, something Simpson has been suspended for in the past. He is a bad judge.
This judge needs taken off the bench. He should be prosecuted himself for his actions on a lot of his cases he has judged. You can tell by almost every single interaction on his videos the lawyers have zero respect for him. Hopefully someone wakes up and gets this guy off the bench for good and maybe spends some quality time behind bars himself. As a judge you are not supposed to let your emotions become a factor in your sentence and he clearly does. Judge Simpson you need to resign from the bench
I usually ride with Judge Simpson but he is to emotionally attached now. He need to give the case to another judge. He is not an accident inspector.
You nailed it! He is too emotionally involved now to be impartial
You are completely wrong, a judge has a right to determine if the guy is telling the truth
Exactly
The parents pulled at his emotions and he investigated. He lost sight of his role . He was wrong on this one. This was merely a formality to a plea. Done.
@@shreev9671wrong. Judge accepted the plea. We are way past evidence. This is inappropriate
@shreev9671 wrong. A judge is not a finder of fact during a trial, never mind during sentencing for a charge that does not even exist. The best I can say for the judge is he is suffering from temporary insanity.
This video reminds us that judges are human. I definitely respect Judge Simpson but this defendant's attorney is on point. It's a difficult case for everyone, definitely not one I'd want to judge but, I do believe feelings and emotions took the gambit on this one. Sad circumstances, all the way around.
There's no Babyface here this is strictly a heel program.
It’s more than that in my opinion. He knows what he’s doing and it’s suicidal. Someone got to Judge Simpson. Reeks of corruption.
@@DaylightDisinfectantyep. Smh
A judge that gets emotional has no business being a judge.
Judge should drop out and take this to jury' trial now
The attorney is correct . Simpson was wrong. Simpson knows he’s wrong too… that’s why he’s so angry.
This is where Simpson lets his emotions overtake his duty.
No..Judge was NOT WRONG..
@@pameliahartsfield4572 The judge was so wrong that he was lawless.
He was acting as a judge, investigator, and prosecutor and applying what he thought were facts but were outside the scope of the charges.
You can't take a crime and use facts from outside that crime to prove and sentence.
Simpson was acting illegally and trying to deny due process to the defendant.
@@nobodyimportant7804 he was reading what was given to him he's not wrong at all but the attorney isn't wrong either in the fact that the judge shouldn't have used the second accident against him
The Judge was wild and caught off guard when he was called out by the defense attorney. He knew he had stepped over the line with his long winded analysis.
my .02, for whatever it’s worth, I didn’t think the explanation was that long winded but he had to put his reasons for his sentencing “on the record”..right OR wrong. judge;s are not bound to sentencing recommendations on plea deals and this is why…
Exactly right. That’s why he came back so loud and aggressive. He knew.
His voice was shaking. Happens to me when I'm in a serious position.
@@OSGCourtWatchcmon, judge Simpson is always long winded and him turning into Mattlock with no evidence, just his personal opinion is totally out of line. And he knew it. That’s why he got so angry.
Judge Simpson is losing it more and more. He is too angry and should not be on the bench allowing his emotions to impede good judgement.
Judge Simpson slipped a few gears. I am not doing an investigation, I am just investigating the 911 calls, the geography of the area, what the defendant could see or not see, traffic patterns and then making findings of fact without any ability for the the defense to dispute the evidence the judge just pulled out of his ass at sentencing of all places.
It is insane. Not every tragic accident requires finding someone to punish.
The defendant told the 911 operator where he was when calling. What was placed in evidence by his attorney was a lie. The judge was not going to accept a plea based on lies. Once the lawyer spoke with his client he realized that the judge was right and asked to withdraw the plea. The 911 call was placed into evidence and all the judge had to do was realize that it contradicted what his lawyer presented to the court. It didn't take an investigation to understand he was lying just simply listening to his own words on the 911 call. Something the prosecutor should have figured out without the judge pointing out. He didn't pull anything out of his ass. He just proved he was lying. When he called 911 he said where he was and that contradicted what his lawyer presented. He was not farther back and unable to witness what happened. 2+2 still equals four dude. As the judge said he wasn't making a ruling just giving the lawyer a chance to realize the plea agreement was based on inaccurate information and withdraw it. Which he did. Case closed the fools going down.
@@jimsachtjen119 just because the Judge thought he was lying does not make it fact. Thats why we have trials so evidence can be brought up and refuted if need be. He honestly may have been mistaken or the pinged location not accurate.
Yes. He is making novel accusations from his own investigation in a position of the case where it would be wildly inappropriate for the defendant to have to defend all the accusations and evidence presented. What if he got it wrong about where he was and it was not a either here nor there situation but a third place. The 911-responder saying that is not where they have him is not a fact that can be responded to. How good is the tracking? Depending on cellphone-positioning triangulation can be tricky. What if both wasn't at A or B but at C and it covered a tower giving only two towers in a shallow direction? More or less pointing at the same spot which would sorta work like one tower in that direction. Or something completely novel. He is the judge. Not the prosecutor. And how are the defendant supposed to act towards the allegations? Try to defend against them against the judge? Then he will be pissed and biased. This is a situation where he is to allocute not defend from verbal accusations without any due process.
@@peope1976 The defendant told the 911 operator exactly where he was. That didn't coincide with what his lawyer put into to the record. Damn how stupid are you.
@@tonettesherman4323 On the 911 call the dude said exactly where he was. That is not what his lawyer put into the record. Damn his own words prove the plea agreement was based on a lie. He wasn't farther back his own statement to 911 proved it. Damn dude wake up. The judge is not going to accept a plea agreement based on lies. Might be why the lawyer advises his client to withdraw his plea. He realized the judge was right. The judge made no ruling he simply proved that he was lying and gave the lawyer the opportunity to withdraw the plea.
I agree with the lawyer. Judge Simpson is totally out of line.
Okay please explain why? The 911 call was admitted and it was obvious the defendant lied through his teeth
This is sentencing, not a trial. The judge has *wide* leeway in what he takes into account, including testimony from people who weren't even there. He's allowed to believe or not believe testimony based on what has been submitted. I guess you could argue that looking at a map is doing an investigation but, again, judges have a fairly wide leeway in what they can do here.
@@annepence4351 The defendant pleaded guilty to not stopping at the _first_ accident (where the girls rear-ended him), not the accident where the girls rolled their truck over at the railroad tracks. Whether the defendant saw the second accident is irrelevant to this charge and should therefore be irrelevant to the sentence. The plea agreement did not contemplate jail time, as it’s very unusual to give jail time for leaving the scene of a minor fender-bender that you didn’t cause.
After having already given their victim’s impact statements, the mothers begged the court to conduct its own investigation into the facts surrounding the second accident - an accident he was not being charged with. The judge is trying to appease the grieving mothers, who are unwilling to accept that their daughters caused their own deaths, by sentencing the defendant to jail time based on his determination that the defendant must have seen (not caused) the second accident.
@@amicaaranearum Thanks for the clarifications, that helps. I admit to not fully understanding the facts of the underlying case.
@@amicaaranearum however the judge does have the discretion for jail time in this case… And Judge Simpson allowed a motion to vacate the plea, so he will have his day in court yes? Let a jury decide.
I like Simpson a lot, but I think he went too far. He's acting as the prosecutor and the judge.
He was acting like the judge, juror and executioner.
he fucked up very hard.
Thanks for the follow up Squishy!
@squish do you have this case all in a playlist? Thank you.
Thanks for all the work you do! Editing, followups & content are what make your channel my fave!!
If Defendant pled to failing to stop for an accident that occured before the young ladies losing their lives and the Judge is all but saying he's going to sentence him harsher after considering things that occured afterwards, Judge Simpson absolutely needs to recuse himself.
I love this Judge and the way he conducts his business, but this is just proof that even Michael Jordan had an off game periodically.
the harsher sentencing wouldn't have been based off of events after the accident, it would have been based on the fact that defense was lying to the court.
I'm thinking that his anger at the perceived lying overtook Judge Simpson so much that it really threw him off his game.
Isn't a judge allowed to reject a plea though
@chelseathibodeaux7029 he is, but he's probably crossed in to abuse of discretion at this point.
@ChelseaLynnThibodeaux Yes
Judge Simpson... You know better than this. What a bummer...
It is a bummer, but it just goes to show that no one is perfect.
@@WlknTlknStvnHwkn While true, a judge has to be above that. I really hope he corrected this mistake or owned up to it. He was simply wrong on this and should own up to his mistake.
The judge is completely wrong. The defendant pled to not stopping an accident when he was rear-ended. The judge is upset about these girls losing their lives and wants to appease the parents. This is just wrong. He literally conducted his own investigation, which is prohibited. The judge should recuse himself. I like Judge Simpson, but he is dead wrong on this one. The judge cannot control what the prosecution charges and wants to give this man jail time to appease the parents. That is not justice.
You’re confusing the law with justice. Judge Simpson may not have followed the law to the letter, but he’s definitely concerned about getting justice for these girls and their parents.
What the judge did was justice.
@@Just_Smile-n2wthat's exactly the wrong thing to do
@@Just_Smile-n2wHe was wrong. This guy did not cause the accident. He had nothing to do with their death or he would have been charged for it. You are the one confused.
@@richardspearman6899What did the judge do wrong? Look and listen to the evidence? He was chasing them at a high rate of speed! If he would have backed off immediately after getting their plate #, this probably wouldn’t have happened.
I agree with you it will be appealed
In a jury trial, jurors have the right to question evidence. If you’re in front of a judge, he/she has also the right to question the evidence.
This should have went to trial instead of judge’s opinion.
Keep doing your thing Squishy!!!
The Judge to say its impossible possible to see he doesn't know that for sure, especially from a map!
I usually love this judge, but he is dead wrong in the situation. He is trying to do anything he can to appease grieving parents.
Yeah I'm glad that both the video maker and the comments are pointing this out- the attorney is making a good point and I think that the Judge is probably overextending appropriate bounds.
Agreed. I love Judge Simpson, but he is dead wrong in this situation. Which attorney produced and presented that map he showed? Neither of them? Oh that's right, the judge just produced and presented that evidence himself. Wildly innapropriate.
how do you figure the guy said it on a statement what happen he said he was there, watch it again that lawyer has been in trouble a lot of time on different cases
@@isthisbetterwell9958Ds I’m not even talking about the facts of the case I’m talking about the fact that the judge is doing his own investigation which is so unbelievably improper. He should be sentencing on the charge the guy pled to. If he didn’t like the plea he could deny it but he didn’t. And now he wants to do his own thing and investigate and sentence the guy based on emotion. It’s not right.
@@Sara-bv9ui
Is it just that a man responsible for contributing to an accident resulting in death should get off with a minor fine when the evidence shows he is misrepresenting his level of involvement?
Holy WOW! Amazing that it isn’t over! Thank God for judge Simpson! Thank you for your work!
I hate to say this,but I was thinking the same thing that the attorney was.
It just appeared to me that JS didn’t stay in his lane, but I’m just a lay person.
I was wondering if this would come back to bite him in the butt.
I was not expecting that attorney to come out swinging the way he did, however.
i found this video fascinating on many fronts...i tend to agree with ya but sentencings on pleas are not guaranteed by the court and clearly the judge didnt feel the defendant was being honest. i dont fault the deendant for withdrawing the plea IF thats what they chooseto do..make the state prove the case.
@@OSGCourtWatch Very unexpected.
@@OSGCourtWatchyou're not wrong that sentence lengths aren't guaranteed on plea agreements, but in this case it's very clear the basis for the sentence that Judge Simpson was considering was centered entirely on things that had nothing to do with his actual charges and I'm guessing that's why the attorney was so heated
@@pendragon3434 Yup, he's attempting to sentencing him on a totally different set of facts from the charges at hand. Defense has called it out at every stage rightfully so. They objected to the statements, they objected to the facts being brought in, they objected to the 911 calls, they objected to his review of the evidence. Defense was entitled to a contested hearing on these facts if they were going to be used at sentencing.
Judge Middleton would have done the same as Judge Simpson, I think.
I’m watching this live just KNOWING Squishy was gonna record and repost lol 😆
March 13th 3pm update! Don’t forget 😉
Ill be back!
Get ready ! It’s coming up soon!
The judge should also allow the attorney to make a clear record without interruption.
To me, it looked like van Laan was out of control. His facial expressions were hysterically child-like, reminding me of my baby brother holding back a full, hyperactive fit.
@@distriawhirlwind7367 The judge was out of control here.
If the lawyer doesn't file a complaint against Simpson, he is not doing his job.
The judge was so out of line here.
@@distriawhirlwind7367 I would agree that the facial expressions were ridiculous.. But to play devils advocate here, I think that's one of the big problems I have with zoom-based meetings of any type.. I think people forget that, while they're in their own private place or wherever, that other people can see them.. I don't think he'd have made those faces in an actual courtroom.. They really need to stop allowing virtual court appearances, except in very specific circumstances. I do think his tactic, when he spoke to the judge, was a bit over the top, which made the judges temper flare because he took it personally. I like Judge Simpson a lot -- he doesn't put up with any nonsense -- but in this case, I do think he was a bit over the top as well.
Yeah but the parents made a claim and he hear them out. Is that really important @@soundguydon
The attorney Joshua has a resting face that looks like a lot the muppet Meep Beaker. Lol
I usually agree with this judge and feel sometimes he is too easy on people, however, he is out of line to consider anything beyond the accident he is charged with. The girls are responsible for their fatal accident as hard as that is for their families.
Yup, I feel the same way. Simpson is typically awesome, but let me ask you something, if he didn't have the plate and followed them to get it, would their fleeing the scene and crashing while running to avoid the responsibility for the crash THEY caused mean that the defendant should be charged?
In the end, I'd say no. Those poor kids caused a minor crash, then turned a citation or misdemeanor, at worst, into a felony. Then, their fleeing caused an even bigger crash that got them killed. It's not OK, and the poor dead kids are the ones who were wrong from the word go.
I don't feel bad for the parents of the driver, they raised a monster that got her friend killed. If they had taught her personal responsibility for her actions, she'd never have run from the first crash and they'd just be dealing with insurance headaches right now.
Lastly, Simpson was flat wrong. He does not get to introduce evidence to himself after the plea with no opportunity for the defendant to respond. He is now irrevocably tainted and should recuse after allowing the plea to be withdrawn.
@@undecidedmiddleground5633 where can I watch the other hearings? Or find out more details of this case!
What's going to be fun is that at the trial it's going to come out that the girls were not sober. The defense attorney has already implied as such, he just didn't feel the need to go into it at the time because he thought everything was reasonable and right and this guy would get a good sentence based on the charges he's actually plead to. Now, if this goes to trial they're going to talk about how these girls were not sober and this guy shouldn't be getting punished for their actions.
I would say that he is being lawless.
Judge is blaming poor guy for the Stupid, Drunk, ENTITLED Brats.
I actually heard Judge Simpson may get in trouble for this. Anyone know anything about it?
I would think so, because the judge is basically testifying and virtually retrying the defendant and that's no allowed for a judge who is to be impartial when trying the case.
@@kikatx I agree. Also, shouldn't the judge have reviewed all of this prior to the last hearing? This was a plea deal , right? I'll have to go back and watch the older video again. If it was a plea deal the judge could have rejected it. I'm confusing myself 🤦🏽
@@kikatxYup, and I think he let his emotions get the better of him with the family’s statements. And I think the defense attorney has not been happy with this for a while and it boiled over today.
Someone has something on Judge Simpson. To me it’s the only possible reason to see him come off the rails.
@@DaylightDisinfectant Nah the mothers tugged at his heart strings
Yeah, I'm on the attorney's side here too. You can't expect a judge to disregard something he already knows - like if the defendant claimed he walked from point A to B in seven minutes when the judge knows those locations are five miles apart - but to listen to 911 evidence that wasn't presented by either side, to go out of his way to study a map (also not presented by either side) to determine whether one could see point B from point A ... that doesn't seem right, and I think he should recuse.
Yeah! I hated it when judge seek justice.
Recuse and resign his position.
@@davidohara7669he acted outside the scope of his job as judge. I agree with what the defense attorney said.
He also should have let the attorney make a statement on the record without interruptions
@@davidohara7669 Seeking justice is giving both sides the ability to present their case. A judge making up his own evidence, declaring it irrefutable, ambushing the defense with this new evidence and then getting mad at the defense for pointing out that ambushing someone with new evidence is not allowed is not "seeking justice", it's being emotionally invested and seeking a predetermined outcome, and doing everything necesarry to reach that outcome. That's not justice. That's called a show trial.
Wow! that was quite interesting. Im very curious to see this play out and how it is finally resolved.
Hopefully, the resolution is the defendant gets a fair trial and Simpson is removed from the bench.
Case thrown out and judge disbarred hopefully
Lol armchair judges are hilarious!! I highly doubt he will be removed etc. Learn the law before you assume you know everything about it. Judge Simpson ain't going NOWHERE 😂😂😂
Attorney Joshua is chomping at the bit to respond to the Judge. Trying to defend his client. Waiting for the outcome of this case!
Wow, you got this out quick!
Always good stuff, Squish❤
The defense lawyer is absolutely right.
All criminals usually side with defense attorneys.
Agreed, yes
@Kell4088 all people who live in this country are afforded basic legal protections from an overzealous, overreacting govt. One's criminal status has no bearing on those rights. It is the prosecutions burden to prove what happened. If the judge feels that strongly, he should refer the matter to the state atty for perjury charges.
@@Kell4088not at all they are not all criminals my son was accused of something he didn’t do by an ex and would be in prison now if it wasn’t for his great defence lawyers.Everyone deserves a fair trial with their side put across.
He wasn't though, the judge was reviewing the facts and evidence brought before him by the prosecutors and he admitted that something didn't add up, that's what a judge is supposed to do.
The judge is on his own accord implying that the charges aren't harsh enough apparently. Or is he implying that the defendant caused the accident by running them off the road? This was crazy. Clearly the judge was not being unbiased in this case. He was emotionally invested in the deaths of the victims & didnt like that Torres was only charged with leaving the scene. But he HAD called it IN? BIZARRE.
He never ran them off the road. The teens caused a minor fender-bender by rear-ending Torres. The teens immediately fled the scene at high speed. Torres attempted to follow them. He caught up to them after they went airborne at the railroad tracks, flew through a thicket of trees, and rolled into a field. Again, he didn't catch up to them until after they caused their own fatal accident. It's a tragedy, but one of the teens' own making.
Believe it or not, it's illegal to drive recklessly or speed, even to follow a hit and run driver. If he misled 911, that might be a crime too. It appears they were contemplating charging him with these things but they pled it to leaving the scene of an accident. As long as the judge stays in the limits for the crime pled to, I think he can consider the extenuating circumstances around the crime. You certainly wouldn't take issue if a judge considered something heroic surrounding a crime to give the minimum, right? If he was saving a little girl, and got angry and punched someone he shouldn't have, you would want the judge to look at what was going on and give him a break, right?
@@ED-es2qvThe problem is that none of that are things that were plead guilty to or accepted as facts in the case. So for the judge to choose to take those as facts, and also insert partly their own investigation on distances, sight lines, etc... is wrong. If they were agreed upon facts surrounding their charge then sure. Otherwise no. If he doesn't like where the prosecutor left it then he can take that up with them.
Calls to 911 are not sworn statements. They can be used like uttered statements by the opposing party. The police report and actual testimony would be sworn to if there was a trial. Falsehoods in those could result in other charges.
The prosecutor can contemplate all she wants, but she accepted leaving the scene of a property damage accident where he was, in fact, the victim. A crime with a maximum penalty of 90 days in jail, a $100 fine, and 6 points on his license. There is no real case against Torres; regardless of how everyone feels, there isn't the evidence to charge him.
@@ED-es2qv But he didn't stay within the limits of the crime he pled to. That's exactly why the defense attorney flipped out. Simpson is kind of stuck with the State's decision to charge him in a very limited fashion. If Simpson has a problem with the Prosecuting Attorney's Office, then he should leave the bench and go set that Office straight.
The brilliant mind of the judge, had the red flags go off. His job is to give proper sentence for crime. That's why he had to call out the truth. That is why he is judge, he has done his attorney time. Plus this is loss of lives, morally he's following his integrity and fairness. Good on the judge for picking up for the other less attorney that was not good enough. Bravo
It does seem like the judge is done his own investigation I think if this judge deeply feels that way he should remove himself this judge has got too much pride to let anything like that happen
Pride cometh before the fall.
@@DaylightDisinfectantwouldn’t be pride, I don’t think, just sympathy for the parents
I wish u'd put all of this court case together, the ending is nice to have with this. I pick through & usually only watch thoughs that have them all together. Now I remember why, this sucks not knowing what happened!
Judge Simpson has taken some Ls before with me, usually when he had a bad day and gets a little emo or something, but yea this one is pretty shocking. I'm with the attorney.
his landlord tenant cases are very frustrating to watch
@@clark-ul7tp That one with the woman who was a hoarder pissed me off.
@@LouieNJ i know which one you mean…totally agree
@@clark-ul7tpI was JUST gonna say that, he needs to stay as far away from LL/Tenant as possible. Sadly for the LL's in this county he can't, they eat so much money because JS will allow a tenant to stay for over a year because of last minute claims of mold or damage not even having the tenant put rent into escrow. He gave a tenant who was down over $10,000 the chance to get caught up paying only $50 extra a month. That would take years but he doesn't care.
He’s usually on point. He had an off day on this one.
I like Judge Simpson, but - I think this was outrageous. He played roles of investigator, DA, jury and judge. I was cringing the whole time.
I completely disagree. All he did was look at the police report, listen to the 911 call and look at a map. A judge doesn't have to rubber stamp a plea deal. If defense counsel is correct in that he was referring to a charge that was dropped, that's a completely different issue, and a legitimate one. But as an attorney, I saw nothing wrong with what the judge was doing in terms of concluding that the defendant lied about the first accident. The only issue is that the plea appeared not to be related to the first accident. The defendant will get his day in court. Judge Simpson has enough of a history of being fair and impartial that I will give him the benefit of the doubt
Judges can take judicial notice of their personal knowledge of a location and it has been ruled that judges can take judicial knowledge of Google maps and distances.
The defendant already pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor. This was just sentencing. The mothers of the 3 young lady’s that lost their lives demanded more.
@@ktkilntime1586 I think we all agree that a judge has the right refuse a plea agreement.
This, to me is troublesome:
"But as an attorney, I saw nothing wrong with what the judge was doing in terms of concluding that the defendant lied about the first accident."
As a non-attorney (but son of one), it would seem the defense should have the ability to challenge the police report, challenge 911 call or the the location device(s) used, and the accuracy of Google maps. These are issues that (IMO) should have been presented by the prosecution, and were not, possibly because that evidence was found to be flawed or inaccurate? I would not be as quick to accept the judge's conclusions a facts. Where is the due process?
To give any judge the power to unilaterally investigate, try, convict and sentence (and ignore attorney objection) is, in my mind outrageous.
In any case I understand your opinion, but mine remains unswayed.
@@benjst1 This was sentencing on a plea agreement - and since they did not like the sentence, they can withdraw the plea and then have an opportunity to do all of those things
Absolutely 100 percent impossible to perceive what someone sees from google maps
Totally agree. Looking at my house in Google Maps you don’t perceive the nearly impassable, steep hill behind it. If I said I couldn’t see something down the hill behind my house you’d think I was lying.
This is one of the most interesting cases I’ve seen. Glad I caught the first part. Thanks OSG!
A judge is allowed to reject a plea deal
He is, he's not however, allowed to agree to the plea deal, but instead of following through, charge you with a crime you're not charged with, try and find you guilty of said crime without a hearing, make his own set of facts, and sentence you for said crime instead of what is currently on the table.
Very bad verdict. He was just looking for anyone to blame other than the girl who was recklessly driving the car, lost control, crashed, taking out herself and her friend.
Unfortunately this is the case with the majority of cases where the person who died was to blame. Just finished watching a video about some Nordic deep sea divers where 1 of them opened a pressurised door without decompressing and killed 5 out of the 6 guys onboard. Who was to blame for this professional opening the door when he wasn't meant to? After years of dragging it through the court, the Norwegian government took responsibility and gave the families a ton of money to go away.
Like this case, it was not about accepting responsibility and the truth. It's about making money and shifting the blame on to someone else.
Judge should be under Judicial Review.
Very disappointed in Judge Simpson in this matter! He completely overstepped based on his emotions. The parents of the girls are wanting to hold everyone else countable instead of accepting the fact that the girls would still be here if they would have stayed at the site of the accident!
It appears to me that the defendant plead guilty to one crime and Judge Simpson wanted to sentence him on a different, uncharged crime.
Yes and no. I guess it's fair to say he probably WANTED to sentence him on something higher... because he doesn't believe the story that secured the plea deal, but that doesn't mean the sentence isn't warranted. There are two important factors to consider:
1) Sentencing guidelines are called guidelines for a reason. Upward departures (i.e. sentencing more strictly than the guidelines suggest) happen all the time, as do downward ones. There's nothing remarkable about that.
2) When defendants make plea deals to lesser charges, they are warned ahead of time that the judge does not have to accept the sentence recommendations made as part of a plea deal. This is such an established thing that defendants actually get back appeal rights that they normally lose by pleading if it's done (and I've seen Judge Simpson warn people about this himself many times.)
So in other words, he plead to a lesser charge to get a lesser sentence recommended, but it was never guarenteed and he knew that ahead of time. You don't have to agree with the sentence, but there is ample precedent to support his ability to do so. Now if they feel it wasn't fair, they can appeal.
@@KaiserSoze679 The issue isn't that the judge didn't agree to the plea deal, it's that the judge provided his own evidence, decided his own evidence was irrefutable, then based his sentence on this evidence he himself provided, and when the attorney said that it was unfair of the judge to provide new evidence, base his judgement on it and not give the defense any time to prepare for that, then the judge got angry and said "Oh yeah? If you have a problem with my self-procured irrefutable evidence then refute it RIGHT NOW; RIGHT HERE, and if you can't the defendant is guilty" and that is just NOT how court is supposed to work.
At the very least Judge Simpson should have given the defense time to evaluate and form a response to the new evidence the judge offered in the case. This was wildly inappropriate.
The problem is the judge went out his line and admitted it influenced his sentencing. At this point whether you agree with the deal or not, you are cooked more or less.
Because of judge's actions you get worse sentence in a plea or need to retry, which puts you in a worse position either way.
Where does the map came from and crossing it with the 911 call? That's prosecution's job... AFAIK judge can't introduce new arguement and say disprove my finding on the spot please.
The judge effectively trashed the plea bargain... Didn't he?
I completely agree with the defense attorney. The judge got too involved on this one and needs to recuse himself. I love Judge Simpson, he’s fair, but this time he made it personal and wanted to add more than what’s before him. I hate what happened in the case.
His compassion (which we all admire) allowed him to fall victim to the mothers' statements and he lost his impartiality. I hope he can get himself out of this with a clear head and let the matter resolve on the plea deal because if he doesn't it will most certainly be overturned on appeal.
I completely agree. He looked at a map that was not in evidence.
Wildly inappropriate is right. Simpson needs to recuse himself. So thankful the man has a lawyer to fight for him.
Judge Simpson didn't put himself in the position of the real victim here.
Mr. Torres did exactly what any normal person would have done.
His car was hit by the truck, at no fault of his own.
The truck runs away.
He follows (chases) the offenders, maybe just to get the license plate number for the police report.
Tben, for whatever reason, he TERMINATED the pursuit.
If POLICE terminate a pursuit, THEY aren’t held responsible for any subsequent accident caused by the fleeing vehicle.
Why was this victim held accountable for the actions of the criminals when POLICE aren’t held accountable in the same situation?
I love jhdge Simpson, and he's a fallible human like any of us.
He's absolutely wrong this time.
i think this case is absolutely fascinating!
At one point it is mentioned he had the plate. Insurance could have gotten the plate and gone for the person’s insurance without the need to chase. Police are treated different than regular civilians. If you call 911 when chasing someone, they tell you to stop.
@@mmmangel1985 The problem is that he wasn't charged with the accident and there wasn't a trial to decide at which point the defendant became aware of the plate number.
@@mmmangel1985
And he DID stop chasing, deciding to return to the scene of the original incident. I would have done exactly what he did.
This is incredibly unfair
Investigator Cedric J Simpson. Geez Louise- just say you’re not accepting the plea cause you don’t think it’s factually accurate.
I don't even think you could make that argument considering there is no one disputing the facts of what the defendant actually pled guilty to. Both the state and the defense stipulated to those facts, the defendant was rear ended and then left the scene
Respect a lawyer that will challenge a judge he thinks he or she is wrong when representing you because those decisions effects you as a defendent it save your ass
I am commenting on the alleged position of Torres's vehicle. It is a huge mistake to assume a GPS pin is exact. It is not. They are using the cell tower as a pin. A cell tower can be a mile away from the phone. Unless the cell phone is broadcasting its location, the pin could be off by a long distance. It is rare that cell phones broadcast their exact position, unless the owner has it specifically set up that way. I have an example of this. The trucks my company uses to deliver have built in GPSs. A truck broke down in Warren, Vermont. The GPS showed the truck 50 miles away from the actual location. This is common.
There's some truth to what you say - a cell phone's GPS can be off, but that is highly uncommon. It almost entirely happens when there is GPS signal interference, like in cities with tall buildings. Today's GPS are extremely accurate and reliable.
The OTHER location sensing is from the cell tower(s) themselves...this is less accurate than a phone's GPS because it may use triangulation from several towers or newer techniques available in 5G.
The prosecution has the ability to research and determine which location method was used, and can subsequently determine (through testing) what the accuracy range was.
Interesting session, and even more interesting comments!I'm waiting to see the next hearing!
getting emotionally involved like this is what got judge simpson suspended and almost removed a few years ago
Well ya got tell us the details now ....
@@Dub-ro9tk Judge Cedric Simpson was ordered by the Michigan Supreme Court to serve a nine-month suspension without pay for interfering in the police investigation of his intern, who was arrested for driving under the influence in 2013.
That was a mess and a half and I was truly shocked...He dodged that bullet for sure.
google it. I did and found the info immediately. @@Dub-ro9tk
i think this is the first time ive seen judge simpson wrong. if the charges are about him leaving the accident scene for the defendants accident and not the accident of the girls then the girls accident doesnt matter in these charges. and judge simpson cannot do anything about the girls accident because its irrelevant to the current charges. judge simpson should also recuse himself from the case because he was going to give a ruling on things that aren't part of the case. judge simpson is too emotionally involved now because he promised something would happen in the case but again the girls running off the road and dying are not part of the current charges. and whether the defendant say the accident or not is irrelevant.
Judge has allowed emotions to interfere with the right ruling here 😐
name like that, i know you're a fake
I agree..... Simpson is so great because of his emotions but this time I think being a dad hit him hard on this one.
Thank you for bringing this to us, and your editing; very well done.
This judge is not only inappropriate, but he is loud and wrong! He keeps interrupting after telling the attorney he can speak. Is this justice or the schoolyard?
I've seen this lawyer tell his clients to flat out, Shut Up.
Time to go to trial. Judge can only try the defendant on what the state charged him with. Sad case.
Apparently you don’t watch much judge simp. He quotes himself often enough, that he can only try what’s in front of him, even saying it here. lol then in the same breath, continues to try and use the actual case in front of him to pass judgment on this separate case that this defendant is not on trial for. Just bc a bunch of Karen’s want to blame someone else with their dumb kids death. probably the very reason the kids died to begin with. Nothing is ever their precious kids fault; always someone else’s. I mean, if judge simp is so concerned about this, then why is he even contemplating taking this man’s plea, knowing the defendant is lying? Judge simp has thrown out pleas on many occasions for a defendant lying, specifically at sentencing hearings. If this judge truly believed this man was culpable in someone’s death, and then not a peep about admonishing the prosecution for not bringing the applicable charges to hold this person accountable, pathetic! I think his constituents wouldn’t be very happy about allowing such an injustice to side. Not to mention what a horrible disservice to the families to allow this man whom “killed” their loved ones; continue to lie at his sentencing. While also completely skirting any charges related to their loved ones untimely deaths. lol you think anything positive about this absolute judge Judy act he’s doing? Pretending that it resembles any kind of American Justice. lol this is a case of a judge fingering the scales of Justice. The judge brought facts from an unrelated case, which this defendant was never tried for; and neither the defense nor the prosecution argued a motion to have these facts heard in this case. The only thing sad here is the poor defendant who’s tied up bound and gagged to the tracks of this court to be railroaded by the unwitting American Justice system. Judge was completely emotionally involved. Van Laan is the gd man here. The only victim on screen is the defendant. And it’s utterly sad how many people are just “headline” junkies ready to convict a man bc a gaggle of Karen’s pulled on the judge heart strings. Keep in mind “head line” junkies is responsible for the likes of flat earthers. Your non critical thinking is absolutely analogous here. Tata, bunch of people being high off this line of thinking these days. That’s what’s truly sad. Dumb kids got them selves killed, and even in death will forever affect this defendants life. Appeals will overturn any injustice here; judge simp will regret this one day soon. 💯
That lawyer disrespected the court by walking and swaying everywhere
And this is why people are going back to flip phones lol
Excellent editing!! Really REALLY good video!!!!!💯👍🏼
The judge doesn't even let the attorney finish his comments before going off. And the judge did investigate, Sorting through evidence and coming up with a conclusion is an investigation.
16:29 I was wonder how he was going to get that out!🤣Just gave up and said it!
good judge
Judge Simpson is also bringing in his local knowledge. I'm not a lawyer, but I believe Simpson overstepped. He should have forwarded the information from the victim's families to the prosecution and defense, and let them figure it out. The Goggle map was the final nail in the coffin for me: He was effectively entering new evidence which is not the Judge's place, I don't believe.
When a judge goes to investigate on their own, adding questionable evidence, we have a huge problem. Judge pulled up a map that was not in evidence.
Why did the prosecutor not work this out and take it into account before the plea deal?
I suspect they did, but given the totality of the circumstances (including the fact that the decedents rear ended the defendant and then raced away) concluded the plea deal was the best they could do. Surely Simpson is experienced enough to understand that.
@@Dub-ro9tk There were also allegations that the “victims” may have been under the influence when the accident occurred. All things considered, it sounds like it would have been difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant caused the second accident.
What is wrong with the male attorney looks like he is on something he can maintain still and keeps looking around,and moving like he’s ready to run out
I don't think there's anything wrong with the defendants attorney here, besides the fact that he's F-ING BEYOND ANGRY AT JUDGE SIMPSON & RIGHTFULLY SO, THERE'S NO SHOT THAT THIS WAS SOMETHING JUDGE SIMPSON SHOULD'VE EVER DONE.....
CONSIDERING THAT JUDGE SIMPSON HAD ALLUDED TO THE FACT THAT THIS ISN'T IN HIS JOB DUTIES NUMEROUS TIMES, WHILE HE WAS TESTIFYING ABOUT HIS OWN INVESTIGATION!!!
The best advice I got in law school was: when you are pissed off at the judge to always ask for a moment to confer with your client so you can cool off and think through your argument. Had the defense done this, it would have really helped him.
I do appreciate how this clip shows just how contentious and emotional litigation is. Most people never see it. The defense and judge are both having intense emotional reactions, which isn’t uncommon. In fact, this is exactly why I knew litigation was not for me
yes Amanda…agreed. when I first starting watching the day to day magistrates & disctrict courts vs just the big tv trials it was extremely eye opening…
This judge was going to be the prosecution and jury on this regardless. This is clear. The attorney did a great job. The judge needs to recuse himself. He is defying his duty.
Could the defense attorney just file an appeal and explain all of this?
@@kimsy520his objections have to be made known at that time on the record or they can’t be brought up in appeals. Nothing the attorney did was wrong.
@@kimsy520 no need to appeal yet. There is no longer a plea…… they need to get before a different judge. This judge went and looked up his own “evidence.” He needs to be recused.
GREAT CONTENT, THANK YOU! I LUV THIS JUDGE!!
The judge said the intersection where the defendant was at the time of the crash and the location of the crash are about 1,000 feet apart so there's no reason the defendant didn't see it happen. That's 330 yards folks. How many people are really focused on what's happening over 300 yards ahead of them when traveling less than 50mph?
11 mins in and seems like the defense attorney is not too happy with what he's hearing
Most of these are cut and dry with outbursts, people in court being disrespectful , but this makes the judge look BAD. What does the judge mean he wasn’t investigating? He clearly went over facts, discussed what he did after a plea was reached/seemed to be reached, and wasn’t happy with what the plea was. ALSO the defendant’s attorney telling him to recuse himself was SPOT ON! The judge was letting emotions get in the way of LAW. If the prosecution was all set and could go as far as they did with charges THEY DID! Unless they’re terrible at prosecuting! Something definitely isn’t right about this one.
The attorney is correct and if he presses, I am sure the Judge will be removed from the case.
I hope you are right. This is genuinely shocking! Suddenly the judge is the prosecutor, jury, and judge….. he is out of line!
Simpson needs to be careful -- he could find himself facing a reprimand or more by the judicial committee.
The defense attorney appears to be in a zero-gravity environment…he’s fidgeting and appears at times to be floating 😂
This is crazy the is going to far..... the ladies took over the judge mind and he has not stop trying to help the ladies get the man located up for who knows what .. its not about pleasing the mothers it's about the law ....
lol judge just busts out his own map not entered into evidence