JUDGE SIMPSON EXPLODES ON ATTORNEY DURING SENTENCING!
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 13 фев 2024
- Judge Simpson remands a defendant why it’s not wise to lie to him! Yet another example of what our courts deal with every day…
Join to support this channel ($2/mo) to get access to priority chat & extra quick clips:
/ @osgcourtwatch
SOVEREIGN CIDIOTS IN COURT: • SOVEREIGN CITIZENS IN ...
KAREN’S IN COURT: • KARENS IN COURT !!!
CRAZY TRAFFIC COURT: • FUN IN TRAFFIC COURT !!!
HAVE YA SEEN THIS ONE YET? • HAVE YA SEEN THIS ONE ...
LAW NERDS ASSEMBLE: • LAW NERDS ASSEMBLE !!
SHORT CHUCKLES: • Short Chuckles...
This remix is intended to provide better insight into how our courts and the folks who run them administer justice to the public they serve. Remember they have to deal with folks who are often having their worst day on a daily basis. We also hope to bring you cases with interesting legal concepts, twists and interactions you may not encounter elsewhere…
This commentary remix work constitutes a fair use of any copyrighted materials under section 107 of the US copyright law. Video was edited only to add relevant commentary and to reduce time in the hopes it will be more convenient to be viewed by more folks thereby raising public interest. All defendants are innocent until they aren’t…officially.
#court #zoom #crazy #sovereign citizen #sovcit #trending #funny #karen #judge #moor 
Развлечения
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.
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.
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 agree with the defendant’s attorney. It _is_ inappropriate for the court to conduct an independent investigation into facts that are irrelevant to the offense that the defendant actually pleaded guilty to. He 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.
Even _if_ the defendant was lying about whether he saw the second accident, it is irrelevant to the charge of leaving the scene of the first accident and should therefore be irrelevant to the sentence. The plea agreement did not contemplate jail time, and no one would reasonably expect jail time for leaving the scene of a minor fender-bender that you didn’t cause.
The judge is trying to appease the grieving mothers, who are unable to accept that their daughters caused their own deaths, by punishing the defendant for an accident that he was not charged with.
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.
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 judge is wrong. Recuse yourself; you are emotionally involved. This is not just.
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.
I would not necessarily say the defense lawyer was ambushed. Judge Simpson has spoken about his concerns about this sentencing the first time about a month ago, and made it clear that the girls deaths were being considered.
I do agree that that he should have not consider the deaths at all for this sentencing. That is not what he plead to.
@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?
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.
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.
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 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.
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
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.
@@OSGCourtWatch Exactly, I watched it several times and there is something missing from this case. I wish I saw the first hearing, I'm just watching this for this first time and I understand about emotions especially with the deaths of two girls. Yet, the defendant's statements doesn't fit. This seems to be a complex case looking forward to March.
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.
Attorney is right in this case. Judge just brought their own investigation and argument in at the last minute. It gives them no opportunity to fairly argue against it, plus it's not really what the judge should be doing at all. They are not meant to be making up their own facts like this.
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.
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
I think Judge Simpson went way out of bounds on this one. I completely agree with the defense attorney and this is just wrong.
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
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.
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
Judge Simpson should recuse himself. It sure seems like the defense attorney has a valid argument. I think that's partly what made Simpson so incensed. The March session could be a doozy.
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.
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.
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.
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.
@@Easy_Going__that's exactly the wrong thing to do
@@Easy_Going__He 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
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
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.
Great job to the defense attorney for advocating and properly advising his client …
I generally like judge Simpson, but he is clearly very wrong here. The attorney should be livid here.
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 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.
The defense attorney was correct the judge overstepped and he did his own investigation! The judge allowed the parents to sway him!
This is a fairly old video. I saw a second part to this where the judge backtracks a whole heap, but this is still unresolved because the judge wanted to throw the book at the defendant for things not part of the charge, found he couldn't and is dragging the process out.
@@jamesrowden303 do you have a link of the follow up?
Nah, I think it was live and SImpson deletes his quite soon after the livestream.
@@tonettesherman4323
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.
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.
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
He also just said.. I believe jail time is appropriate given what I see..
his own investigation.
That’s wrong!
Corrupt Simpson. Look him up
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.
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.
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
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
Thanks for your dedication to your channel Squishy. We appreciate it. Keep up the great work. 🤘
I can't imagine Judge Simpson will have anything more to do with this case. If we give the prosecutor's office the benefit of the doubt, then their charges and plea deal were based on what they believed they'd be able to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Judge Simpson seems to have just thrown that out of the window, listened to the victim's families, looked at the evidence, looked at Google Maps, and come to his own conclusion about what happened without actually hearing evidence, arguments, etc. from both sides. I think Mr Van Laan could definitely have been more diplomatic, but once Judge Simpson started his monologue, there was only one way this was going to end.
Attorney Van Laan was doing his job and advocating for his client versus bowing to the judges investigation. Judge Simpson attempts to intimidate attorneys by getting loud.
All Van Laan did was try to put his objection on the record. Simpson exploded at him for doing so. Those are the actions of a man who knows he messed up.
Yeah, rewatching it, Simpson kinda worked himself up such that he probably would've flown off the handle no matter what Van Laan said.
Power gone to his head on this one - shame as I like his no nonsense approach in general.
The defense lawyer did nothing wrong, tf you talking about could’ve been more diplomatic?
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
Thanks for the follow up Squishy!
@squish do you have this case all in a playlist? Thank you.
Thanks for posting this update. My heart goes out to the family and Judge Simpson. ❤❤
Love your commentary and that you don't interrupt the cases! Your videos are great!
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.
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. 💯
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 lawyer is absolutely right.
I'm sorry...love judge Simpson but he's absolutely in the wrong here. He was ready to sentence this guy weeks ago...then let these girl's parents give a statement then after the trial was over did an investigation all on his own. The defense atty is 💯 right here.
Not true. Judges can take judicial knowledge of his own personal knowledge of a location and it has been ruled that a judge can take judicial knowledge of distances etc provided by google maps.
@@Nclghtexcept they don't get to gather their own facts and make rulings on facts not in evidence.
judge was wrong and out of line. he absolutely investigated. then he talked forever and the wouldnt let the lawyer speak.
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!
This is one of the most interesting cases I’ve seen. Glad I caught the first part. Thanks OSG!
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?
Judge Simpson... You know better than this. What a bummer...
Another great vid! Thanks squishy!!
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.
Keep doing your thing Squishy!!!
Wow, you got this out quick!
Thanks for all the work you do! Editing, followups & content are what make your channel my fave!!
Wildly inappropriate is right. Simpson needs to recuse himself. So thankful the man has a lawyer to fight for him.
Atty Joshua Van Laan should send ina complaint to the review board. Simpson has had to appear before the judge's review board before.
He sure did. I remember that. JS … even his conduct lacked decorum. Yelling like a toddler OVER the defense counsel … after asking for his response. I’m like, “Dude you asked him and now you’re talking over him”
He shouldn't because Judge Simpson read what was given to him and he based his opinion on the evidence and I think he's 100% right he just went about it the wrong way and got emotional over it
@@brandenantonino23 then they need to charge him with contributing to the accident.
@@brandenantonino23 Looking at location data is not enough to prove where a person is.
Regardless, it is irrelevant. Even if the defendant saw the accident, he didn't cause it.
@@nobodyimportant7804 the judge is gonna base his verdict off if what's in front of him if the defendant didn't give information to prove he didn't cause it then that's his fault
The attorney us absolutely right. I love judge Simpson.
You love a corrupt judge?
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 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.
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 is realy wrong on this one
They all behaved badly but he started lying from the get go.
@@jackieraulerson2005💯
JS, investigating and yelling like a banshee
Defense counsel should BE THERE IN PERSON (even for a simple sentencing hearing because we all saw this fly off the rails and turn into a cluster F)
And Ms Reiser: your office was negligent and you need to NOT be the (A)DA for this jurisdiction. You’ve failed ! This IS your fault.
Interesting session, and even more interesting comments!I'm waiting to see the next hearing!
Holy WOW! Amazing that it isn’t over! Thank God for judge Simpson! Thank you for your work!
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
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.
11 mins in and seems like the defense attorney is not too happy with what he's hearing
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 ....
how acurate are those 911 pin points?Yes with defence good call.
This is why they need to have a trial on this if they are going to sentence him for it.
The location a 911 operator gets when you call them is not precise at all, usually. It's based on the tower's best guess based on your signal strength and which sector of the antenna is receiving your signal. All kinds of things can throw it off, including weather, interference (even local interference on the phone side that the tower can't see), buildings, vehicles nearby, etc. The GPS location reported by your phone *can* be fairly accurate, if it has already acquired a signal, and you are sitting still, and you have those location services enabled on your device. But there is a lot of room for uncertainty in those 911 location pins. A jury would be right to have reasonable doubt.
Exactly. Looks like the defendant has enough money to hire his own attorney, and I'm sure his attorney can find an expert witness who can cast doubt on just how accurate the 911 call location data is, or another one that could possibly use cell phone tower location data or the vehicle's black box data to estimate the location of the defendant.
However, as others have noted, this should not be an issue, as the death of those girls took place well after the crime for which the defendant pleaded guilty to. Judge Simpson might as well say that he's sending the guy to jail (contrary to the plea agreement) because the defendant lied to his wife about being at work late 3 days after the accident, it's that irrelevant.
Answer: not accurate at all depending on location. They attempt to triangulate you between cell phone towers, some cell phone towers can be miles apart from each other. this judge is basing the stuff off of a thousand feet which is easily outside of visible distance especially with tree cover, bushes etc. I mean a good example of this is if I walk around in my building I work in, the coverage is spotty and my GPS literally thinks I'm driving from end to end of a 1.5 mile long building.
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.
Wow! Looking forward to more after the next hearing
I agree with the defense council on this.
I second that agreement with the Defense Counsel. Attorney here. I totally understand that the Judge has to take into account the totality of the circumstances when implementing the sentencing guidelines for the guilty plea made. However, the Judge is NOT permitted to conduct his own examination and/or controverting of the facts presented in the plea deal made. While the Judge has the authority to accept or reject any deal struck in his courtroom. He is very emotionally attached to this case (whether its morally right or not), legally speaking he should separate himself from any sort or bias or outside feelings. I get the court’s position. However, Defense is 💯 to state on the record how inappropriate it is for the Judge to conduct his own, what does seem like an arbitrary investigation, of the facts concerning whereabouts. It was also good that the Defense also motioned for the Judge to recuse himself on the record, which could potentially be used as a basis for appeal (assuming an actual trial went forward or the new initial plea was pulled and trial set)
Wasn’t it a bench trial/ or sentencing and he only reviewed existing evidence. Calling out a lie is just that. Calling out a lie. If a judge can’t consider that at sentencing then I don’t know when it should be? Frankly I’ve watched many of his cases and he’s this conscientious with all of them.
@@jmcrazy7wagree, he could have asked th we clarifications and questions during the trial. You can't just retry the facts because it bugs you that something may have been missed by prosecution.
The decision can be appealed, right? So if it's decided Judge Simpson was overstepping, it can be done then.
I wouldn't be surprised if this matter ends in the same plea deal. Anything else would be easily overturned on appeal. Judge Simpson knows it and if he doesn't his boss will let him know.
What Judge Simpson did here will almost certainly guarantee an appeal if this isn't completely dismissed before then. Frankly, the guy didn't do anything that most the rest of us wouldn't. Someone ran into his car, then fled. He chased them down. It doesn't excuse the crime, but it's not like it was a nefarious act. SImpson stepped outta line here, and I think he realizes that, he just didn't like getting called out.
It could be, but I think the defendant wants to withdraw his plea instead, as this isn’t what was bargained for.
I *think* when you enter a plea you forfeit the right to appeal. Since this is going sideways fast withdrawal plea would reset and stop sentencing by JS. Let things cool down, talk to prosecutor (I have a feeling she feels the same as defendant’s attorney). Will be interesting.
@@missmermaid6249 if Judge Simpson accepted the agreed upon plea deal there's no reason for the defense to appeal.
But he is rejecting the plea and if when he imposes different sentence it guaranteed will be reversed and I think the judge knows it.
Imo, the judge will need to reverse his course and accept the deal. He'll find some words to save face.
The moral of the story is compassion (for the victims' mothers) cannot supercede protocol. Impartiality was lost.
Thanks!
Wow...I'm so disappointed in Judge Simpson right now. The whole situation was horrible, but he truly overstepped here. And, since he appears unable to be impartial here, I really do believe he should recuse himself from this case.
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.
That Judge was way out there. To surmise and say what he the Judge thought is a little too much. The defendant was there for sentencing not have a Judge tell him his lying. Very inappropriate.
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.
When the defense attorney said that the judge was doing his own investigation, the way the prosecutor looked up into the camera was priceless! That look said, "ohhhhhhhh I wouldn't be making accusations sir..."
This should be good.
I don't get why the judge is acting for the prosecution? That's not his fucking job. We have a system of fairness in the country were the prosecutor makes a case and the defense takes their claims and gives their best argument and evidence against their arguments. What the fuck is this Judge doing making an argument for the prosecution that the defense has no recourse to defend themselves against? The Judge is making a claim in his own that apparently the prosecution did not bring up and the defense has no way for defending itself against it.
Whatching Van Laan through this, how he was constantly moving around, fidgeting and shaking his head... reminded me of a bored toddler.
I don’t think he was bored. I think he was caught off guard by the court deciding to do its own investigation into facts that were not relevant to the crime that his client actually pleaded guilty to (leaving the scene of the _first_ accident) and then considering those facts in deciding to sentence his client to jail time.
I agree with the defense attorney that the 911 calls & second accident shouldn't be considered in his client's sentencing. His client was pleading guilty to leaving the scene of the first accident. Judge Simpson let his emotions get the better of him when he agreed to listen to the 911 calls. The mothers were asking the wrong person to consider that evidence. They should've been asking the prosecutor why charges were not filed in the second accident. The prosecutor must've felt they didn't have enough evidence to find this man guilty of causing the second accident. I believe Judge Simpson needs to recuse himself from this case. This hearing provides enough evidence for the defense to appeal any possible guilty verdict.
This judge acts as if he's in a movie or something.
Aside from the procedural issues, I just think it's very difficult to prove/disprove what somebody else claims they saw or didn't see. You can look at street maps all day long and say, "Well they should be able to see that," but there are all kinds of reasons why a person might not have seen whatever it is. And the 911 call center claiming that the defendant's phone is pinging from a different place (only a very short distance from where he claims to be) is also explainable by the way cell towers work.
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.
I love judge Simpson, however I think this Defense attorney is going to bat for his client and I applaud him! 👏👏👏✌️ can’t wait for the update!
I dont know anything about this case, but i will say that JS did seem way out of line here. That attorney didnt hardly get 2 worda out before the judge got defensive and cut him off. That wasnt a good look.
Agreed. I generally like and respect Judge Simpson, but you don't have to be watching his courtroom long to realize that he is highly ego-driven and has little to no tolerance for anyone suggesting that he might be wrong. He has this way of saying the right words to imply that he's open to being challenged, but he always gets offended, interrupts, and raises his voice whenever anyone comes directly at him, even respectfully and as part of their job as an advocate. I've noticed a definite blind spot that JS has in this regard. He's not accustomed to being challenged in any way, and he's stubborn and emotional if anyone tries it. Not a good look as far as judicial temperament.
@@-HeyLyd- There's one case where people were cheering him on for going off on a defendant (because she was the tennant). The kicker? He went off on her for saying someone lied, but what she actually said was that the other side accused her of lying. Judge Simpson went on an entire tirade about respect and not accusing people of lying and pretty much ended the case. I don't know the details, maybe the landlord was 100% right and the verdict was deserved, but Simpson gave verdict based on what he misheard and it's been bugging me ever since watching it.
@@bluegreen5377 That's so funny, because I saw the very hearing you're talking about and noticed the same thing you did. She attempted to correct his mistake, but he was so done and wouldn't listen. I really admire Simpson, but I wish he were more aware of this weakness in himself. I've seen him make a few bad calls because he let his ego get in the way of his usual reason and fairness
Yeah I agree with the attorney on this one, although I also think it's weird that the defendant was in the courtroom and the attorney wasn't.
The judge has had at least one case where Michigan JTC ( on 15 counts 2014) said he needs to be removed from the bench. This is not the only time this judge was out of line. The one I found in like 2 minutes was about him interfering with a case involved one of his interns on a DUI. The jtc removed him from the bench. The State Supreme Count lifted the lifetime removal and suspended him for 9 months.
The defense attorney appears to be in a zero-gravity environment…he’s fidgeting and appears at times to be floating 😂
Huge fan of Judge Simpson. May be the whole reason I tune in. However, I agree with the defense on this one. He was doing everything he could to put this guy in jail. As soon as he brought the map out and everything, I was like no way, what is he doing. Good job on that lawyer not backing down.
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