@@rigormortis1355 The Judge said, "If you want to be here for the decision, that's your business." Essentially, he gave the prosecutor permission to be there or not to be there.
The lead prosecutor was not present through most of the trial. This brat and two other attorneys were. Those three were present for the judge to give his ruling on whether there was enough evidence to move forward. There was to be no more argument on the subject. Just a ruling which was in the prosecutions favor. Yelling and being disrespectful of the judge calling the procedure a sham is not peaceful. His demeanor was stormy.
Maybe due to the fact that criminals are simply released back into society, over and over again, to commit more and most often even worse crimes. Sounds to me like this guy is upset that the case is proceeding without a country prosecutor, who may actually see to it that such a criminal isn't just released back into the streets? Probably because the judge has personal plans, which he doesn't want any backed up cases to interfere with. This is actually quite common with judges.
Not really. If the judge said not to cancel the appointment and the other prosecutor said she would have a replacement for the day then the judge should have kept better records or called the day off.
"Prosecutor Mark Sleeper walked out of the courtroom after a heated argument with Judge Mark Sleeper..." So both the Prosecutor and the Judge were named "Mark Sleeper"?!? What an amazing coincidence!
Mark Sleeper walked out to avoid conflict of interest being the Judge and the Prosecutor to the same case. He chose to remain the judge and dismissed the Prosecutor.
Uh, they don't need to be. Judges already have a ton of power already. Maybe you think a wrong decision was made, but, they are definitely supposed to have power.
I have watched the trial and suspected by Day 3 that the judge is biased toward the defense. He has given alot of free reign to the defense and seriously hand tied the prosecution. Ms Schiffel stood up to the judge the other day and he got snarky. GOOD on this prosecutor for calling out the judge and standing on his values. The judge seemed VERY uncomfortable with the facts of the phone call coming out in open court. Kudos to the prosecutor for getting them out. Well done!
Is it not common to give "a lot of free reign" to a defendant if he is defending himself? I remember something similar from the Ronnie Onael trial and that at one point in the trial, the judge even explicitly said that she was giving more freedom to the defendant.
@@carolinacremasta277 yeah, this is the United States. Innocent until proven guilty and all. The burden of proof IS on the government to prove an offense before they deprive a citizen of their freedom.
What's the case about? Honestly, prosecutors probably get away with so much, I don't feel any sympathy towards the prosecution. Their job is supposed to be difficult.
@@carolinacremasta277 But you can’t rule that hearsay evidence is fine to be used for the defense but deny hearsay evidence for use by the prosecution which is what this judge did. That’s not leeway. It’s bias.
So disappointing to see a judge act this way. If he told the prosecutor not to change her appointment and that it wouldn't be a problem, then it's reprehensible that he went forward with the hearing in her absence.
@@kazbee6978 So, you're saying the judge is both biased against the defense and prosecution? This was the prosecuting attorney storming about of the room like a baby boy, not the defense.
So a prosecuting attorney walking out on the reading of the verdict because another prosecutor was not there to hear it was the right thing to do? What point was there in that when clearly neither of them needed to be there for it to be read?
That's not the way this works. If an attorney has a problem with the disposition of the case, they may seek an appeal in another venue. Tantrums never work in a legal setting.
It's a good thing that we can believe in judges that represent the justice system by doing what is morally and ethically correct. If you didn't pick up on my sarcasm what a sham. It's good to see that there are actual lawyers out there who are willing to do the right thing. I didn't know those guys existed
I had a friend who was doing a DUI trial whent he DA got mad and walked out. My friend continued his cross-examination. When the DA came back in later, he asked my friend what happened. He told him, "Typical cross exam of a dui expert." It's really childish behavior.
Even if one wants to assume malice on the judge's part, how exactly is walking out of the courtroom going to help the state's case? The only thing it does is stroke the feelings of those who don't see past the romance of an act of rebellion. If his colleague's presence was so important then it just means one thing: he didn't do his homework, and intends to make it seem like he's the victim of anything except his own incompetence. EDITED the state/people is their client, but I kinda see now how that might lead to a misunderstanding
As opposed to prosecutors? You think beard boy is above withholding information from the defense to secure a conviction? You are right to not trust judges but you should distrust prosecutors even more. Also, he was right to raise an objection but throwing a tantrum like a little baby boy who didn't get his way is at best unprofessional.
To give context- this was an attorney from the prosecution walking out. The judge was about to give his decision regarding the Rule 29 motion from the defense. Ultimately, the judge did not dismiss the case.
@@emmasanders6226 It's absolutely routine to ask for a dismissal as a challenge to any and all evidence presented. It's usually denied and the defense then moves to defend against the case the prosecution presented.
@@emmasanders6226 I don’t know how normal it is, but a directed verdict can be asked for the defense stating the feel the prosecution has not meet the burden of proof after presenting. If the judge agrees the defendant is effect found not guilty. If the judge disagrees the defense then will present their case.
The junior prosecutor is expecting the judge to toss the case since that's what he's ruling on. He's embarrassed and doesn't want to take the heat alone without his boss there. However the judge is about to rule in his favor. He had nothing to worry about, but he showed everyone he had no confidence in his own case. I don't blame him either, they had nothing on this guy. Like they didn't even prove a crime was committed sort of nothing. He should never have been charged in the first place.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
He's ridiculous. All arguments from both sides for the issue the judge is ruling on have already been presented. He is just making his decision known to enter it into the record. This is purely theatrics on this attorneys part.
What does the D.A mean tho, him and 2 other prosecutors we're there why do they need 4. Most judges DO NOT like to hold a jury up if they don't have to.. he should of been held in contempt like you or I would for goin off like that to a judge... I can see if she was the only prosecutor, but she wasn't.... Not guilty is a just verdict in this case anyway. What was a sham ,was them charging this guy without the evidence to back it. Smdh. Sad
Judges are not dictators and have to follow court proceedings. He intentionally shifted a date after instructing someone he would not. That's malfeasance by definition. After the prosecutor walked off, the Judge admitted to the room he didn't care because he had already made up his mind beforehand, which is another violation of court proceedings.
Judge is a tool. Seen this happened few times where they say ok go to your appointment/ you can do this then next thing you know the judge acts like the conversation never happens in the court room. Lawyer did the right thing.
I think a lot of the people commenting here defending the prosecutor didn’t watch the full trial… what they did to the defendant was morally wrong and I could tell the judge was only trying to seek truth and be fair
@@cabubsmom02 Saying that a person was elected, as a counter point for reviews is a little confusing. Are you suggesting that once someone is elected, they are incapable of misusing their power? I didn't really think this judge was being too intimidating, except for the part where he was saying "you're going to sit here". I would agree with reviewing people in power especially. I'm sure you get reviewed every year by your employer.
@@cabubsmom02 Careful here, you're making way to much sense here. Gotta remember that there are soft people walking around there days. They get offended if you breath the same air they do so when they share their "opinion", they think it's law. There was nothing wrong here and yup, it's up to the people on if he keeps his job. The Prosecutors office can file a complaint and this case would be reviewed which is done more than we know and unless there is an issue, we never hear the outcome.
Heck to the yeah! We are all humans and not one of us hasn't had a day where we didn't need a bit of oversight. So much more for people that can effect so many lives.
Why is everybody in the comment section against this judge? I haven’t watch trial yet. My immediate reaction is it doesn’t matter who is in the courtroom because the decisions already been made. And telling one of the two prosecutors that they don’t have to cancel the appointment is not necessarily the same as saying there will be a continuance. So are people in the comment section not understanding this or is this judge a bad judge? Did the prosecutor think the judge was gonna rule against them so wanted the elected prosecutor to be there in hopes that the judge wouldn’t rule against them because of that significance, even though that shouldn’t matter?d
The junior prosecutor is expecting the judge to toss the case here so he wants his boss there to take the heat. However the judge is about to rule in his favor. He had nothing to worry about, he just showed everyone he has no confidence in his own case. I don't blame him either, they had nothing.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
Prosecutors didn't want to show up for work. The guy was found not guilty on all charges because the charges were bogus. The people of CZcams are upset they couldn't send an innocent man to prison for a crime he didn't commit. They want the judge to suffer for it.
@@oni-one574 No Judge should be up on ethics violations. He lied to the prosecutor and told her to keep her appointment which she did then continued the case behind her back. This was a sham trial through and through and dude was guilty as F+++ and of that there is no doubt but go ahead and celebrate putting a killer back out on the street. Hope he dates your daughter next.
@@onewhoknows5969 you do understand end of the day jurors found him not guilty. Did the judge took away evidence from trial that hurt the prosecution's case ? Or took away a witness out from giving testimony.
@@onewhoknows5969 Not a killer, acquitted on all counts. Could see throughout the trial that the state failed to meet their burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. You need to remember the presumption of innocence and that burden of proof protect those who are targeted by lazy or corrupt cops. Going with a vibe or gut feeling isn’t enough and that is something to celebrate because the presumption of innocence protects you. For 'It's better that 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man be wrongly convicted” is truly meaningful when you or your loved ones are that one innocent man. You need to go watch some vids on innocent people being wrongfully convicted who finally get justice after decades in prison and admit (if you watched all of this trial) that the jury made the right decision based squarely on the states failure to meet their burden of proof.
What the ADA did is uncalled for. The DA doesn't appear at all cases and it's the job of ADAs just like him to represent the office when needed. Sounds like the millennial came out in him. Guess those poor feelings needed stroking.
When it comes to courtrooms there's nothing more I like seeing that an attorney telling the judge off kudos to that attorney for putting that ignorant power hungry judge in his place 👏👏👏👏👏👏
I have no problem with any attorney standing up to a judge, but walking out is childish. It also abandons the client, which in this case, are the people of the state. I guess they really don't need an attorney.
@@jx14aby well that judge was berating that attorney and nobody has to take being berated it's a free country that attorney had the right to walk out of the courtroom. Would you let someone berate you?
Is the judge just reading the decision he made? The trial is over at this point so why would it matter if additional members of the prosecution were not present?
He was reading a decision on a motion, not the decision on the case itself. The defense raised a motion, and this is the judge making a decision on said motion. Of course, making a decision on a motion and then moving forward without both sides being present is highly unethical.
the judge told the court at the end of the previous day's session that he would deliver his ruling on a motion 29 first thing in the morning, he said the court would start as usual at 8:30 and the jury would be brought in around 09:30,
@@MegaMech Yes there is. I did so in 2016 in a case involving high level police corruption and as a result a corrupt judge and his Chief Magistrate were both exposed and removed from office as well as the police corruption referred to the State Parliamentary Corruption Panel for investigation which resulted in three corrupt Chief Commissioners and a number of subordinate police officers also being exposed. If a corrupt magistrate thinks they can drown out exposure within a court of law with audible volume then it is not only necessary but entirely appropriate to shout over the top of them to ensure the subject evidence is placed upon the court record. Here endeth the lesson.
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh why did he basically trick the prosecution by saying it would be fine if she wasn't there and then on that day "welp she's not here sorry you don't get to argue now"
@@nevadanate4957 They do get to argue. I'm sure that lawyer is more than good enough on his own. The notion they need the other attorney is almost certainly false.
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh He came back about 60 seconds later and continued as normal. He was expecting the judge to toss the case and he didn't want to take the heat alone, but the judge is going to rule in favor of the prosecution. It happens about 5 seconds after this clip end. He had nothing to worry about in the first place.
@@MargotHypnos Have you never made an appointment before? Some appointments are planned months ahead of time too, this is why she got in to contact with the judge to see if she needed to cancel it or not. The judge, IMO, acted in bad faith and said she didn't need to cancel it.
No, not most. Very few are like this. Just because they don't rule in your favor doesn't mean that they are corrupt. That said, this guy needs to be recalled.
While nowadays many judges are partisan hacks in civil sector we still have some good ones in the state crimianl sector. Anything federal in 99% corrupted though
And he has shown that integrity since day one of this 'trial'. If I was him I would have left day one when I saw how this 'judge' decided to let the defense attorney do whatever she wants to do.
I had a Maine judge tell me" You have no rights" She also stated that she will side with the police 100% of the time. I was fighting a simple pot change when it was still illegal. The state took my license away for a traffic ticket that was paid off. I kept the receipt, thank god. The cops searched my car under the pretense that I had no license. I literally had the receipt for the ticket in my car. They ignored the facts and searched my car. The found half a gram of concentrates and tried to charge me for heroin. In court I made the point nothing was even tested. They dropped the heroin charge and made me pay 420$ for the illegal search and violation of my rights, and then she stated "you have no rights". Also had the school cop try and charge me with a needle when he took a marijuana pipe from me at the age of 17. I came from a broken home and at this point in my life I was working, going to high school, and paying the bills for me and my older brother.
Oh yeah I represented myself with no legal knowledge. The judge asked to speak with me privately in her chambers, and she tried to convince me to go to law school. She said I represented myself incredible well. I might had taken her advice, had she not just make a mockery of the legal system.
The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would do, the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state!
People commenting negatively about Judge Wolaver CLEARLY did NOT watch any of the trial. He demonstrated the upmost respect, professionalism, & judicial integrity throughout the trial. If I ever had to be tried, I pray to have a judge like him residing. The prosecution did not need each person present for him to simply rule on this motion, they already presented arguments for him to consider.
People have no idea what a good judge looks like. They think just because a judge rules in favor of the prosecution, they're a good judge, but when they rule in favor of the defense, they're bad. And many prosecutors are flat-out crybabies who think they get to win all the time.
So this is a motion to dismiss, meaning the judge is deciding if he wants to toss the case or not. This is the junior prosecutor and he's expecting the judge to toss the case, because he knows the have no evidence. He wants his boss to be there to take the heat because he's embarrassed. However the judge is about to rule in his favor so he had nothing to worry about. He just revealed that he has no confidence in his case.
I know nothing about this case. But on its face, this video should have resulted in the "lawyer" being held in contempt and taken into custody. If you disagree with what a judge is doing, you can appeal his decisions. Refusing to follow the orders of a judge is unacceptable.
I think he did follow orders, the person absent was not in court because the judge said for that person to not cancel the appt they had but was now told they should have been in court. Typical judge.
Definitely should have cited him for Contempt of Court. That kind of disrespect shouldn't be allowed to pass. It sets a bad precedent. He should of said "You walk out of here you will be cited with Contempt". I'm surprised the Judge let it pass.
Good instincts. The judge is moments away from ruling in his favor. He just expects the judge to toss the case because he knows he has nothing and wants his boss there to take the heat. They should have never charged this guy in the first place.
As honorable as the prosecutor may seem, he's the one out of line and should have been sanctioned. He's the officer of the court and the representative of the state. That would be like a defense attorney abandoning their client at sentencing and walking out.
I am not a legal professional but as a citizen and a peer to which I would be judged I would be mad at the judge too. The reason he was fine announcing his decisions without the prosecutor is the same reason he announced without the other lawyer. He made is decision and no one could change his mind or have a say while he was in that room. I think the lawyer just wanted it to be "fair and just".
They weren't there to discuss the merits of the case, they were there to render a decision that was already made and there was a prosecutor there so why did he need someone else with him? Sounds like he was just trying to delay.
So nice to see a judge standing up to a prosecutor. This doesn't happen often, mostly because judges see the same prosecutors over and over and over, so they develop a report. Not saying that is a bad thing, but it does, I think, disadvantage defense counsel.
I would ask the judge to remove himself as he might be bias about the case. if not, I would ask for a motion to remove judge on the bench right there and then.
He is the legal representation. The judge is about to rule in his favor. He just assumed that the judge would toss the case because he knows it's garbage. He wants his boss there to take the heat.
I'm confused. From most of the comments here it seems that 'this judge is corrupt' because he is somehow favoring the defense by going forward with the trial on day seven when one of the two prosecuting attorneys is absent for a day. After the prosecution has rested their case and the defense is about to start putting forward their case. Is it common for judges to send the jury home for a day when one of the lawyers has 'an appointment' that they made the court aware of a week before the trial began? There must be some other stuff behind this that I'm not aware of...
Sometimes the judge will go ahead and takeoff in the middle of a trial, but many times they will not. A lot of times the judge will not even stop trial if an important witness doesn’t show up, they would just say too bad for that side. So this judge moving on is not wrong at all. I guess the only possible point is that the judge may have told the prosecutor that they would stop the trial. But that’s not actually what I heard the prosecutor say. I heard the prosecutor say that the judge told the prosecutor that they did not have to cancel their appointment, but that’s not the same thing as saying that they’re gonna cancel court. As for everybody saying the judge is corrupt, I’m embarrassed that these people have the ability to vote. That is where I’m leading. I’ve also saw a few comments that were very lengthy and were verbatim the same, so I’m almost wondering if the prosecutor is on here creating different accounts posting some of the stuff. I’m 100% serious. Because to say this judge is corrupt is something only somebody with no more than a brain at 50% processing ability would say. Maybe the judge my mistake, maybe you didn’t. But he say he’s corrupt is absolutely absurd. So I agree with you.
@@kurtdowney1489 The judge is ruling on a motion to dismiss by the defense. This junior prosecutor storms out because he expects the judge to toss the case and he wants his boss there to take the heat. However the judge is about to rule in his favor, so he had nothing to worry about.
Judge is ruling on a motion to dismiss. This junior prosecutor expects him to toss the case because he knows it's garbage. He wants his boss there to take the heat. However the judge is about to rule in favor of the prosecution so he had nothing to worry about. All he did was demonstrate that he had no confidence in his own case. I don't blame him either, they had nothing.
------ not having one side present is ex-parte and ethical rules typically forbid one side proceeding without the other side present. This attorney knows that and so does the judge ---------- this judge should be held accountable........and judges HATE being questioned, since they are often of the mindset that they know better than anyone else.
that is not even remotely true. either party has the option to be or not to be in the proceeding regarding a ruling. Also, the state was there being represented by another colleague. State attorneys have too much power and are entitled to absolute immunity, which is why the judicial system is such a joke in this country.
@@SterlingSigurdsen Not to mention the judges are affiliated with each of the political parties. Partisan Judges should reigned in, and laws enacted to force that crap out of our judicial systems.
@@afcgeo882 they have the right to be their after the judge made he's decision, but don't have to be there to hear it, the time to argue against or for it would be at the hearing on the motion, not during the judges final decision. This motion was already ruled on and heard by both parties. You really need to read the rules and proceedings of criminal procedure, and you are wrong, they do have absolute immunity, which is why cases are over turned so much. It is due to the fact the state attorneys can basically do what ever they want without any consequences. The state attorney or parties in regards to a hearing do not have to be there as it turns into a default judgement. If you go to a proceeding, and the state doesn't show up, the defendant is granted favorable. If the defendant doesn't show up, they are held in contempt and issued a warrant for their arrest to be brought forth to the court. They can however refuse to attend a hearing that they already know the out come of said hearing, as long as their attorney is present for them on their behalf. However they cannot refuse to be present upon sentencing. The state does not have be present for sentencing to be heard, and the judge can then handout any sentence deemed fit, whether it is basis towards or against the defendant.
I agree with the lawyer. This judge is a total a-hole if what we heard here is true. An attorney doing the right thing is amazing. I love it, and I'm here for it! If the opposing side would have had any integrity they would have done the same thing and refused to continue. Things happen in life, appointments get missed, and especially if the judge had prior notification and explanation there was no excuse for him to say she "chose" not to be there today. It isn't a choice if you can't show up to something as important as a court date, it's not something you just "choose" not to appear for, and not just implying, but stating that someone chose not to appear is a sign of bias on the judges part. I can't believe this. This is wrong. I don't know the case here, but this snapshot of this judge doesn't look good. Fortunately he's old, and he'll be in the dirt soon enough, but if you ask me, not soon enough. There's too many rotten judges, and it's causing our prisons to overflow unlike any other nation on the Earth except for Thailand and some Central American banana republic. Even Russia doesn't imprison the percentage of their population that we do, so we have a real problem with judges here since they ultimately put people in prison, and it seems to be their goal. Justice should be their goal, not filling prison cells and rehab centers.
If what the attorney said was correct the opposing side was the missing county prosecutor. Sounds like she had a prior appointment which the judge told her not to cancel and everyone was under the impression that the court proceeding would be rescheduled. However, the judge made it sound like she missed the court date of her own choice and without his input. It's a good thing the defense attorney set the record straight.
@@thecounselingcouch68 He's correct in opposing, but not correct in acting like a petulant child. I wonder how many times beard boy has withheld information from the defense so he can secure a conviction. I trust prosecutors less than judges.
The prosecution is present though? If they wanted a second prosecutor there they don't have a right to that. If it's a sham appeal, which is why the judge keeps repeating it's noted. It's a challenge to appeal it.
They do because they get paid for every person they put in jail. When your prisons are privatized they need to be full to make money. No one goes as a volunteer so the companies who own the prisons, pay the judges to fill them up.
This is the best pay off I’ve seen between Law Enforcement Agencies. You do not have the right connection made. I’d like to get a connection made in the D.A.’s office. Any imperfections will be found. They will have to be made perfect. Don’t confess ever. Two and two is not four.
I've often wondered why you don't just start your own government and justice system. Base it on better laws and supervision, and start using that to solve cases that involve corruption. You can't fix a toxic mess, you need to bury it and seal it off, like Chernobyl. This has been done in history, and should be done if a system is so corrupt, nothing is no longer trusted. Plan it, involve people from all stratum of life, write down a constitution and do it small scale first, and just ignore the corrupt system.
@@shanestewart4905 That's the point. The government can't even solve gun crime, when most people are for background checks and gun control. Thus, a new government is needed. Take money out of it, take out career politicians, have observers follow legal proceedings, and so on. Start it in a city, then a state, then keep expanding. They've been trying to fix a single issue for decades. It's not happening. At some point you have to give up, go to the tennis court, and declare you are now the government.
So I watched this a couple of times and did not see a “heated” argument nor anyone “storming” out of any courtroom. I saw an attorney calmly raise an objection and then walked out of the courtroom.
There definitely wasn’t a heated argument, but he definitely stormed out of the courtroom. When you yell that this process is a sham that is heated. And when you storm out, that is storming out. So I’m not sure what exactly watched.
You saw a very unprofessional and rude attorney walk out of a courtroom which was disrespectful to the Court. That attorney should be held accountable for his violations.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state.. So mayby get your facts right before commenting lol
Judge knew, we knew, everybody knew Matheau was innocent. I have never seen a lawyer be as bad looser as this prosecutor shows up. He is a disaster. I have followed the trial and I must say that the prosecutors were like from a movie: "The 3 undertakers". I feel good that Matheau was free. How much governement have to pay to Matheua for this totaly unnecessary trial. It was obviouse from day one prosecutors had nothing to come with. Why in heaven have this trial at all. Prosecutors prime argument: She ws not self suicial....sighh.
A good example of not knowing any context and many placing a false label on the judge or prosecutor. What even is this? It's just a 1 minute thing. Also was this publicized or was it leaked, pretty sure there is a law against posting this in most cases. Ironic as it's exactly what these people think they are avoiding by viewing a 'law' channel, but they are quick to jump to a biased conclusion.. There needs to be more context to see who is to blame for this little outburst.
@@johncherskov5755 You asked one question: "what even is this?" This is a clip from a trial that was live streamed via Law & Crime. I'm pretty sure my initial comment answered that question.
@@BlackOps78321 Do you see a question where he's asking for context? The question "what even is this" was answered. If it's not an answer that he likes, he can watch the full trial.
@@iMatti00 again, not how this works in court. the lead attorney on record can not be substituted without their consent. which is why the judge was forced to shut up when he walked out. Judges have been tossed off the bench for pulling this. If you do not understand court procedure then you need to stop and learn about it before offering up layman opinions based on TV shows you have watched.
@@erikanders3343 - Are you saying that it’s not true that the day before this the judge told the prosecutors that he was going to announce his decision at 9 AM? Or it may have been 9:30 AM. But the judge told them what he was going to do, Then they show up this day and demand that the judge stops reading his opinion. Sounds to me like the prosecutor thought they were going to lose. As I understand it the lead prosecutor was only on a short conference call it was gonna be right back. The judge was just getting his opinion either way. Also sounds to me like the prosecutors thought they were gonna lose so they wanted to slam the judge so they would have a bogeyman to blame it on, I wonder if had they known they were not gonna lose if they would’ve sat down and been quiet. And I got my education from watching Matlock and murder she wrote, thank you very much! Lol
@@iMatti00 Ok your 2 weeks late and clearly not informed. Your " Sounds to me like the prosecutor thought they were going to lose." statement makes it clear you have no idea what's actually going on and you are in pure jerry springer speculation mode. as for "The judge was just getting his opinion either way." no he was forced to stop when the only member of the prosecution left. Let me repeat this basic fact for you... The case can not proceed without both parties being represented and the judge knows this. He tried to do an end run around the case by trying to force the junior attorney for the DA to sit in while he let the case move forward. That failed. This judge is now "stood down" by the state supreme court and is not hearing any new cases and only finishing up the current case he had started. his actions are being investigated by the discipline panel and he will more than likely be declined for this. Remember this is an elected judge. His appointment is for a term and good behavior. If the court funds he deliberately screwed over the DA because she is his political opponent than he will not be a judge any more.
Actually judges have been some of the most ethical part Of our system. And one way I wanna say I’m surprised that you would say what you said, but I just don’t trust people judgment anymore. Judges actually have very little power in most situations. Prosecutors are the ones who prosecute. Did you know in most cases if a judge thinks someone is innocent but a jury finds them guilty, The judge still has to sit in them and can’t overturn the verdict? Some states are different, but many states are not. I’d be interested to see if you have any actual reasoning why you believe judges are some of the worst part of our country and they have messed up our country?
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would do the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
If this judge didn't show integrity over a simple phone call and scheduling issue, how could the people expect him to have integrity on more important issues?
Why is everybody in the comment section against this judge? I haven’t watch trial yet. My immediate reaction is it doesn’t matter who is in the courtroom because the decisions already been made. And telling one of the two prosecutors that they don’t have to cancel the appointment is not necessarily the same as saying there will be a continuance. So are people in the comment section not understanding this or is this judge a bad judge? Did the prosecutor think the judge was gonna rule against them so wanted the elected prosecutor to be there in hopes that the judge wouldn’t rule against them because of that significance, even though that shouldn’t matter?e
@@iMatti00, It is a totally fair question. Reading about the different perspectives behind this moment it is clear there is an aspect to this story we don't see in the video. According to several people, the judge made explicit promises about how this part of the trial would go. It wasn't the only issue, it was simply the one that finally pushed prosecutors over the edge. In their view, a murderer is walking free today because of this judge and his blatant incompetence. Based on several accounts of the incidents leading up to this moment, I'm inclined to believe there may be some truth to it. If you look in to the history of this specific judge it sure makes you wonder.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would do the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
My assumption is you are just biased against judges and you actually don’t know what went on in this situation more than watching this one clip. Am I correct or not?g
The judge is moments away from ruling in his favor. He just expects the judge to toss the case because he knows it's garbage and wants his boss there to take the heat. He knows they had no evidence.
He did not leave his MacBook behind. He came right back to grab it. This was silly. The prosecution was obviously trying to stall for time and the judge refused to play along. 😆
My assumption is you are just biased against judges and you actually don’t know what went on in this situation more than watching this one clip. Am I correct or not?f
My assumption is you are just biased against judges and you actually don’t know what went on in this situation more than watching this one clip. Am I correct or not?l
The State decided to move with the trial with little evidence. The attorney can ask for permission to be absent and the permission was granted. It doesn’t mean that the trial will stop. Stop throwing tantrums, like the persecution.
I actually find the prosecutor's actions refreshing. If I felt a trial had devolved into nothing more than a sham, I too would walk out. What would have happened if the prosecutors in the show trial days of the Soviet Union had walked out? Well, the government would have murdered them - but at least they would have died as heroes.
I stopped watching yesterday because the judge is clear about which side of the fence he is on. I’m surprised a judge would act this way. I’ll read about the end result late
Prosecutor most likely already knows the decision imo. However,all parties should be in front of the court to hear that decisions. Was there an ex parte? Makes one wonder.
The judge is about to rule on the defendant's motion to toss the case. This junior prosecutor expects him to toss it because he he knows the case is weak. I don't blame him either, they had a terrible case.
The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would do the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state!
“Storms out of the courtroom” as he walks out all slowly and peacefully 😂
Contempt of court is real.
@@rigormortis1355 The Judge said, "If you want to be here for the decision, that's your business." Essentially, he gave the prosecutor permission to be there or not to be there.
@@halcyon2017 It is his business since is his case, he decides to leave.
The lead prosecutor was not present through most of the trial. This brat and two other attorneys were. Those three were present for the judge to give his ruling on whether there was enough evidence to move forward. There was to be no more argument on the subject. Just a ruling which was in the prosecutions favor. Yelling and being disrespectful of the judge calling the procedure a sham is not peaceful. His demeanor was stormy.
Lol yessssss!!!!!😂😂😂😂
We have a basic argument with no context and everyone supporting the prosecutor. Too much missing information to really have an opinion about it.
This
Exactly! It’s pretty ridiculous that so called press doesn’t even answer the basics nowadays and leave more questions than answers often times.
Maybe due to the fact that criminals are simply released back into society, over and over again, to commit more and most often even worse crimes.
Sounds to me like this guy is upset that the case is proceeding without a country prosecutor, who may actually see to it that such a criminal isn't just released back into the streets?
Probably because the judge has personal plans, which he doesn't want any backed up cases to interfere with.
This is actually quite common with judges.
All the corrupt prosecutors need to walk out and never come back
Not really. If the judge said not to cancel the appointment and the other prosecutor said she would have a replacement for the day then the judge should have kept better records or called the day off.
He left all his things behind…. That’s going to be awkward walking back picking those up 😂😂😂
He couldn’t help it he lost control with his little b&tch fit
"Prosecutor Mark Sleeper walked out of the courtroom after a heated argument with Judge Mark Sleeper..." So both the Prosecutor and the Judge were named "Mark Sleeper"?!? What an amazing coincidence!
Mark Sleeper walked out to avoid conflict of interest being the Judge and the Prosecutor to the same case. He chose to remain the judge and dismissed the Prosecutor.
One of them must be the person Mark Sleeper, the other the agent.
So, the judge and prosecutor are the same individuals? I'm sure there's a COI there.....
@@Donotevengotherewithme Judge Stephen Wolaver presiding. You are just confused.
It says judge wolaver
So many judges are power hungry, so frustrating
So many of you don’t know how the legal system works🤣
Explain it to us?
Uh, they don't need to be. Judges already have a ton of power already. Maybe you think a wrong decision was made, but, they are definitely supposed to have power.
@@flipnotrab you got ratio'd hard... sucks when your belief is in the minority lmfao
Cry more
What do you expect when you’re dealing with a corrupt judge.
@@ChristopherGray00 Not really, it was the prosecutor who walked out.
This judge is probably in charge of election integrity
How do you know? It take's one to know one, isn't it?
Justice system is bad
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh You don't need to be a corrupt judge to know when a judge is a corrupt judge. Genius.
I have watched the trial and suspected by Day 3 that the judge is biased toward the defense. He has given alot of free reign to the defense and seriously hand tied the prosecution. Ms Schiffel stood up to the judge the other day and he got snarky. GOOD on this prosecutor for calling out the judge and standing on his values. The judge seemed VERY uncomfortable with the facts of the phone call coming out in open court. Kudos to the prosecutor for getting them out. Well done!
Is it not common to give "a lot of free reign" to a defendant if he is defending himself? I remember something similar from the Ronnie Onael trial and that at one point in the trial, the judge even explicitly said that she was giving more freedom to the defendant.
@@carolinacremasta277 yeah, this is the United States. Innocent until proven guilty and all. The burden of proof IS on the government to prove an offense before they deprive a citizen of their freedom.
@@carolinacremasta277
What's the case about? Honestly, prosecutors probably get away with so much, I don't feel any sympathy towards the prosecution. Their job is supposed to be difficult.
@@carolinacremasta277 But you can’t rule that hearsay evidence is fine to be used for the defense but deny hearsay evidence for use by the prosecution which is what this judge did. That’s not leeway. It’s bias.
So disappointing to see a judge act this way. If he told the prosecutor not to change her appointment and that it wouldn't be a problem, then it's reprehensible that he went forward with the hearing in her absence.
Another dirty judge
He has been so bias towards the defence. I think what people perceive as grumpy prosecution is their uphill battle against the bias.
@@kazbee6978 So, you're saying the judge is both biased against the defense and prosecution? This was the prosecuting attorney storming about of the room like a baby boy, not the defense.
And to lie about it: “she chose not to be here” 🤦🏻♀️
@@etiennedegaulle3817 what case is this??
Good thing this thing was recorded. Props to the attorney for doing what's right...
Agree I have had this happen to me.. Judges are thieves of system 30% monthly fee increases
So a prosecuting attorney walking out on the reading of the verdict because another prosecutor was not there to hear it was the right thing to do? What point was there in that when clearly neither of them needed to be there for it to be read?
Walking out made a HUGE difference. Prosecutor threw a “Tiny Riot”. Ask Sam Ryder about the power of views.
That's not the way this works. If an attorney has a problem with the disposition of the case, they may seek an appeal in another venue. Tantrums never work in a legal setting.
Video went viral bc of his walk-out. Unethical judge exposed. Walking out was a gamble. It paid off.
Why did I imagine Eric Cartman saying "Screw you guys. I'm going home."
Because you're immature and unintelligent.
It's a good thing that we can believe in judges that represent the justice system by doing what is morally and ethically correct. If you didn't pick up on my sarcasm what a sham. It's good to see that there are actual lawyers out there who are willing to do the right thing. I didn't know those guys existed
I had a friend who was doing a DUI trial whent he DA got mad and walked out. My friend continued his cross-examination. When the DA came back in later, he asked my friend what happened. He told him, "Typical cross exam of a dui expert."
It's really childish behavior.
Your knowledge of the Judicial system shows. Your sarcasm is null.
Even if one wants to assume malice on the judge's part, how exactly is walking out of the courtroom going to help the state's case? The only thing it does is stroke the feelings of those who don't see past the romance of an act of rebellion. If his colleague's presence was so important then it just means one thing: he didn't do his homework, and intends to make it seem like he's the victim of anything except his own incompetence.
EDITED the state/people is their client, but I kinda see now how that might lead to a misunderstanding
@@matthew3640 Client? You mean the state?
As opposed to prosecutors? You think beard boy is above withholding information from the defense to secure a conviction? You are right to not trust judges but you should distrust prosecutors even more. Also, he was right to raise an objection but throwing a tantrum like a little baby boy who didn't get his way is at best unprofessional.
To give context- this was an attorney from the prosecution walking out. The judge was about to give his decision regarding the Rule 29 motion from the defense. Ultimately, the judge did not dismiss the case.
So the defense wanted to dismiss the case or was it the state?
@@kyojaysin1470 the defense made the request. This was between the time the state had rested its case and the defense had not yet started their case.
@@kyojaysin1470 It is normal for defense to ask for dismissal when the state rests
@@emmasanders6226 It's absolutely routine to ask for a dismissal as a challenge to any and all evidence presented. It's usually denied and the defense then moves to defend against the case the prosecution presented.
@@emmasanders6226 I don’t know how normal it is, but a directed verdict can be asked for the defense stating the feel the prosecution has not meet the burden of proof after presenting. If the judge agrees the defendant is effect found not guilty. If the judge disagrees the defense then will present their case.
This judge clearly does not want on record,his participation in the phone conference,if I got this right.
I think you have that correct.
The junior prosecutor is expecting the judge to toss the case since that's what he's ruling on. He's embarrassed and doesn't want to take the heat alone without his boss there. However the judge is about to rule in his favor. He had nothing to worry about, but he showed everyone he had no confidence in his own case. I don't blame him either, they had nothing on this guy. Like they didn't even prove a crime was committed sort of nothing. He should never have been charged in the first place.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
He's ridiculous. All arguments from both sides for the issue the judge is ruling on have already been presented. He is just making his decision known to enter it into the record.
This is purely theatrics on this attorneys part.
hope the attorney get sentenced to life for this
@@SoyAntonioGaming lol chill
He knew he was losing even if and when the judge ruled in his favor
@@tylko_do_pracy1083 It wasn't a verdict. It was making a record of a ruling which was in his favor
I can tell because he left his computer.
What does the D.A mean tho, him and 2 other prosecutors we're there why do they need 4. Most judges DO NOT like to hold a jury up if they don't have to.. he should of been held in contempt like you or I would for goin off like that to a judge... I can see if she was the only prosecutor, but she wasn't.... Not guilty is a just verdict in this case anyway. What was a sham ,was them charging this guy without the evidence to back it. Smdh. Sad
Judges are not dictators and have to follow court proceedings. He intentionally shifted a date after instructing someone he would not. That's malfeasance by definition. After the prosecutor walked off, the Judge admitted to the room he didn't care because he had already made up his mind beforehand, which is another violation of court proceedings.
Judge is a tool. Seen this happened few times where they say ok go to your appointment/ you can do this then next thing you know the judge acts like the conversation never happens in the court room. Lawyer did the right thing.
simply record all your phone calls..
@@insertmoneyhere that's not legal in every state.
Judge/tyrant should be held accountable.
@@TiptronicSS Nah! You are just misinform.
@@newmanattack How does every company support line get away with "this phone call will be recorded.."
He's been salty for seven days because he has no case. The only sham going on here is what the state is trying to do Mr Moore 👌
I think a lot of the people commenting here defending the prosecutor didn’t watch the full trial… what they did to the defendant was morally wrong and I could tell the judge was only trying to seek truth and be fair
👏 judges should not be allowed to intimidate with their authority. Every judge should be reviewed at least every 2 years or so.
I didn’t see any form of intimidation in this video whatsoever and, BTW, judges are elected LOL! Therefore, they’re reviewed by the people.
@@cabubsmom02 Saying that a person was elected, as a counter point for reviews is a little confusing. Are you suggesting that once someone is elected, they are incapable of misusing their power?
I didn't really think this judge was being too intimidating, except for the part where he was saying "you're going to sit here". I would agree with reviewing people in power especially. I'm sure you get reviewed every year by your employer.
@@doorswindows5214 I think she was more saying that the election acts as a sort of review by the general public.
@@cabubsmom02 Careful here, you're making way to much sense here. Gotta remember that there are soft people walking around there days. They get offended if you breath the same air they do so when they share their "opinion", they think it's law. There was nothing wrong here and yup, it's up to the people on if he keeps his job. The Prosecutors office can file a complaint and this case would be reviewed which is done more than we know and unless there is an issue, we never hear the outcome.
@@cabubsmom02 some are appointed.
Judges need much more oversight than they receive.
Heck to the yeah! We are all humans and not one of us hasn't had a day where we didn't need a bit of oversight.
So much more for people that can effect so many lives.
You’re right the think they are God
Why is everybody in the comment section against this judge? I haven’t watch trial yet. My immediate reaction is it doesn’t matter who is in the courtroom because the decisions already been made. And telling one of the two prosecutors that they don’t have to cancel the appointment is not necessarily the same as saying there will be a continuance. So are people in the comment section not understanding this or is this judge a bad judge? Did the prosecutor think the judge was gonna rule against them so wanted the elected prosecutor to be there in hopes that the judge wouldn’t rule against them because of that significance, even though that shouldn’t matter?d
The junior prosecutor is expecting the judge to toss the case here so he wants his boss there to take the heat. However the judge is about to rule in his favor. He had nothing to worry about, he just showed everyone he has no confidence in his own case. I don't blame him either, they had nothing.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
Wait, how was this judge out of control? The Prosecutors are literally throwing tantrums like children.
Prosecutors didn't want to show up for work. The guy was found not guilty on all charges because the charges were bogus. The people of CZcams are upset they couldn't send an innocent man to prison for a crime he didn't commit. They want the judge to suffer for it.
@@oni-one574 No Judge should be up on ethics violations. He lied to the prosecutor and told her to keep her appointment which she did then continued the case behind her back. This was a sham trial through and through and dude was guilty as F+++ and of that there is no doubt but go ahead and celebrate putting a killer back out on the street. Hope he dates your daughter next.
@@onewhoknows5969 don’t say that last^ part jeeeeez. calm down and grow up!!
@@onewhoknows5969 you do understand end of the day jurors found him not guilty. Did the judge took away evidence from trial that hurt the prosecution's case ? Or took away a witness out from giving testimony.
@@onewhoknows5969 Not a killer, acquitted on all counts. Could see throughout the trial that the state failed to meet their burden to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. You need to remember the presumption of innocence and that burden of proof protect those who are targeted by lazy or corrupt cops. Going with a vibe or gut feeling isn’t enough and that is something to celebrate because the presumption of innocence protects you.
For 'It's better that 10 guilty men go free than one innocent man be wrongly convicted” is truly meaningful when you or your loved ones are that one innocent man. You need to go watch some vids on innocent people being wrongfully convicted who finally get justice after decades in prison and admit (if you watched all of this trial) that the jury made the right decision based squarely on the states failure to meet their burden of proof.
What the ADA did is uncalled for. The DA doesn't appear at all cases and it's the job of ADAs just like him to represent the office when needed. Sounds like the millennial came out in him. Guess those poor feelings needed stroking.
Totally Agree!!!
Yeah and the judge is moments away from ruling in his favor. He had nothing to worry about.
@@abebuckingham8198 I have a sneaking suspicion he would prefer to be a defense attorney and this was suppose to be his name "making" moment.
When it comes to courtrooms there's nothing more I like seeing that an attorney telling the judge off kudos to that attorney for putting that ignorant power hungry judge in his place 👏👏👏👏👏👏
I have no problem with any attorney standing up to a judge, but walking out is childish. It also abandons the client, which in this case, are the people of the state. I guess they really don't need an attorney.
The judge read a motion judgement that would of been the same with or without the particular lawyer in the room. The judge did not make himself king!
You perceived that judge as power hungry? 😅
@@jx14aby well that judge was berating that attorney and nobody has to take being berated it's a free country that attorney had the right to walk out of the courtroom. Would you let someone berate you?
@@TNTITAN exactly
Is the judge just reading the decision he made? The trial is over at this point so why would it matter if additional members of the prosecution were not present?
it doesn't , this is just click bait
He was reading a decision on a motion, not the decision on the case itself. The defense raised a motion, and this is the judge making a decision on said motion. Of course, making a decision on a motion and then moving forward without both sides being present is highly unethical.
Yeah, that lawyer just has his panties in a twist.
@@ShaggyRogers1 The prosecution was heard on the motion. Why would they need to be present to hear the decision? They'll receive a written copy.
The trial isn’t over. That means by law, there are still responsibilities on both sides.
the judge told the court at the end of the previous day's session that he would deliver his ruling on a motion 29 first thing in the morning, he said the court would start as usual at 8:30 and the jury would be brought in around 09:30,
That's what I heard too
That attorney did exactly the correct thing.
No he didn't. There's never an excuse for raising your voice at a judge, interrupting him, and leaving. The judge could have charged the lawyer.
@@MegaMech actually the judge said he didn't have to stay if he didn't want to
@@MegaMech Yes there is. I did so in 2016 in a case involving high level police corruption and as a result a corrupt judge and his Chief Magistrate were both exposed and removed from office as well as the police corruption referred to the State Parliamentary Corruption Panel for investigation which resulted in three corrupt Chief Commissioners and a number of subordinate police officers also being exposed. If a corrupt magistrate thinks they can drown out exposure within a court of law with audible volume then it is not only necessary but entirely appropriate to shout over the top of them to ensure the subject evidence is placed upon the court record. Here endeth the lesson.
Yeah cause they have so much more rights than every other human being 😳
@@MegaMech There is 100% reason to stand up for what's right if it calls for it. His job is to represent his client.
Seems like judge has some ethical questions to answer!!!
Like what? Just curious
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh why did he basically trick the prosecution by saying it would be fine if she wasn't there and then on that day "welp she's not here sorry you don't get to argue now"
@@nevadanate4957 They do get to argue. I'm sure that lawyer is more than good enough on his own. The notion they need the other attorney is almost certainly false.
@@MegaMech as far as I can see the lawyer isn't the one saying she needs to be there...
@@mayshack may be.
That was a pretty wild storming out of the courtroom.
Wait when he try to come back....
Everyone could smell the schnapps on him....shameful.......
@@michaelkennedy5126 🙄
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh He came back about 60 seconds later and continued as normal. He was expecting the judge to toss the case and he didn't want to take the heat alone, but the judge is going to rule in favor of the prosecution. It happens about 5 seconds after this clip end. He had nothing to worry about in the first place.
@@abebuckingham8198 Can you tell me where to confirm that, I can't find anything on the web?
The attorney was so unprofessional very child like
Why did you cut it off???
Because the just was wrong he told the prosecutor that she didn't have to cancel her appointment then proceeded to move forward with out her presense
@@soultakerkain why would she even make an appointment she is getting paid to be there.
@@MargotHypnos Have you never made an appointment before? Some appointments are planned months ahead of time too, this is why she got in to contact with the judge to see if she needed to cancel it or not. The judge, IMO, acted in bad faith and said she didn't need to cancel it.
@@DakotaTheRota ty don't even know why @Margot would ask that
That attorney will absolutely be a great judge in the future...
Or an unemployed lawyer.
Rubbish. His whole team is terrible.
Yeah, that was childish and disrespectful. Probably disqualified him from the bench permanently. And rightly so.
@@deathtotruthers1 Can just go to a different state or country like all lawyers do.
@@Amy_Stanmore your thoughts only
Most judges are just like this. They need to get a new job.
Nah! You need to get more educated.
No, not most. Very few are like this. Just because they don't rule in your favor doesn't mean that they are corrupt. That said, this guy needs to be recalled.
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh false and downvoted
While nowadays many judges are partisan hacks in civil sector we still have some good ones in the state crimianl sector. Anything federal in 99% corrupted though
Yea but if they did get a new job they’d probably be looking at a 90% pay cut so they keep being judges even tho they hate their job
Thank God for those who face fear and stand on principle and integrity 👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽… our legal institutions are going rogue !!!!
Integrity. Great word. That’s exactly what the prosecutor showed!
@@sweetpeas8206 In what way?
And he has shown that integrity since day one of this 'trial'. If I was him I would have left day one when I saw how this 'judge' decided to let the defense attorney do whatever she wants to do.
@@TNTITAN In the imagination of delusional right-wing imbeciles...
It is all grounds for appeal! This will probably be retried due to the Judge's conduct!
I had a Maine judge tell me" You have no rights" She also stated that she will side with the police 100% of the time. I was fighting a simple pot change when it was still illegal. The state took my license away for a traffic ticket that was paid off. I kept the receipt, thank god. The cops searched my car under the pretense that I had no license. I literally had the receipt for the ticket in my car. They ignored the facts and searched my car. The found half a gram of concentrates and tried to charge me for heroin. In court I made the point nothing was even tested. They dropped the heroin charge and made me pay 420$ for the illegal search and violation of my rights, and then she stated "you have no rights". Also had the school cop try and charge me with a needle when he took a marijuana pipe from me at the age of 17. I came from a broken home and at this point in my life I was working, going to high school, and paying the bills for me and my older brother.
Oh yeah I represented myself with no legal knowledge. The judge asked to speak with me privately in her chambers, and she tried to convince me to go to law school. She said I represented myself incredible well. I might had taken her advice, had she not just make a mockery of the legal system.
@@___X___ So did you become a lawyer or keep doing drugs?
Hope the best that you stay clean
@@jwonz2054 do you drink alcohol
@@jwonz2054 he became a storyteller in youtube comments.
I need some more context but it doesn't look good on the Judge.
attorney looked like a cry baby. disrespectful attorney. hope he get sentenced to jail for life for being a drama queen
The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would do, the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state!
People commenting negatively about Judge Wolaver CLEARLY did NOT watch any of the trial. He demonstrated the upmost respect, professionalism, & judicial integrity throughout the trial. If I ever had to be tried, I pray to have a judge like him residing. The prosecution did not need each person present for him to simply rule on this motion, they already presented arguments for him to consider.
It’s sad that people think that judges are good,have ethics & morals
They are an extension of a political system
you mean, all judges ....????
You spelled "tyrannical system" wrong.
People have no idea what a good judge looks like. They think just because a judge rules in favor of the prosecution, they're a good judge, but when they rule in favor of the defense, they're bad. And many prosecutors are flat-out crybabies who think they get to win all the time.
It’s sad that people make generalizations like you do
Most judges were lawyers....
The prosecutor was there. Why did he need the 2nd one to be there as well?
So this is a motion to dismiss, meaning the judge is deciding if he wants to toss the case or not. This is the junior prosecutor and he's expecting the judge to toss the case, because he knows the have no evidence. He wants his boss to be there to take the heat because he's embarrassed. However the judge is about to rule in his favor so he had nothing to worry about. He just revealed that he has no confidence in his case.
@@abebuckingham8198 So all those people defending the Karen have room temperature IQ? Cool.
I know nothing about this case. But on its face, this video should have resulted in the "lawyer" being held in contempt and taken into custody. If you disagree with what a judge is doing, you can appeal his decisions. Refusing to follow the orders of a judge is unacceptable.
I think he did follow orders, the person absent was not in court because the judge said for that person to not cancel the appt they had but was now told they should have been in court. Typical judge.
Definitely should have cited him for Contempt of Court. That kind of disrespect shouldn't be allowed to pass. It sets a bad precedent. He should of said "You walk out of here you will be cited with Contempt". I'm surprised the Judge let it pass.
I never trust a prosicutor regardless
Good instincts. The judge is moments away from ruling in his favor. He just expects the judge to toss the case because he knows he has nothing and wants his boss there to take the heat. They should have never charged this guy in the first place.
This judge BETTER BE SANCTIONED
Wrong! Prosecutor was in contempt and should be jailed and fined.
All for it! not because they are judge, they have the right to be tyrants!
@@flipnotrab 🤓🤓
Based on you vast legal experience and education?
As honorable as the prosecutor may seem, he's the one out of line and should have been sanctioned.
He's the officer of the court and the representative of the state. That would be like a defense attorney abandoning their client at sentencing and walking out.
He's a lawyer and he just figured out court is a sham lol
Prosecutors case is a sham
He knew his case was garbage and was expecting the judge to toss it. However the judge is moments away from ruling in his favor.
@@abebuckingham8198 Where ya from ? 🥶🤓
@@LauRoot892 I'm Canadian.
@@abebuckingham8198 Oh okay, How old are you ? Really nice 😊 getting with ya 😲😘
There is not enough context or back story to the clip to know what to make of it.
Judge is a sham!!!
Yep
More of this needs to happen. The judge is outta line
Nope, the SA attorney acts like a child, I'm leaving the court because I didn't get what I asked for. You have no idea about the Law or court system.
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh the lawyer literally said the judge had a conversation they where on the same page then he switched things up
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh It's not what he asked for. It's what the judge agreed to and he backed out without any discussion.
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh the attorney stated that the judge told her not the cancel her appointment
Only thing he’s “out of line” with is not charging that punk with contempt and throwing him in jail for the night.
I am not a legal professional but as a citizen and a peer to which I would be judged I would be mad at the judge too. The reason he was fine announcing his decisions without the prosecutor is the same reason he announced without the other lawyer. He made is decision and no one could change his mind or have a say while he was in that room. I think the lawyer just wanted it to be "fair and just".
They weren't there to discuss the merits of the case, they were there to render a decision that was already made and there was a prosecutor there so why did he need someone else with him? Sounds like he was just trying to delay.
It seems you have insider knowledge?
The judge ruled for the prosecution and this case/their conduct is outrageous.
@@rogersmith7808 There were two prosecutors there.
It is fair to the judge,who has the final say.Justice be damned!
Poor baby. No reason to support a prosecutor.
So nice to see a judge standing up to a prosecutor. This doesn't happen often, mostly because judges see the same prosecutors over and over and over, so they develop a report. Not saying that is a bad thing, but it does, I think, disadvantage defense counsel.
Judge has the complexion of canned ham!😂
This system is beyond corrupt
It's pretty much laughable. That's why this area of content is so popular
What isn't corrupt
Why are the prosecutor and the judge both called Mark Sleeper? Who is the sleeper? Must the sleeper awaken?
its a misprint but your response is pure gold 😂😂
A big typo. Its Judge Stephen Wolaver
Again…it is the legend.
"I think this is outrageous you're going forward with this without the prosecutor," the prosecutor said before exiting the courtroom.
Objection lack of legal representation
I would ask the judge to remove himself as he might be bias about the case. if not, I would ask for a motion to remove judge on the bench right there and then.
wow, are you okay? Objection? lol
Lack of manpower?
He is the legal representation. The judge is about to rule in his favor. He just assumed that the judge would toss the case because he knows it's garbage. He wants his boss there to take the heat.
I'm confused. From most of the comments here it seems that 'this judge is corrupt' because he is somehow favoring the defense by going forward with the trial on day seven when one of the two prosecuting attorneys is absent for a day. After the prosecution has rested their case and the defense is about to start putting forward their case. Is it common for judges to send the jury home for a day when one of the lawyers has 'an appointment' that they made the court aware of a week before the trial began? There must be some other stuff behind this that I'm not aware of...
Or this people commenting are libs
Sometimes the judge will go ahead and takeoff in the middle of a trial, but many times they will not. A lot of times the judge will not even stop trial if an important witness doesn’t show up, they would just say too bad for that side. So this judge moving on is not wrong at all. I guess the only possible point is that the judge may have told the prosecutor that they would stop the trial. But that’s not actually what I heard the prosecutor say. I heard the prosecutor say that the judge told the prosecutor that they did not have to cancel their appointment, but that’s not the same thing as saying that they’re gonna cancel court.
As for everybody saying the judge is corrupt, I’m embarrassed that these people have the ability to vote. That is where I’m leading. I’ve also saw a few comments that were very lengthy and were verbatim the same, so I’m almost wondering if the prosecutor is on here creating different accounts posting some of the stuff. I’m 100% serious. Because to say this judge is corrupt is something only somebody with no more than a brain at 50% processing ability would say. Maybe the judge my mistake, maybe you didn’t. But he say he’s corrupt is absolutely absurd. So I agree with you.
Yeah apparently rejecting the defense's motion to dismiss favored the defense. That's how good Manashe was.
It’s obvious by these comments who has actually watched the trial and who hasn’t
Yes, I need more context before I would leave a comment. No I have not see the trial.
Exactly why I haven’t commented. 😂
@@kurtdowney1489 The judge is ruling on a motion to dismiss by the defense. This junior prosecutor storms out because he expects the judge to toss the case and he wants his boss there to take the heat. However the judge is about to rule in his favor, so he had nothing to worry about.
this assistant prosecutor was wholly unprepared to present his case. he stormed out bc his boss couldnt be there to argue for him lmao
Zero context.
Tried to Google more about this case to see what is the context of this video and found absolutely nothing.
So big waste of time.
Judge is ruling on a motion to dismiss. This junior prosecutor expects him to toss the case because he knows it's garbage. He wants his boss there to take the heat. However the judge is about to rule in favor of the prosecution so he had nothing to worry about. All he did was demonstrate that he had no confidence in his own case. I don't blame him either, they had nothing.
------ not having one side present is ex-parte and ethical rules typically forbid one side proceeding without the other side present. This attorney knows that and so does the judge ---------- this judge should be held accountable........and judges HATE being questioned, since they are often of the mindset that they know better than anyone else.
that is not even remotely true. either party has the option to be or not to be in the proceeding regarding a ruling. Also, the state was there being represented by another colleague. State attorneys have too much power and are entitled to absolute immunity, which is why the judicial system is such a joke in this country.
@@SterlingSigurdsen Not to mention the judges are affiliated with each of the political parties. Partisan Judges should reigned in, and laws enacted to force that crap out of our judicial systems.
Does the other side have to be there if it’s just a ruling being read with no arguments or witnesses?
@@afcgeo882 they have the right to be their after the judge made he's decision, but don't have to be there to hear it, the time to argue against or for it would be at the hearing on the motion, not during the judges final decision. This motion was already ruled on and heard by both parties. You really need to read the rules and proceedings of criminal procedure, and you are wrong, they do have absolute immunity, which is why cases are over turned so much. It is due to the fact the state attorneys can basically do what ever they want without any consequences. The state attorney or parties in regards to a hearing do not have to be there as it turns into a default judgement. If you go to a proceeding, and the state doesn't show up, the defendant is granted favorable. If the defendant doesn't show up, they are held in contempt and issued a warrant for their arrest to be brought forth to the court. They can however refuse to attend a hearing that they already know the out come of said hearing, as long as their attorney is present for them on their behalf. However they cannot refuse to be present upon sentencing. The state does not have be present for sentencing to be heard, and the judge can then handout any sentence deemed fit, whether it is basis towards or against the defendant.
Yes, but it is not against the law!
hmmmmmmmmmmm seems to me like the Attorney is correct in this case.
I agree with the lawyer. This judge is a total a-hole if what we heard here is true. An attorney doing the right thing is amazing. I love it, and I'm here for it! If the opposing side would have had any integrity they would have done the same thing and refused to continue. Things happen in life, appointments get missed, and especially if the judge had prior notification and explanation there was no excuse for him to say she "chose" not to be there today. It isn't a choice if you can't show up to something as important as a court date, it's not something you just "choose" not to appear for, and not just implying, but stating that someone chose not to appear is a sign of bias on the judges part. I can't believe this. This is wrong. I don't know the case here, but this snapshot of this judge doesn't look good. Fortunately he's old, and he'll be in the dirt soon enough, but if you ask me, not soon enough. There's too many rotten judges, and it's causing our prisons to overflow unlike any other nation on the Earth except for Thailand and some Central American banana republic. Even Russia doesn't imprison the percentage of their population that we do, so we have a real problem with judges here since they ultimately put people in prison, and it seems to be their goal. Justice should be their goal, not filling prison cells and rehab centers.
If what the attorney said was correct the opposing side was the missing county prosecutor. Sounds like she had a prior appointment which the judge told her not to cancel and everyone was under the impression that the court proceeding would be rescheduled. However, the judge made it sound like she missed the court date of her own choice and without his input. It's a good thing the defense attorney set the record straight.
@@thecounselingcouch68 He's correct in opposing, but not correct in acting like a petulant child. I wonder how many times beard boy has withheld information from the defense so he can secure a conviction. I trust prosecutors less than judges.
Imagine if the defendant "chose" not to appear
The prosecution is present though? If they wanted a second prosecutor there they don't have a right to that.
If it's a sham appeal, which is why the judge keeps repeating it's noted. It's a challenge to appeal it.
They do because they get paid for every person they put in jail. When your prisons are privatized they need to be full to make money. No one goes as a volunteer so the companies who own the prisons, pay the judges to fill them up.
You don't see that too often in court.
I HAVE ZERO FAITH IN OUR JUSTICE SYSTEMS!!!!!
This is the best pay off I’ve seen between Law Enforcement Agencies. You do not have the right connection made. I’d like to get a connection made in the D.A.’s office. Any imperfections will be found. They will have to be made perfect. Don’t confess ever. Two and two is not four.
Judges do whatever they want in this country, we as citizens must reclaim our power that we've given away to these psychopaths!
Good luck with that
Alas.. this very fallible, fragile and blind faith in a single arbiter is precisely purpose desired and built in this country.
I've often wondered why you don't just start your own government and justice system. Base it on better laws and supervision, and start using that to solve cases that involve corruption. You can't fix a toxic mess, you need to bury it and seal it off, like Chernobyl.
This has been done in history, and should be done if a system is so corrupt, nothing is no longer trusted. Plan it, involve people from all stratum of life, write down a constitution and do it small scale first, and just ignore the corrupt system.
@@Lawh They can not even begin to solve gun crime, and you often wonder about a new government?
@@shanestewart4905 That's the point. The government can't even solve gun crime, when most people are for background checks and gun control. Thus, a new government is needed.
Take money out of it, take out career politicians, have observers follow legal proceedings, and so on. Start it in a city, then a state, then keep expanding. They've been trying to fix a single issue for decades. It's not happening. At some point you have to give up, go to the tennis court, and declare you are now the government.
Why stop at the crucial moment?
So I watched this a couple of times and did not see a “heated” argument nor anyone “storming” out of any courtroom. I saw an attorney calmly raise an objection and then walked out of the courtroom.
Open up your eyes.
same
There definitely wasn’t a heated argument, but he definitely stormed out of the courtroom. When you yell that this process is a sham that is heated. And when you storm out, that is storming out. So I’m not sure what exactly watched.
You saw a very unprofessional and rude attorney walk out of a courtroom which was disrespectful to the Court. That attorney should be held accountable for his violations.
That's it. He just going to insult a judge like that and walk away. Hmmmm. I didn't know you can do that.
Good for him! These judges think they're God's, I swear.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
The equivalent of " I'm gonna take my ball and go home".
What? No decision? Who prepared this video? Do they charge you by the minute to post?
The video isn’t about the decision.
The decision was the judge denying the defense’s motion to dismiss btw.
how about mentioning the case this is regarding at least SOMEWHERE
Amazing. A lawyer with integrity.
Or one pitching a hissy fit when his case is too skinny.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state.. So mayby get your facts right before commenting lol
Attorney walking out like he did during a hearing is unethical. He lacks professionalism.
Lol!!! It’s the justice system, bro. You sucked. You lost. End of game.
Judge knew, we knew, everybody knew Matheau was innocent. I have never seen a lawyer be as bad looser as this prosecutor shows up. He is a disaster. I have followed the trial and I must say that the prosecutors were like from a movie: "The 3 undertakers". I feel good that Matheau was free. How much governement have to pay to Matheua for this totaly unnecessary trial. It was obviouse from day one prosecutors had nothing to come with. Why in heaven have this trial at all. Prosecutors prime argument: She ws not self suicial....sighh.
Loser*
Thank you Judge 👏🏿👏🏿👏🏿
This judge is truly a good man he also does volunteer work. His discussion was correct
Any other person would be held in contempt and put in jail…
A good example of not knowing any context and many placing a false label on the judge or prosecutor. What even is this? It's just a 1 minute thing. Also was this publicized or was it leaked, pretty sure there is a law against posting this in most cases. Ironic as it's exactly what these people think they are avoiding by viewing a 'law' channel, but they are quick to jump to a biased conclusion.. There needs to be more context to see who is to blame for this little outburst.
This whole trial has been live streamed on Law & Crime so I don't see how anything was "leaked."
@@halcyon2017 So you know that yet don't know anything else? Thx for granting 10% of the request
@@johncherskov5755 You asked one question: "what even is this?" This is a clip from a trial that was live streamed via Law & Crime. I'm pretty sure my initial comment answered that question.
@@halcyon2017 He asked for context and you acted like a 12 yr old acting like you answered the full question.
@@BlackOps78321 Do you see a question where he's asking for context? The question "what even is this" was answered. If it's not an answer that he likes, he can watch the full trial.
Prosecutor got his way and would have known that had he not stormed out of court! 🤦🏻♀️
Wow, I don’t know why a judge would proceed without the prosecutor. That seems so unprofessional
unethical at the least
But that’s not the judges fault. There were multiple prosecutors there, only one was not there. So that’s perfectly fine.
@@iMatti00 again, not how this works in court. the lead attorney on record can not be substituted without their consent. which is why the judge was forced to shut up when he walked out. Judges have been tossed off the bench for pulling this. If you do not understand court procedure then you need to stop and learn about it before offering up layman opinions based on TV shows you have watched.
@@erikanders3343 - Are you saying that it’s not true that the day before this the judge told the prosecutors that he was going to announce his decision at 9 AM? Or it may have been 9:30 AM. But the judge told them what he was going to do, Then they show up this day and demand that the judge stops reading his opinion. Sounds to me like the prosecutor thought they were going to lose. As I understand it the lead prosecutor was only on a short conference call it was gonna be right back. The judge was just getting his opinion either way. Also sounds to me like the prosecutors thought they were gonna lose so they wanted to slam the judge so they would have a bogeyman to blame it on, I wonder if had they known they were not gonna lose if they would’ve sat down and been quiet.
And I got my education from watching Matlock and murder she wrote, thank you very much! Lol
@@iMatti00 Ok your 2 weeks late and clearly not informed. Your " Sounds to me like the prosecutor thought they were going to lose." statement makes it clear you have no idea what's actually going on and you are in pure jerry springer speculation mode.
as for "The judge was just getting his opinion either way." no he was forced to stop when the only member of the prosecution left. Let me repeat this basic fact for you... The case can not proceed without both parties being represented and the judge knows this. He tried to do an end run around the case by trying to force the junior attorney for the DA to sit in while he let the case move forward. That failed.
This judge is now "stood down" by the state supreme court and is not hearing any new cases and only finishing up the current case he had started. his actions are being investigated by the discipline panel and he will more than likely be declined for this.
Remember this is an elected judge. His appointment is for a term and good behavior. If the court funds he deliberately screwed over the DA because she is his political opponent than he will not be a judge any more.
There is storming out, THEN there is, STORMING OUT !!! . This was neither.....LOL .
Judges have been messed up in our country for some time.
what a uneducated clueless statement. please give me specific examples. let me guess. you are a socialist
Lawyers in general have done that decades ago
Actually judges have been some of the most ethical part Of our system. And one way I wanna say I’m surprised that you would say what you said, but I just don’t trust people judgment anymore. Judges actually have very little power in most situations. Prosecutors are the ones who prosecute. Did you know in most cases if a judge thinks someone is innocent but a jury finds them guilty, The judge still has to sit in them and can’t overturn the verdict? Some states are different, but many states are not. I’d be interested to see if you have any actual reasoning why you believe judges are some of the worst part of our country and they have messed up our country?
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would do the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
Seriously who needs Netflix nowadays when theres camera in the courts lol
If this judge didn't show integrity over a simple phone call and scheduling issue, how could the people expect him to have integrity on more important issues?
Why is everybody in the comment section against this judge? I haven’t watch trial yet. My immediate reaction is it doesn’t matter who is in the courtroom because the decisions already been made. And telling one of the two prosecutors that they don’t have to cancel the appointment is not necessarily the same as saying there will be a continuance. So are people in the comment section not understanding this or is this judge a bad judge? Did the prosecutor think the judge was gonna rule against them so wanted the elected prosecutor to be there in hopes that the judge wouldn’t rule against them because of that significance, even though that shouldn’t matter?e
@@iMatti00, It is a totally fair question. Reading about the different perspectives behind this moment it is clear there is an aspect to this story we don't see in the video. According to several people, the judge made explicit promises about how this part of the trial would go. It wasn't the only issue, it was simply the one that finally pushed prosecutors over the edge. In their view, a murderer is walking free today because of this judge and his blatant incompetence. Based on several accounts of the incidents leading up to this moment, I'm inclined to believe there may be some truth to it. If you look in to the history of this specific judge it sure makes you wonder.
You clearly didn't watch the case lol. The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would do the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state
The judge did NOTHING improper.
@@iMatti00 DITTO!
Good for that Defense Attorney!
Not really, the Judge is about to make a call.
That wasn't the Defense Attorney that walked out....That was one of Prosecutors
How is that attorney allowed to behave like that to a judge without sanctions/bar complaint/contempt??? Weak judge.
All judges should retire at the same age as other people I mean come on how can that happen the job should be held accountable
Can you say why this Judge did wrong? Just curious about your comment
Judges should be volunteers and both parties should agree on who the judge is
How do you think a judge gets appointed, crystal???? Should change your name to Ignorant Darkness.....
@@macbook802 What a nonsense solution. You want soneone with no law training to make legal decisions?
What does this have to do with anyone’s age?
Why didn’t that SGT arrest him or the judge order to arrest the guy walking out?
How are judges allowed to get away with this behavior!?
2 words Ka and Ching
@@whizadree 1 word money
💰
They didn’t show the whole clip. The judge ruled in favor of the state’s motion. That was the assistant state attorney that had the tantrum.
My assumption is you are just biased against judges and you actually don’t know what went on in this situation more than watching this one clip. Am I correct or not?g
That judge needs to take a sip of water. I can feel his hot breath through the phone
They should strip judge of his appointment
The judge is moments away from ruling in his favor. He just expects the judge to toss the case because he knows it's garbage and wants his boss there to take the heat. He knows they had no evidence.
Ahh gotcha
He did not leave his MacBook behind. He came right back to grab it.
This was silly. The prosecution was obviously trying to stall for time and the judge refused to play along. 😆
So many bad judges.
My assumption is you are just biased against judges and you actually don’t know what went on in this situation more than watching this one clip. Am I correct or not?f
Confusing: The prosecutor walks out because the prosecutor isn’t present? What’s missing here?
I’m lost as well
This JUDGE is DISGUSTING
Why is that?
@@Lonewolf-gr2nh cuz.... you know....
@@AS-zc8mr Yes, I have worked for 30 years in the court system. Tell me about your experience.
My assumption is you are just biased against judges and you actually don’t know what went on in this situation more than watching this one clip. Am I correct or not?l
The State decided to move with the trial with little evidence.
The attorney can ask for permission to be absent and the permission was granted. It doesn’t mean that the trial will stop. Stop throwing tantrums, like the persecution.
I actually find the prosecutor's actions refreshing. If I felt a trial had devolved into nothing more than a sham, I too would walk out. What would have happened if the prosecutors in the show trial days of the Soviet Union had walked out? Well, the government would have murdered them - but at least they would have died as heroes.
🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦
A dude with a Russian flag in his name commenting on appropriate judicial conduct. What a clown
@@vitekkozov3980 the dude is openly criticizing the Soviet Union and you want to be mad at him for his nationality? You're the clown here.
@@vitekkozov3980 Congrats on putting yourself out there as a MO Ron.
Good Job!!!!
Really? You must be republican, if you lose then attack the Judge.
I stopped watching yesterday because the judge is clear about which side of the fence he is on. I’m surprised a judge would act this way. I’ll read about the end result late
Hi, what a pretty picture you've on your profile! Just decided to stop by and say Hi!! I hope my compliment is appreciated 😊
@@eshagberiemperor Thank you
@@flighttime1717 You're welcome 🤗. Where are you from?
Prosecutor most likely already knows the decision imo. However,all parties should be in front of the court to hear that decisions. Was there an ex parte? Makes one wonder.
Seems like the one prosecutor satisfies the need for representation of the state.
The judge is about to rule on the defendant's motion to toss the case. This junior prosecutor expects him to toss it because he he knows the case is weak. I don't blame him either, they had a terrible case.
The day before the judge listened to all the arguments and said that the first thing he would do the next morning is give his final opinion. Since the arguments where already made, his decision could not be changed and thus the abscense of the main prosecutor wasn't a problem. And for your information, he ruled in favor for the state!