A lazy judgey will likely not bring about a responsible outcome. Instead they focus on their vacations, stumping during elections, shallow public displays at public forums; check their calendars for evidence and their past behavior! Generally, they focus on their own comfort!

A lazy jury will likely not bring about a responsible outcome. Instead they focus on what food to order if sequestered, children’s movies and ball games to watch, do not ask any questions and do not react to the evidence! Generally, they focus on their own comfort!

CERTAIN JUDGES MAY BE HAVE OVERREPRESENTATION OF CERTAIN CASES: Judge Dorothy W. Nelson, another Carter appointee who took senior status 16 years ago, was back on the bench at the Pasadena courthouse in March, a few weeks after her husband of 60 years died. She has carried a 75 percent caseload throughout her supposed retirement and has spent "the other 75 percent of my time" at the Western Justice Center she founded for mediation and conflict prevention. "I feel a responsibility to the litigants," said Nelson, 82. "The courts are not for the judges, and they are not for the lawyers. They are for the people who have real grievances that need to be heard." All but three of the 9th Circuit's 19 senior judges heard cases over the last year. Their collective caseload accounted for 33 percent of the appeals court's work in the year that ended in September, said Molly Dwyer, the court's clerk. "We'd be sunk without them," Dwyer said of the seniors. "I often joke that I'm shipping out vitamins and giving out orange juice along with the assignments."... Nationwide, seniors handle 21 percent of the federal judiciary's work, said David Sellers, an assistant director of the federal court agency.

Judges, Justices, arbitrators, commissioners, and Bench warmers are often AVERAGE students.

The Judiciary tends to be low paid compared to other areas of legal practice.

Corruption of the Judiciary is common.

Bench warmers tend to be elected or appointed and, therefore, actually political positions.

Judicial discretion and activism exists.

Judges, Justices, arbitrators, commissioners, and Bench warmers can obtain these positions without ever practicing law.

It is more common than most would think for Judges, Justices, arbitrators, commissioners, and Bench warmers to not read documents that they must rule on.

Addiction issues are common for Judges, Justices, arbitrators, commissioners, and Bench warmers.

Some Judges, Justices, arbitrators, commissioners, and Bench warmers work their way up from positions in the lower courts.

Other Judges, Justices, arbitrators, commissioners, and Bench warmers are career government employees, sometimes previously held positions running agencies, working for lawmakers as an analyst, or as a prosecutor, or even in law enforcement.

It tends to be uncommon for Judges, Justices, arbitrators, commissioners, and Bench warmers to have been in private practice.

Judges, Justices, arbitrators, commissioners, and Bench warmers can tend to put former the government interest before all other interests or the interests of their former colleagues.

A judge may have her husband in her continuing education required course.

Judges may have multiple sourced of income, such as from board positions and education jobs.

Some appellate level judges only come into the courtroom once a week to hear cases.

A judge should dismiss themselves from a case if there is even a hint of a conflict of interest.

Retired judges can referee depositions.

A lawyer and his wife who is a judge may effectively control the personal injury practice even in a large metropolitan region and if they are criminally oriented escape prosecution because there would be too many persons to prosecute.

The Judicial Council and the State Bar might consider investigating a judge.

A judge might be married to a member of the State Bar.

In large cases with many defendants it might be almost impossible to find an impartial judge.

The judicial branch of the government might be the most corrupt branch of the government, with the executive branch being the next most corrupt and then the legislative branch.

A judge can have more influence over a person’s life than the president or a lawmaker, and for the longest period of time.

Some Supreme Court Justices may rarely speak or write a dissenting opinion.

Complain to the Judicial Council when incompetence or corruption seems to be the problem with a judge. THE TRUTH MAY BE IN SOME CASES IT MAY BE ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO FIND AN UNBIASED JUDGE. THIS IS WHY THE MEDIA IS ALLOWED TO COVER CASES. HOWEVER, THERE STILL IS NOT ENOUGH CAMERAS IN THE COURTROOMS. LITTLE INDICATIONS OFTEN EXIST THAT SHOW A JURIST IS HAVING A HARD TIME WITH A CASE, SUCH AS CALLING IT LAST, NOT CALLING OR ORDER IN THE COURT, LOSING THE FILE, NOT LISTENING TO BOTH SIDES, OR NOT EVEN MAKING A RULING! SOMETIMES, A CASE CAN BE MOVED TO THE FEDERAL COURT, TO A DIFFERENT VENUE or to join another similar case with a different judge by consolidation or Relating cases, OR THE JUDGE CAN BE DISQUALIFIED, BUT RARELY FOR BIAS OR CORRUPTION. U.S. District Court Judge John Joseph Sirica (1904-1992) stood up to U. S. President Nixon regarding the Watergate trials by fining him $25,000 and $50,000 for each day the presidential tapes were not produced! THIS WAS LIKELY ONE OF THE MOST INTELLEGENT AND INDEPENENT ACTS OF ANY JUDGE IN HISTORY. HOWEVER, THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA RARELY SHOWS EITHER ACTIVIST OR DISCRESIONARY POWER OF THE AVERAGE JUDGE!

Judges tend to be fair and impartial.

Judicial conspiracies exist.