Red line

The example of the red line is often used as a separation of good and evil in environments: political, judicial, social. Undoubtedly, that of sports referees is usually the most controversial when it comes to assigning the goal (on lines 5cm thick), but in the case of a judge, can the opposite be interpreted as someone who breaks the law? Our judicial system considers the right to make mistakes in their work to apply the laws legitimate due to their human condition, which is questionable when more than 50 judges (supposedly independent) do it systematically when interpreting misappropriation crimes that is to say, with a conceptual base similar to 1+1=2.

We are lucky (or unfortunate) to be able to prove the repeated bad success of our judicial system, especially when it comes to recognizing economic crimes of people who we understand are "not interested" indicting. Likewise, the treachery with which our judges have used all kinds of tricks and traps to justify their sentences is also accredited.

The most surprising without a doubt has been the systematic assistance (dog) of the prosecution to the interests of the judge, who have not hesitated to affirm in their reports what is necessary to justify the contrary to the law (metaphorically 1 + 1 = 3). All these facts have been accredited in our complaints to the anti-corruption prosecutor, prosecutor inspectorate, etc... the lack of interest in:

sign the reports they issue with their first and last names, the abuse of "the prosecutor's lieutenant" appearing as a signatory is quite striking, don't forget they are public officials
certify that their reports have followed the legal course (entry stamp in the courts). We can accredit reports without any seal.
that have complied with the pillars of their function: legality, independence, impartiality. We can accredit cases in which the same prosecutor attends a procedure and in which the perjury of a witness of the previous one is valued.

If you are interested in any of these "irrefutable" tests, do not hesitate to contact us. It is not the purpose of this website to prove the facts, for that we understand the courts are.

If you are wondering how to date no one has recognized such flagrant "facts", the answer we can give you is that neither are we, we are looking for the judge who "dares" to recognize them, understood in the sense that he will prove the error of 50 "companions".