Judge hallucinated date on exhibit and every judge overlooks it ,why?

[quincy]

This is the exact exhibit submitted at trial. It's all public info.

Would you say the cropped photo is dated? What about,
"... dated the day after the alleged incident..."?

If you were handed this exhibit at trial then would you regard it as "dated the day after the alleged incident..."?

It really doesn’t matter what I think, does it?

 

[0p3ns0urc3s]

Thank you for apologizing but you didn't entirely understand my point. You came to a free advice site. Instead of taking whatever advice you find here that you feel is useful to you, you are arguing with the volunteers...and being a bit arrogant about it. That doesn't make a volunteer inclined to go the extra mile to research something for you.

I understand your points. There's no arrogance. This problem is bigger than me and not constrained to my particular case. I'm asking you all questions, opinions. If you do not answer them then I don't expect that you'll go any extra miles.

I don't think anyone here knows for sure what you mean by "hometowned". We can kind of guess, but we don't know for sure. It is not a normal legal definition. Also, I certainly wasn't applying any bias to your statements. I was taking them at face value.

I'd never heard of it before either.
But it's legal slang:
https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/hometowned

To most legal professionals, a settlement in those circumstances is considered a "win/win" not a "lose/lose". I know nothing about your case therefore I have no opinion as to whether they offered you a settlement because they thought they would lose, or they offered you a settlement to just make the case go away. I do know however, that most attorneys who offer a settlement just to get you to go away tend to try to squash you like a bug if you refuse a reasonable settlement, and they generally succeed.

I was not squashed. I didn't care about the money after the trial. It became much bigger than car repairs.
I am not squashed. Not vexatious, as they tried, so they'll see me again.


https://postimg.cc/N2sghZc4
Would you say the cropped photo linked above is dated? What about,
"... dated the day after the alleged incident..."?

If you were handed this exhibit at trial then would you regard it as "dated the day after the alleged incident..."?

 

[0p3ns0urc3s]

It really doesn’t matter what I think, does it?

I would hold your opinion in the highest esteem, Sir.
You would be undertaking a great feat that appellate court judges and supreme court judges fear.

Please most gracious and merciful quincy, bestow me with an answer.

 

[cbg]

Please clarify something that is not yet clear to me.

What is the picture, regardless of whether it is dated or not, supposed to prove? In what way does it affect the case?

 

[0p3ns0urc3s]

Please clarify something that is not yet clear to me.

What is the picture, regardless of whether it is dated or not, supposed to prove? In what way does it affect the case?

The judge used that Exhibit D against my Exhibit 1. She juxtaposed them.
In her decision, she stated my Exhibit 1 wasn't dated so she lacks belief in it. She stated defendants Exhibit D was dated so she believed it. But it's not, "... dated the morning after the alleged incident..." There's no date on it. The judge got a photo with the date cropped out because the Progressive attorney didn't believe his clients.


I wrote in my pleadings at the trial, appellate, and supreme court level something to this effect, quoting the judgment decision:

The Magistrate clearly writes in her findings of fact adopted by the Judge: "She introduced a picture of the vehicle and plate into evidence, but it was not dated nor was a location of the photo provided. During trial she then did find a picture of Defendant’s car on her phone that appeared to be dated 4/8/23. She did not print the dated photo.”
The Magistrate also writes, “He [Appellee] stated there was no damage to the car and had photos of the car dated the morning after the alleged incident and no damage is shown, which were introduced into evidence."

The quoted text and bolded text is verbatim from the judgment decision.
The bolded text contains an untrue statement of the facts.

Plain error just has to prejudice and be readily seen. But for the mistaken date, the judge would've had to come up with a coherent reason and not just say, "Exhibit 1 is not dated so I don't believe it!" And then insert a date on the opposing sides Exhibit D because, lo and behold, that exhibit isn't dated either.
The exhibits spoke to whether or not there was an incident.
I went to the police station ASAP, drew the kid on the report, had my exhibit 1 pic of the car by mine on the road at the time.
I hadn't even filed a claim until weeks after because I was out of town and had to wait for the police report to even get the owner of the cars insurance info!

There's no reason the defendant would be taking a Pic of his car the day after. The accident happened 4/8. I filed the claim 4/26 but went to the police 4/8 right after. It doesn't make sense. None of my testimony matters at all though. It's whatever the family of constituents said goes.

The judge plants a date on one piece of evidence to discredit the opposing evidence.

 

[cbg]

That isn't what I asked.

"The photo is supposed to prove that:

a.) person A was in the vicinity of the accident
b.) person A was not in the vicinity of the accident
c.) The car was damaged in the accident
d.) The car was not damaged in the accident
e.) something else

 

[0p3ns0urc3s]

That isn't what I asked.

"The photo is supposed to prove that:

a.) person A was in the vicinity of the accident
b.) person A was not in the vicinity of the accident
c.) The car was damaged in the accident
d.) The car was not damaged in the accident
e.) something else

My apologies.
a. most definitely
Loosely c. for the defendants car because damage isn't always visible.

It was a hit and run on a holiday. I scrambled to get a pic of the plate, got it. Went to the police, filed a report and drew & described the person driving as well as the vehicle. Waited for the report. Contacted insurance. Got ignored. Went to small claims.

See my next answer please. Sorry.
My exhibit 1 was put forth to prove a. and c.

 

[0p3ns0urc3s]

That isn't what I asked.

"The photo is supposed to prove that:

a.) person A was in the vicinity of the accident
b.) person A was not in the vicinity of the accident
c.) The car was damaged in the accident
d.) The car was not damaged in the accident
e.) something else

I think I still answered your question incorrectly.
Their Exhibit D was put forth to prove b. and d.

My exhibit was put forth to prove the opposite.

 

[cbg]

Which means a date on the photo would be supporting evidence at best and does not conclusively mean anything at all.

 

[0p3ns0urc3s]

Which means a date on the photo would be supporting evidence at best and does not conclusively mean anything at all.

All evidence is supporting.
Respectfully, I don't understand this answer. I don't think this response means anything.

Is it OK for a judge to plant a date on evidence?


https://postimg.cc/N2sghZc4
Would you say the above cropped photo is dated? What about,
"... dated the morning after the alleged incident..."?

If you were handed this exhibit at trial then would you regard it as "dated the morning after the alleged incident..."? Do you see April 9 on the exhibit?

Edit:
All good evidence is supporting. Only judges truly conclude.

 

[Zigner]

It's quite clear that nobody believes that the minor error in the writing affected the outcome of the case. The testimony was, obviously, enough.

There really is nothing more to be gained from arguing the matter here.

 

[0p3ns0urc3s]

It's quite clear that nobody believes that the minor error in the writing affected the outcome of the case. The testimony was, obviously, enough.

There really is nothing more to be gained from arguing the matter here.

Then why avoid stating that? Appellate judges chastised the Progressive attorney at oral argument and side stepped it in the decision.

Why do you think mistaking evidence is a minor error for a judge?
I sure don't. The fact that this "minor error" isn't in any way talked about and is steadily avoided means all the judges agree.


https://postimg.cc/N2sghZc4
Would you say the above cropped photo is dated? What about,
"... dated the morning after the alleged incident..."?

If you were handed this exhibit at trial then would you regard it as "dated the morning after the alleged incident..."? Do you see April 9 on the exhibit?

Why is this so hard to answer? Plenty of you call it a mistake but none of you answer.

 

[0p3ns0urc3s]

It's quite clear that nobody believes that the minor error in the writing affected the outcome of the case. The testimony was, obviously, enough.

There really is nothing more to be gained from arguing the matter here.

It also can't be "minor" if having dates on exhibits is mentioned numerous times in the decision. Obviously dates mattered a great deal to the trial judge.

 

[quincy]

It also can't be "minor" if having dates on exhibits is mentioned numerous times in the decision. Obviously dates mattered a great deal to the trial judge.

Did you ever investigate any vehicle repairs made by your defendant? If not, why not?

Seriously, from what I read of your case, I saw nothing that proved the defendant caused damage to your vehicle. What you presented was inadequate. You lost for that reason.

This thread has been reported for moderator review.