How else do you say that someone sees something that is not there?
Erred, confused, mistook?
Sigh. But mistook nothing for something? She obviously didn't read or look at the exhibit.
If the judge looked at your phone and saw a dated photo, the judge apparently mistook your photo for the defendant’s photo. Erred is okay, too.
The judge saw the defendants photo and erred thinking there was a date on the photo. There was no date on the photo. But he testified to the date.
The judge threw out (mentally) the photo of mine where I showed the car right by mine after the accident occurred.
Right. So the judge confused your photo with the defendant’s photo. Did you present anything else in court that showed the defendant was the one who damaged your car (e.g., police report)?
Yes and I drew the child driver on the police report where I accurately described the driver and the car. But the judge said nothing of how I could draw a likeness of a minor, unlicensed driver on a police report if I'd never seen the kid driving the car.
Have you gone over all of this with an attorney in your area? It might be worthwhile for you to purchase a few hours of an attorney’s time to help you with your appeal, or perhaps seek assistance at a local legal aid clinic.
Yes. A lot of people are glad this judge was not elected. I just need someone to look and listen like you. Everyone in the courts avoids it.
It seems they discount what I say because I'm Pro Se. The appeals court addressed this issue at oral argument then left it out of the decision based on no transcript when no one needs a transcript. It is present from the judgment entry decision and exhibits alone.
Yes, wholeheartedly. But she wouldn't correct herself. The appeals court wouldn't correct her. And, the state Supreme Court doesn't seem like it will.
Then you say the judge made a mistake, not that she "hallucinated."
