You’ve heard of a “hanging judge”? I prefer a slapping judge, like this one. Let’s start with the story, then a follow-up story of a Florida finger-flipper:
Slapped Upside the Head the Right Way
“To be abundantly clear, it is not a crime to give someone the finger,” scolded Judge Dennis Galiatsatos of the Court of Quebec, Canada, in a 26-page ruling. “Flipping the proverbial bird is a God-given, Charter enshrined right that belongs to every red-blooded Canadian,” he continued. “The complainants are free to clutch their pearls in the face of such an insult. However, the police department and the 9-1-1 dispatching service have more important priorities to address.” With that, “This injustice ends today,” he ruled, throwing out the criminal case against Neall Epstein, instigated by his neighbor, Michael Naccache, 34, who repeatedly called police on Epstein, calling the gesture “threatening.” Epstein was arrested and prosecuted for “criminal harassment and uttering death threats,” the judge observed. Galiatsatos further lectured that Naccache “consistently videotaped their neighbours,” and provided video “evidence” to the court showing the problem — including Naccache and his wife driving “dangerously near the [Epstein’s] children as a way to protest their presence.” Then, “With an irony of unmatched proportions, they complain that [Epstein] might have recorded them. He did not.” Prof. Andrew McDougall of the University of Toronto, an expert in constitutional law, commented that “If all the person did was simply put up the middle finger, it would be hard to read [it] as a threat.” (RC/Toronto Star) …Unless Naccache is willing to go on record as believing it was loaded.
From the 12 March 2023 issue (#1500)
Thrown with Great Force
The story noted the judge threw the case out. That’s the short version. His version is more poetic, and worthy of a reading:
In the modern-day vernacular, people often refer to a criminal case “being thrown out”. Obviously, this is little more than a figurative expression. Cases aren’t actually thrown out, in the literal or physical sense. Nevertheless, in the specific circumstances of this case, the Court is inclined to actually take the file and throw it out the window, which is the only way to adequately express my bewilderment with the fact that Mr. Epstein was subjected to an arrest and a fulsome criminal prosecution. Alas, the courtrooms of the Montreal courthouse do not have windows.
…emphasis from the original. Let that be noted for all past and future True stories that use the short version.
But Wait, There’s More!
The entire 26-page ruling is great reading, just like the several short sentences I quoted. Here it is in PDF format:
I particularly like that after Naccache and then Epstein testified, the judge said that “in a tremendous display of professionalism and objectivity, Crown counsel [the prosecutor] declined to cross-examine him since, in her view, it was not in the public interest to do so. Instead, she humbly invited the Court to enter an acquittal.” Again, that’s the prosecutor inviting the judge to make an acquittal!
The only amazing thing is that the judge didn’t offer Mr. Epstein a restraining order against his false accuser, or suggest the Crown prosecutor might consider charges against Naccache for his criminal threats, reckless driving, and perjury.
Naccache repeatedly referred to Epstein as “insane,” the “crazy neighbour,” Judge Galiatsatos found. I’m willing to bet that 99 percent of people who read through the judge’s summary of his testimony will conclude that Epstein is not only not insane, but rather exhibits great self-control over the Naccache family’s provocations, including physical assault and not-so-veiled threats of great bodily harm to Epstein’s two young daughters.
If someone is “insane” here, I’m willing to bet you’ll think it’s Naccache, and perhaps his family members, who should be so described.
In any case, the situation itself is definitely insane, so I’m truly happy there’s at least one judge in North America who is not only willing to confront it in such clear terms, but also willing to release his written ruling to the public as a well-written example of the proper response to the obliviocy we see in so many of True’s stories.
I’ll be interested in your comments.
The FFF: Florida Finger-Flipper
Even when zooming the photos are a bit hard to see, so scroll down for larger versions.
You’re welcome to share the image, but not the text version from this page (which includes all of the above, for that matter).
Count the Fingers II
Deputies with the Volusia County (Fla.) Sheriff’s Office were chasing a group of motorcyclists who refused to pull over — deputies said they were “driving recklessly” with speeding and passing in a no-passing zone, not to mention refusing to pull over. A deputy was behind the lead bike when they came to a red light. The biker turned around to see the deputy right behind him; the biker flipped the deputy off and ran the light — and was hit by a crossing pickup truck. The motorcyclist ran, but was quickly surrounded by deputies and handcuffed. “I’m hurt,” whined Joshua Richardson. “Idiot,” a deputy replied. “I know,” Richardson said. “You know how your leg doesn’t get hurt?” another deputy said. “You don’t run from the cops and crash your bike.” Richardson asked, “Do you think this is funny?” The deputy responded “No, I don’t think it’s funny. It’s incredibly stupid.” Richardson complained, “We’re being chased by 12 cops in the middle of nowhere. What am I supposed to do?” (RC/WESH Orlando, WEAR Pensacola) …Not be an idiot.
Click each to see full size, taken from the Volusia County (Fla.) Sheriff’s Office video.
All we need now is a good slappin’ judge for the bikers.
– – –
Bad link? Broken image? Other problem on this page? Use the Help button lower right, and thanks.
This page is an example of my style of “Thought-Provoking Entertainment”. This is True is an email newsletter that uses “weird news” as a vehicle to explore the human condition in an entertaining way. If that sounds good, click here to open a subscribe form.
To really support This is True, you’re invited to sign up for a subscription to the much-expanded “Premium” edition:
Q: Why would I want to pay more than the minimum rate?
A: To support the publication to help it thrive and stay online: this kind of support means less future need for price increases (and smaller increases when they do happen), which enables more people to upgrade. This option was requested by existing Premium subscribers.