Skip to main content

See also:

Why can't Feiger say the word “polygraph”?

Did attorney Feiger really break the law

Rating:
Star0
Star
Star
Star
Star

If not mistaken, there are more people out there that read and listen to the news, from Flint and regions beyond, without the rose-colored lenses of a legal tint? With that being a case, then why does the news media, from a Channel 7 News reporter Thursday, reporting on attorney Geoffrey Fieger's misuse of the “P-word” for “polygraph,” to the IPAD ABAJOURNAL “there's an app for that,” reporter Martha Neil report's that the famous defense attorney said, without explaining the term to the laymen public. Why does mentioning that word, represent a crime in the court room of the judge.

Apparently, in Judge Rae Lee Chabot's courtroom to err could be forgiven, but not in her presence can either attorney utter that multi-syllabled word having to do with attempting to establish credibility by medical equipment means. We understand that the machine is outlawed or even overruled, but why is this the case -- and why does the mere mentioning of the word, stand to cost either or any attorney not only a fine, but the judge clarified her remarks -- by adding that jail time could and quite possibly would be imposed for the faux pas?

The ABAJOURNAL cited the Detroit Free Press coverage of the the murder trial in which Fieger is representing defendant Jonathan Belton, who is accused of shooting an Oak Park public safety officer following a traffic stop.

The court's and those who ply their trade and their might in them, are more powerful than the social institutions that apparently foster and provide for them. Now if we just had a judge in Flint that could impose a penalty on people who use the “N-word” or the “W-word,” you see where this is heading, don't you? Apparently, free-speech is somewhat limited in the legal system, and not outside of it, well in Michigan anyway.

Comments