By Christopher Cross
At the forefront of all judicial and quasi-judicial mandates is that of every citizen's inherent and fundamental right to receive a fair and impartial hearning no matter what platform such exists. Thereby compelling, as a matter of law that Judges, Magistrates and Referee's be impartial when exercizing the authority of their office. See State v. Bass, 81 S.W.3d 595, 613 (Mo. App. 2002). And in this, those holding such an office must refrain from indicating their belief in either guilt or innocence of the accused regardless if such is a criminal or civil trial proceding. To-wit, "[n]or may [he] let such belief be reflected or even conjectured by the jury in his treatment of either [party]. See State v. Jackson , 836 S.W.2d 1, 7 (Mo. App. 1992). And to ensure that "[n]o error [occurs] if the trial judge does not express [an] opinion as to the nature, content or tuthfulness of the evidence," see Bass at 614. To-wit, such an opinion may be expressed implicitly through suggestive conduct or hostile remarks. See State v. Wren , 486 S.W.2d 447, 448-49 (Mo. 1972).
Fortunately, in real Courts' of law the impartiality standard lives far more than exists in the state bureaucratic systems of unemployment hearings, which often prescribe to Neo-Nazi Third Rich mentalities, customs, patterns or practices. Making the law up as the trials moves along and often promoting the agenda's of corporations by depriving common citizens their Constitutional and State created rights and / or liberties.
In January 2005, the Columbia Daily Tribune, Jefferson City, Missouri appropriately and accurately summed up the corruption existing in the Missouri Division of Employment Security by pointing out that Chief Refereee "Ron Miller is proof positive that the political appointment process in Missouri is dirty."