FORMAL COMPLAINT - Sweden Confidential

United Nations petition — incomplete report
§ 60;
.....all judges — except lay-judges and assessors — must sign a binding
assurance obliging them to exert their office conscientiously (cf §§ 52, 53
and 65 ibid, item the Norwegian Constitution Article 21),
§ 76;
.....only persons markedly competent as co-judges and members of the jury
through their righteousness, skills and independence should be elected (cf §§
52, 53, 60 and 65 ib), and that
§ 108;
.....nobody can operate as a judge or juror when particular circumstances
potentially diminishing his impartiality eventuates (cf §§ 106 and 109 etc
ibid).
Furthermore; § 107 ib explicitly lays down that ".....neither judges nor jurors
can serve as experts in one and the same case.....(in this case all jury members
— viz Mr Horneman and Mr Hunstad — in their capacity as buddy-buddy
psychiatrists and tainted mercenaries chummily backing up their accomplices/
seniors, functioned as — experts)", and sec's 112, 113 and 115 ibid emphasizes
that the president of the court and his jurors are obliged to inform one another
and the respective parties about their actual disqualification. In this court case
unambiguous inhability after §§ 106 (items 1, 4 and 6), 107 and 108 in the Nor-
wegian Courts of Justice Act existed, and neither judge nor lay judges possessed
the moral and intellectual qualifications required by §§ 53, 60 and 76 ib (Mr
Lynghjem and Mr Horneman both had a Stanford-Binet IQ of 127 [cf Doc
#377, entry of Nov 07, 2000], and this alarming fact is in itself disqualifying...;
though — at least in this connection — a pitifully modest score, a general and
minimum IQ of 140 should be required of judges at all law courts)....and — not
only was there a very distinct lack of professional competency and noological
capability.....; we're dealing with downright corruption!
Handpicked to cover up official turpitude and give the various illegalities a
most treacherous garnish of "respectability", corresponding jury's felony may be
prosecuted/adjudicated usw in agreement with — e.g — subsequent sections of
the Norwegian Penal Code of May 22, 1902:
§ 110;
A judge, juror or assessor who in such capacity acts against his better
judgment shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding
five years.
If he thereby caused or was accessory to causing any person to be
wrongfully subjected to penalty or to a greater penalty than he deserved,
he shall be liable to imprisonment for a term not less than two years.
85
FORMAL COMPLAINT VS THE KINGDOM OF NORWAY
by Wilh. Werner WINTHER, Norway
85