JUDGE SIMPSON EXPLODES ON ATTORNEY DURING SENTENCING! 

Totally agree. Looking at my house in Google Maps you don’t perceive the nearly impassable, steep hill behind it. If I said I couldn’t see something down the hill behind my house you’d think I was lying.

The be fair the charge is leaving the scene of a minor car accident….likely a fine….maybe probation at most…. It just suddenly turned into something outragous

The parties agreed to sentence and thought this would be a formality. This was a stunning move by an amazing judge who lost his impartiality and he knows it.

judge said something about showing up two hours late. perhaps attorney forgot about the hearing and that's partly why Judge was taking a closer look...a little riled up. he may be right. I don't know.

I agree. Being in court is scary enough; being there alone shouldn’t happen.

@@IGNANT4LIFE the obvious anger about the attorney being two hours late should have been enough to just adjourn the proceeding to another day, vs even risking the appearance of letting your irritation with the attorney color your judgement towards the defendant. This could be a slam dunk on appeal.

Generally, a judge can give any sentence within the range provided by statute. He or she doesn't even need to explain it. If I were the judge here, I would have just pronounced the sentence without the 20 minute speech.

@@kcgunesq I assume the plea deal included no jail time as part of the agreement. If the judge wants to depart from that he needs to make a record as to why he is doing it and give the defendant a chance to withdraw his plea.

Judges do not have to follow plea agreements. They determine the punishment. Also, all jufged read reports and review material before sentencing. The o ly thing he did was explain his reasoning. Maybe he should have thrown him in jail for killing 2 girls by chasing them down for no damn reason. 2 women against an angry man who then follows then AFTER he has their info are not wrong for acting in fear.

The judge is a joke. He shouldn't even be a judge with what he did in the past. Just look him up

@@meekomio The defendant also has the right to withdraw their plea if the judge doesn't stick to the plea agreement. The woman fled the scene of an accident. He only chased because they hit him first and allegedly sped away. Most importantly though, he wasn't charged with any crime relating to their deaths.

my .02, for whatever it’s worth, I didn’t think the explanation was that long winded but he had to put his reasons for his sentencing “on the record”..right OR wrong. judge;s are not bound to sentencing recommendations on plea deals and this is why…

Exactly right. That’s why he came back so loud and aggressive. He knew.

His voice was shaking. Happens to me when I'm in a serious position.

@@OSGCourtWatchcmon, judge Simpson is always long winded and him turning into Mattlock with no evidence, just his personal opinion is totally out of line. And he knew it. That’s why he got so angry.

Judge Simpson is losing it more and more. He is too angry and should not be on the bench allowing his emotions to impede good judgement.

To me, it looked like van Laan was out of control. His facial expressions were hysterically child-like, reminding me of my baby brother holding back a full, hyperactive fit.

@@distriawhirlwind7367 The judge was out of control here. If the lawyer doesn't file a complaint against Simpson, he is not doing his job. The judge was so out of line here.

@@distriawhirlwind7367 I would agree that the facial expressions were ridiculous.. But to play devils advocate here, I think that's one of the big problems I have with zoom-based meetings of any type.. I think people forget that, while they're in their own private place or wherever, that other people can see them.. I don't think he'd have made those faces in an actual courtroom.. They really need to stop allowing virtual court appearances, except in very specific circumstances. I do think his tactic, when he spoke to the judge, was a bit over the top, which made the judges temper flare because he took it personally. I like Judge Simpson a lot -- he doesn't put up with any nonsense -- but in this case, I do think he was a bit over the top as well.

Yeah but the parents made a claim and he hear them out. Is that really important ​@@soundguydon

There's no Babyface here this is strictly a heel program.

It’s more than that in my opinion. He knows what he’s doing and it’s suicidal. Someone got to Judge Simpson. Reeks of corruption.

​@@DaylightDisinfectantyep. Smh

A judge that gets emotional has no business being a judge.

Judge should drop out and take this to jury' trial now

Not irregular, unlawful. Simpson is being prosecutor and judge by investigating. Even worse, he investigated the wrong crime. The charge was leaving the scene, not whether he saw it or caused it.

@@derekbootle8316 Just remember that Judge Simpson was already guilty of judicial misconduct. And the minority opinion of the Michigan Supreme Court wanted to not just charge him with fine and suspension but to also remove him from the bench. Sometimes he gets too riled up and also has too much of an ego issue when riled up.

I think Simpson should step down from his position, or be forceably removed from whatever agency in Michigan can hold judges accountable. I thought he was a good judge, but he needs to be removed before he gets worse. He doesn't sound that he is mentally all there anymore.

@@boooster101 His ego does get in his way and that's why I can only take him in small doses. It's his way or the highway. I think in this cases he was haunted by the mom's grief and wanted to deliver some justice but that may have been beyond his role (I don't know enough to say one way or the other whether it was inappropriate).

Totally agree. Judge Simpson is fun to watch but he has a job to do, and impartiality is central to that job. In this case he's lost that impartiality, seemingly due to the victims' parents. He can't be so easily swayed by emotion if he wants to be a judge. He's gone off on a wild goose chase of his own, essentially investigating the crime himself. It's not his job and if he doesn't know better, he should retire or have his title removed

. EXACTLY WELL SAID

I'm VERY confused by the accusation that he had to have seen the 2nd accident that he wasn't involved in. First, I don't think the judge can determine where his eyes were, and second what would it matter if he did see it? He doesn't have an obligation to stop or report an accident.

​actually, one does have an obligation to stop and report, and all have laws called, "Good Samaritan or Duty to Rescue" Laws. I know each states laws are written differently, here in Nebraska, you can be put in jail and pay a fine if you pass an accident.

@blakepenberthy5698 but none of that has ANYTHING to do with what he's charged with or pleading to. The charges related to the 2nd accident were dropped way early in the process.. Then they dropped any other charges with the plea. He's only pleading guilty to leaving the scene of the 1st accident where they rear-ended him. They drove off from that accident and got into an accident. Now, he's being sentenced based on whether he could see that 2nd accident or not, which is irrelevant.

@@Mewse1203 ,I was answering the person above me. I agree 100% This poor guy is being railroaded and this is not justice at all. Most cases is the person fault that hits a person from behind not the other way around!

Do you know what happened in this case? Is there any news articles?

@@leo2md786 i don't have any info. Hope we get a follow up.

i found this video fascinating on many fronts...i tend to agree with ya but sentencings on pleas are not guaranteed by the court and clearly the judge didnt feel the defendant was being honest. i dont fault the deendant for withdrawing the plea IF thats what they chooseto do..make the state prove the case.

@@OSGCourtWatch Very unexpected.

​@@OSGCourtWatchyou're not wrong that sentence lengths aren't guaranteed on plea agreements, but in this case it's very clear the basis for the sentence that Judge Simpson was considering was centered entirely on things that had nothing to do with his actual charges and I'm guessing that's why the attorney was so heated

@@pendragon3434 Yup, he's attempting to sentencing him on a totally different set of facts from the charges at hand. Defense has called it out at every stage rightfully so. They objected to the statements, they objected to the facts being brought in, they objected to the 911 calls, they objected to his review of the evidence. Defense was entitled to a contested hearing on these facts if they were going to be used at sentencing.

Judge Middleton would have done the same as Judge Simpson, I think.

The defense attorneys facial reactions were rude and dismissive. Unprofessional.

@@North_West1 wrong he was outraged and had every right to be! Judge Simpson was totally out of line…

@@bouncingback3 In what was was the judge out of line?

@@WukongTheMonkeyKing as Judge Simpson stated himself in the first hearing his only job was to go by the first accident (The girls hitting Torres’s car and fleeing). He flat out told the mothers he could not go back and base anything on what happened after that. Him going back and go over things that happened after that and coming to a conclusion without getting any evidence the defendant may have is dead wrong.

@@bouncingback3 unless he didn't need to get new evidence, and could infer from the evidence given. Things like looking at maps are not getting new evidence, provided location details have been entered into evidence. Simpson could be overruled on appeal. We'll see.

his landlord tenant cases are very frustrating to watch

@@clark-ul7tp That one with the woman who was a hoarder pissed me off.

@@LouieNJ i know which one you mean…totally agree

@@clark-ul7tpI was JUST gonna say that, he needs to stay as far away from LL/Tenant as possible. Sadly for the LL's in this county he can't, they eat so much money because JS will allow a tenant to stay for over a year because of last minute claims of mold or damage not even having the tenant put rent into escrow. He gave a tenant who was down over $10,000 the chance to get caught up paying only $50 extra a month. That would take years but he doesn't care.

He’s usually on point. He had an off day on this one.

Okay please explain why? The 911 call was admitted and it was obvious the defendant lied through his teeth

This is sentencing, not a trial. The judge has *wide* leeway in what he takes into account, including testimony from people who weren't even there. He's allowed to believe or not believe testimony based on what has been submitted. I guess you could argue that looking at a map is doing an investigation but, again, judges have a fairly wide leeway in what they can do here.

@@annepence4351 The defendant pleaded guilty to not stopping at the _first_ accident (where the girls rear-ended him), not the accident where the girls rolled their truck over at the railroad tracks. Whether the defendant saw the second accident is irrelevant to this charge and should therefore be irrelevant to the sentence. The plea agreement did not contemplate jail time, as it’s very unusual to give jail time for leaving the scene of a minor fender-bender that you didn’t cause. After having already given their victim’s impact statements, the mothers begged the court to conduct its own investigation into the facts surrounding the second accident - an accident he was not being charged with. The judge is trying to appease the grieving mothers, who are unwilling to accept that their daughters caused their own deaths, by sentencing the defendant to jail time based on his determination that the defendant must have seen (not caused) the second accident.

@@amicaaranearum Thanks for the clarifications, that helps. I admit to not fully understanding the facts of the underlying case.

@@amicaaranearum however the judge does have the discretion for jail time in this case… And Judge Simpson allowed a motion to vacate the plea, so he will have his day in court yes? Let a jury decide.

Agree. Disappointing.

They don’t call him Simpson the softy for nothing

Yes, attorney was professional and appropriate.

​@kt-4383 yes he been ambushed from day one .... that the mother's started telling the judge of what he already knew.... if you tell me you are going to jail for breaking the window 🪟 not for the building falling.... the judge is taking this personally

Judge is cowtowing to the family.

Lol thats the deal with plea deals. The judge is not bound to the deal in sentencing. If he is so sure of his innocence it should be brought before a jury. Which perhaps is what the judge wanted. There are things being concealed & hopefully it all comes out ....

I still don't understand Mr. Torrez connection to the crash that killed the girls. Did he cause them to go off the road? If not why are their deaths mentioned with such jugement towards Mr.Torrez?

What did the defendant do?

Attorney Van Laan was doing his job and advocating for his client versus bowing to the judges investigation. Judge Simpson attempts to intimidate attorneys by getting loud.

All Van Laan did was try to put his objection on the record. Simpson exploded at him for doing so. Those are the actions of a man who knows he messed up.

Yeah, rewatching it, Simpson kinda worked himself up such that he probably would've flown off the handle no matter what Van Laan said.

Power gone to his head on this one - shame as I like his no nonsense approach in general.

The defense lawyer did nothing wrong, tf you talking about could’ve been more diplomatic?

Hopefully, the resolution is the defendant gets a fair trial and Simpson is removed from the bench.

Case thrown out and judge disbarred hopefully

You love a corrupt judge?

the harsher sentencing wouldn't have been based off of events after the accident, it would have been based on the fact that defense was lying to the court.

I'm thinking that his anger at the perceived lying overtook Judge Simpson so much that it really threw him off his game.

You nailed it! He is too emotionally involved now to be impartial

You are completely wrong, a judge has a right to determine if the guy is telling the truth

Exactly The parents pulled at his emotions and he investigated. He lost sight of his role . He was wrong on this one. This was merely a formality to a plea. Done.

@@shreev9671wrong. Judge accepted the plea. We are way past evidence. This is inappropriate

@shreev9671 wrong. A judge is not a finder of fact during a trial, never mind during sentencing for a charge that does not even exist. The best I can say for the judge is he is suffering from temporary insanity.

@squish do you have this case all in a playlist? Thank you.

i know i would have a hard time not being somewhat emotional if i was sitting on the bench too...

@@OSGCourtWatch yeah, me too, but I'm not a judge.

Why was he out of line, he wasn’t going to go soft on a guilty man

@@GA-wq8xq Guilty of what?

The girls were guilty not the victim. The girls should have stopped after they hit the victim

I would think so, because the judge is basically testifying and virtually retrying the defendant and that's no allowed for a judge who is to be impartial when trying the case.

​​@@kikatx I agree. Also, shouldn't the judge have reviewed all of this prior to the last hearing? This was a plea deal , right? I'll have to go back and watch the older video again. If it was a plea deal the judge could have rejected it. I'm confusing myself 🤦🏽

@@kikatxYup, and I think he let his emotions get the better of him with the family’s statements. And I think the defense attorney has not been happy with this for a while and it boiled over today.

Someone has something on Judge Simpson. To me it’s the only possible reason to see him come off the rails.

@@DaylightDisinfectant Nah the mothers tugged at his heart strings

Ill be back!

Get ready ! It’s coming up soon!

Yeah! I hated it when judge seek justice.

Recuse and resign his position.

​@@davidohara7669he acted outside the scope of his job as judge. I agree with what the defense attorney said.

He also should have let the attorney make a statement on the record without interruptions

Your racism is showing...and it isn't pretty.

He sure did. I remember that. JS … even his conduct lacked decorum. Yelling like a toddler OVER the defense counsel … after asking for his response. I’m like, “Dude you asked him and now you’re talking over him”

He shouldn't because Judge Simpson read what was given to him and he based his opinion on the evidence and I think he's 100% right he just went about it the wrong way and got emotional over it

@@brandenantonino23 then they need to charge him with contributing to the accident.

@@brandenantonino23 Looking at location data is not enough to prove where a person is. Regardless, it is irrelevant. Even if the defendant saw the accident, he didn't cause it.

@@nobodyimportant7804 the judge is gonna base his verdict off if what's in front of him if the defendant didn't give information to prove he didn't cause it then that's his fault

He never ran them off the road. The teens caused a minor fender-bender by rear-ending Torres. The teens immediately fled the scene at high speed. Torres attempted to follow them. He caught up to them after they went airborne at the railroad tracks, flew through a thicket of trees, and rolled into a field. Again, he didn't catch up to them until after they caused their own fatal accident. It's a tragedy, but one of the teens' own making.

Believe it or not, it's illegal to drive recklessly or speed, even to follow a hit and run driver. If he misled 911, that might be a crime too. It appears they were contemplating charging him with these things but they pled it to leaving the scene of an accident. As long as the judge stays in the limits for the crime pled to, I think he can consider the extenuating circumstances around the crime. You certainly wouldn't take issue if a judge considered something heroic surrounding a crime to give the minimum, right? If he was saving a little girl, and got angry and punched someone he shouldn't have, you would want the judge to look at what was going on and give him a break, right?

@@ED-es2qvThe problem is that none of that are things that were plead guilty to or accepted as facts in the case. So for the judge to choose to take those as facts, and also insert partly their own investigation on distances, sight lines, etc... is wrong. If they were agreed upon facts surrounding their charge then sure. Otherwise no. If he doesn't like where the prosecutor left it then he can take that up with them.

Calls to 911 are not sworn statements. They can be used like uttered statements by the opposing party. The police report and actual testimony would be sworn to if there was a trial. Falsehoods in those could result in other charges. The prosecutor can contemplate all she wants, but she accepted leaving the scene of a property damage accident where he was, in fact, the victim. A crime with a maximum penalty of 90 days in jail, a $100 fine, and 6 points on his license. There is no real case against Torres; regardless of how everyone feels, there isn't the evidence to charge him.

​@@ED-es2qv But he didn't stay within the limits of the crime he pled to. That's exactly why the defense attorney flipped out. Simpson is kind of stuck with the State's decision to charge him in a very limited fashion. If Simpson has a problem with the Prosecuting Attorney's Office, then he should leave the bench and go set that Office straight.

I don't even think you could make that argument considering there is no one disputing the facts of what the defendant actually pled guilty to. Both the state and the defense stipulated to those facts, the defendant was rear ended and then left the scene

Not true. Judges can take judicial knowledge of his own personal knowledge of a location and it has been ruled that a judge can take judicial knowledge of distances etc provided by google maps.

​@@Nclghtexcept they don't get to gather their own facts and make rulings on facts not in evidence.

THIS judge is corrupt AF. look him up. ,he was investigated for favorably helping friends on matters and tried to influence police officers in that.

Yup, I feel the same way. Simpson is typically awesome, but let me ask you something, if he didn't have the plate and followed them to get it, would their fleeing the scene and crashing while running to avoid the responsibility for the crash THEY caused mean that the defendant should be charged? In the end, I'd say no. Those poor kids caused a minor crash, then turned a citation or misdemeanor, at worst, into a felony. Then, their fleeing caused an even bigger crash that got them killed. It's not OK, and the poor dead kids are the ones who were wrong from the word go. I don't feel bad for the parents of the driver, they raised a monster that got her friend killed. If they had taught her personal responsibility for her actions, she'd never have run from the first crash and they'd just be dealing with insurance headaches right now. Lastly, Simpson was flat wrong. He does not get to introduce evidence to himself after the plea with no opportunity for the defendant to respond. He is now irrevocably tainted and should recuse after allowing the plea to be withdrawn.

@@undecidedmiddleground5633 where can I watch the other hearings? Or find out more details of this case!

What's going to be fun is that at the trial it's going to come out that the girls were not sober. The defense attorney has already implied as such, he just didn't feel the need to go into it at the time because he thought everything was reasonable and right and this guy would get a good sentence based on the charges he's actually plead to. Now, if this goes to trial they're going to talk about how these girls were not sober and this guy shouldn't be getting punished for their actions.

I would say that he is being lawless.

Judge is blaming poor guy for the Stupid, Drunk, ENTITLED Brats.

This is a fairly old video. I saw a second part to this where the judge backtracks a whole heap, but this is still unresolved because the judge wanted to throw the book at the defendant for things not part of the charge, found he couldn't and is dragging the process out.

@@jamesrowden303 do you have a link of the follow up?

Nah, I think it was live and SImpson deletes his quite soon after the livestream. @@tonettesherman4323

Yeah, this definitely sounds like prosecutor closing arguments. Should be an easy appeal for the defendant.

It's a sad day where justice is stayed because of bullshit legal technicalities and a disgusting plea deal. I'm with Simpson on this one.

There's some truth to what you say - a cell phone's GPS can be off, but that is highly uncommon. It almost entirely happens when there is GPS signal interference, like in cities with tall buildings. Today's GPS are extremely accurate and reliable. The OTHER location sensing is from the cell tower(s) themselves...this is less accurate than a phone's GPS because it may use triangulation from several towers or newer techniques available in 5G. The prosecution has the ability to research and determine which location method was used, and can subsequently determine (through testing) what the accuracy range was.

The defendant told the 911 operator where he was when calling. What was placed in evidence by his attorney was a lie. The judge was not going to accept a plea based on lies. Once the lawyer spoke with his client he realized that the judge was right and asked to withdraw the plea. The 911 call was placed into evidence and all the judge had to do was realize that it contradicted what his lawyer presented to the court. It didn't take an investigation to understand he was lying just simply listening to his own words on the 911 call. Something the prosecutor should have figured out without the judge pointing out. He didn't pull anything out of his ass. He just proved he was lying. When he called 911 he said where he was and that contradicted what his lawyer presented. He was not farther back and unable to witness what happened. 2+2 still equals four dude. As the judge said he wasn't making a ruling just giving the lawyer a chance to realize the plea agreement was based on inaccurate information and withdraw it. Which he did. Case closed the fools going down.

@@jimsachtjen119 just because the Judge thought he was lying does not make it fact. Thats why we have trials so evidence can be brought up and refuted if need be. He honestly may have been mistaken or the pinged location not accurate.

Yes. He is making novel accusations from his own investigation in a position of the case where it would be wildly inappropriate for the defendant to have to defend all the accusations and evidence presented. What if he got it wrong about where he was and it was not a either here nor there situation but a third place. The 911-responder saying that is not where they have him is not a fact that can be responded to. How good is the tracking? Depending on cellphone-positioning triangulation can be tricky. What if both wasn't at A or B but at C and it covered a tower giving only two towers in a shallow direction? More or less pointing at the same spot which would sorta work like one tower in that direction. Or something completely novel. He is the judge. Not the prosecutor. And how are the defendant supposed to act towards the allegations? Try to defend against them against the judge? Then he will be pissed and biased. This is a situation where he is to allocute not defend from verbal accusations without any due process.

@@peope1976 The defendant told the 911 operator exactly where he was. That didn't coincide with what his lawyer put into to the record. Damn how stupid are you.

@@tonettesherman4323 On the 911 call the dude said exactly where he was. That is not what his lawyer put into the record. Damn his own words prove the plea agreement was based on a lie. He wasn't farther back his own statement to 911 proved it. Damn dude wake up. The judge is not going to accept a plea agreement based on lies. Might be why the lawyer advises his client to withdraw his plea. He realized the judge was right. The judge made no ruling he simply proved that he was lying and gave the lawyer the opportunity to withdraw the plea.

No..Judge was NOT WRONG..

@@pameliahartsfield4572 The judge was so wrong that he was lawless. He was acting as a judge, investigator, and prosecutor and applying what he thought were facts but were outside the scope of the charges. You can't take a crime and use facts from outside that crime to prove and sentence. Simpson was acting illegally and trying to deny due process to the defendant.

​@@nobodyimportant7804 he was reading what was given to him he's not wrong at all but the attorney isn't wrong either in the fact that the judge shouldn't have used the second accident against him

Pride cometh before the fall.

@@DaylightDisinfectantwouldn’t be pride, I don’t think, just sympathy for the parents

I hope you are right. This is genuinely shocking! Suddenly the judge is the prosecutor, jury, and judge….. he is out of line!

Simpson needs to be careful -- he could find himself facing a reprimand or more by the judicial committee.

yes Amanda…agreed. when I first starting watching the day to day magistrates & disctrict courts vs just the big tv trials it was extremely eye opening…

This judge was going to be the prosecution and jury on this regardless. This is clear. The attorney did a great job. The judge needs to recuse himself. He is defying his duty.

Could the defense attorney just file an appeal and explain all of this?

@@kimsy520his objections have to be made known at that time on the record or they can’t be brought up in appeals. Nothing the attorney did was wrong.

@@kimsy520 no need to appeal yet. There is no longer a plea…… they need to get before a different judge. This judge went and looked up his own “evidence.” He needs to be recused.

Yeah I'm glad that both the video maker and the comments are pointing this out- the attorney is making a good point and I think that the Judge is probably overextending appropriate bounds.

Agreed. I love Judge Simpson, but he is dead wrong in this situation. Which attorney produced and presented that map he showed? Neither of them? Oh that's right, the judge just produced and presented that evidence himself. Wildly innapropriate.

how do you figure the guy said it on a statement what happen he said he was there, watch it again that lawyer has been in trouble a lot of time on different cases

@@isthisbetterwell9958Ds I’m not even talking about the facts of the case I’m talking about the fact that the judge is doing his own investigation which is so unbelievably improper. He should be sentencing on the charge the guy pled to. If he didn’t like the plea he could deny it but he didn’t. And now he wants to do his own thing and investigate and sentence the guy based on emotion. It’s not right.

​@@Sara-bv9ui Is it just that a man responsible for contributing to an accident resulting in death should get off with a minor fine when the evidence shows he is misrepresenting his level of involvement?

Hrs reading what's given to him and he's making statements based on hard cold facts judge Simpson went about it wrong yes but he was trying to do the right job

@@brandenantonino23Those aren't facts because they haven't been analyzed by actual experts and cross-examined by the defense. You can't take call location data at face value and it is irrelevant to the charges.

@@nobodyimportant7804 doesn't matter the dude waved his rights and that means he doesn't get his trial he gets what's coming to him when he waves those rights it's not my fault or the judges that the idiot threw away his rights

@@brandenantonino23 He didn't throw away his rights and didn't give the judge the right to try him on something he wasn't charged for. The judge was using evidence improperly, from a legal and scientific perspective. This is clear judicial misconduct, something Simpson has been suspended for in the past. He is a bad judge.

Apparently you don’t watch much judge simp. He quotes himself often enough, that he can only try what’s in front of him, even saying it here. lol then in the same breath, continues to try and use the actual case in front of him to pass judgment on this separate case that this defendant is not on trial for. Just bc a bunch of Karen’s want to blame someone else with their dumb kids death. probably the very reason the kids died to begin with. Nothing is ever their precious kids fault; always someone else’s. I mean, if judge simp is so concerned about this, then why is he even contemplating taking this man’s plea, knowing the defendant is lying? Judge simp has thrown out pleas on many occasions for a defendant lying, specifically at sentencing hearings. If this judge truly believed this man was culpable in someone’s death, and then not a peep about admonishing the prosecution for not bringing the applicable charges to hold this person accountable, pathetic! I think his constituents wouldn’t be very happy about allowing such an injustice to side. Not to mention what a horrible disservice to the families to allow this man whom “killed” their loved ones; continue to lie at his sentencing. While also completely skirting any charges related to their loved ones untimely deaths. lol you think anything positive about this absolute judge Judy act he’s doing? Pretending that it resembles any kind of American Justice. lol this is a case of a judge fingering the scales of Justice. The judge brought facts from an unrelated case, which this defendant was never tried for; and neither the defense nor the prosecution argued a motion to have these facts heard in this case. The only thing sad here is the poor defendant who’s tied up bound and gagged to the tracks of this court to be railroaded by the unwitting American Justice system. Judge was completely emotionally involved. Van Laan is the gd man here. The only victim on screen is the defendant. And it’s utterly sad how many people are just “headline” junkies ready to convict a man bc a gaggle of Karen’s pulled on the judge heart strings. Keep in mind “head line” junkies is responsible for the likes of flat earthers. Your non critical thinking is absolutely analogous here. Tata, bunch of people being high off this line of thinking these days. That’s what’s truly sad. Dumb kids got them selves killed, and even in death will forever affect this defendants life. Appeals will overturn any injustice here; judge simp will regret this one day soon. 💯

I don’t think he was bored. I think he was caught off guard by the court deciding to do its own investigation into facts that were not relevant to the crime that his client actually pleaded guilty to (leaving the scene of the _first_ accident) and then considering those facts in deciding to sentence his client to jail time.

I think he was trying hard to keep from interrupting the Judge. Working off some of his nervous/stress energy.

name like that, i know you're a fake

I agree..... Simpson is so great because of his emotions but this time I think being a dad hit him hard on this one.

He was acting like the judge, juror and executioner.

he fucked up very hard.

I suspect they did, but given the totality of the circumstances (including the fact that the decedents rear ended the defendant and then raced away) concluded the plea deal was the best they could do. Surely Simpson is experienced enough to understand that.

@@Dub-ro9tk There were also allegations that the “victims” may have been under the influence when the accident occurred. All things considered, it sounds like it would have been difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant caused the second accident.