Comment #: AZ2092
Rating:1.0
Comments:
I recently made a review regarding Judge Geoffrey fish handling of the states fraudulent charges against me and the most important parts of my review was redacted. But not in the eyes of God. my son never filed the charges against me and the prosecution ( all four of them coming against an innocent mother) , have filed on my sons behalf without his permission or knowledge . setting about to destroy an innocent mothers life for wanting the return of my child and speaking out on my sons behalf? wrong on so many levels . Gods searchlight is on Arizona praying God removes all [redacted] and bias Judges off the bench and replace with Godly Judges with ethics and a moral compass in Jesus mighty name . Amen . God sees all and knows all .why all the aggression against me I have no prior criminal history and wanting to confirm a doctors medical opinion does not equate to a felony two charge it seems the prosecution and Judge Fish have a decision to make to dismiss their fabricated charges against me with extreme prejudice . seeing number one : No signatures were on the Grand Jury Indictment , 2: I was arrested without a warrant and have proof of that on video and in writing , 3: the arraignment hearing was on July 19th, 2019 and it seems the prosecution has well went over the time frame for bringing their fabricated charges against me into trial! This Judge [redacted by Ed.] fired public defender LA to push for rule 11 when it never was a matter regarding my competency . As Judge fish stated on March 16th ,2020 . clearly this case should have been dismissed from the word go I have the evidence btw to prove my innocence and all the evidence to prove the retaliation and the prosecutions malicious prosecution for which my evidence states the case should have never been pulled into the criminal to begin with and my son returned ! Judge Fish asked what I wanted the fraudulent charges dropped with extreme prejudice never to bother my son or I ever again and my son returned back into my safe and loving care where he truly belongs!

Comment #: AZ2080
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Not just . Thinks he is above the law he swore an oath to protect . ignores rule 81 and rule of law and ignores pertinent evidence allows prosecution to file on my sons behalf when he never filed any charges against me nor requested anything from the prosecution. I would rate his overall handling of the fraudulent case against me as violating all my constitutional rights across the board . He should not be immune to the devastation he is causing innocent people [redacted by Ed.] He was biased from the first hearing against me because I was not an officer of the court. He should not have the power to hurt an innocent mother for wanting the return of my son nor for speaking the truth . He pretends not to hear me when I speak always sides with all four prosecutors assigned to frame an innocent mother to keep a private interest from being liable for a lawsuit. He refuses to acknowledge I was arrested without a warrant, that no signatures was on the original true bill indictment as well as refusing to acknowledge the fact the prosecution well went over the 270 day time frame for a complex case . Thinks he is above the rule of law that he is supposed to be bound by the Constitution . I fully intend on litigation on all parties involved if the prosecutions fraudulent charges are not dismissed with extreme prejudice. My son by the way did not file the charges against me let's be clear the prosecutors :
[redacted].

Comment #: AZ1857
Rating:1.0
Comments:
Complete lack of due diligence. Failed to follow AZ statute and law requiring concrete evidence. As a result, caused devasting consequences that cannot be fixed. Should not be immune to civil suit when there was a total lack of incompetence.

Comment #: AZ1680
Rating:1.0
Comments:
This judge was not impartial, and was indeed biased. He did not ask for documentation of allegations but took someone's word as fact without proof, and that is hearsay.
A court appointed impartial party was asked to value a business. It was valued at zero and yet this judge put a monetary value on it. it was his ob to remain impartial and her did not.

Comment #: AZ1679
Rating:3.0
Comments:
Not objective. Allows evidence that should not be considered. Tends to side toward females.