The controversial decision, published this week, points out that police don’t arrest people unless they already have an ironclad case against guilty parties, and nothing new would be learned about each case from witnesses or evidence, since “all important facts and relevant information are already detailed in police documents.”
Besides, lawmakers say, talking to more people and exhibiting additional materials would only clog up the courts and slow the progress of justice.
“Alternative facts won’t help anyone,” the written decision explains. “This law is all about upholding the American way—it’s not up to the citizenry to question those in charge,” the judges who approved it argue, adding, “We cannot simply allow people to speak freely or write whatever opinions they want when we have leaders to decide such things.”
In an effort to silence the very vocal opposition to this new law, the East End Judiciary added an amendment to their decision, noting that, under certain circumstances—and only at the discretion of lawmakers and local leaders—some perps will enjoy the same rights as police.
“These special cases, where the accused are exonerated and not forced to endure the hardship of so-called victim, witness or police testimony, must, of course, be left to the better judgment of our respected leaders who always know what’s best for us.”