Judge Christopher Menges is at the center of a highly controversial legal case that has now gained international attention raises serious questions about his judicial conduct. Despite overwhelming evidence suggesting that the case has no legal standing, that his decisions are infringing on the rights of vulnerable children, and that his actions may be violating legal and ethical standards, Judge Menges continues to preside over the proceedings. Below are 10 crucial questions that demand immediate attention, particularly in light of concerns that Menges may be facilitating child abuse and neglecting his constitutional duties. These questions are posed not only for transparency but also with the expectation that he realizes the severity of his actions and takes action to correct them.
1. Judge Menges, why are you continuing litigation in a case where you clearly have no jurisdiction?
You are presiding over a case that, by all legal accounts, falls outside of your jurisdiction. Why are you continuing with this case when it is clear that the court does not have the authority to make decisions in this matter?
2. How can you justify granting rights to an individual who, by law, is not entitled to them?
You are allowing a party to claim rights over children that they are legally ineligible to have. How do you justify this decision, knowing it directly contradicts legal precedent and statutes governing custody and visitation?
3. Are you aware that by continuing with this case, you are violating your oath of office and undermining the integrity of the judicial system?
As a judge, you swore an oath to uphold the law and the Constitution. How do you reconcile your actions in this case with your sworn duties, particularly when your decisions appear to violate established law and legal principles?
4. Why are you disregarding the Constitution and the rights of the individuals involved in this case, especially when the law is clearly on their side?
Your rulings appear to be in direct conflict with constitutional protections, particularly the due process rights of Sara and her children. How can you justify such actions when the Constitution is unequivocal in its defense of individual rights?
5. What is your rationale for ignoring well-established legal standards that govern family law, child protection, and parental rights?
Numerous legal standards exist to protect children from harm and ensure that custodial decisions are made in their best interest. Why are you disregarding these standards in favor of a case that lacks legal merit and could endanger the children involved?
6. How do you respond to accusations that you are facilitating child abuse by allowing a legally unfit individual to gain access to children?
There are serious allegations of child abuse associated with this case. By granting access to someone who is not legally entitled to it, you may be facilitating an environment in which abuse can continue. How do you justify your role in enabling harm to vulnerable children?
7. Do you acknowledge the harm being done to these children as a result of your decisions, and what are you doing to ensure their safety?
Given the ongoing allegations of abuse and neglect, what measures are you taking to safeguard the children involved? How can you be certain that your rulings are in their best interests, considering the serious risks to their well-being?
8. Why have you failed to acknowledge or act upon the legal deficiencies in this case, including the lack of standing and the questionable claims being made by Bruce?
The case you are presiding over has no solid legal foundation, and Bruce has no legitimate standing. Why have you not dismissed the case, or at the very least, acknowledged these significant legal deficiencies?
9. Are you aware that your involvement in this case is undermining public trust in the judicial system and potentially exposing you to a judicial conduct investigation?
Your actions in this case have attracted significant public scrutiny and hopefully will lead to an investigation by a judicial conduct board. How do you respond to concerns that you are jeopardizing your credibility and the integrity of the judiciary by continuing to preside over this matter?
10. Given the serious ethical and legal concerns surrounding your decisions, what steps are you taking to rectify this situation, and will you recuse yourself from this case?
In light of the growing concerns about your conduct, what steps are you planning to take to correct the course of this case? Will you recuse yourself from further proceedings, given the mounting evidence that your involvement may be doing more harm than good?
Conclusion: A Call for Accountability and Transparency
Judge Christopher Menges’ continued presiding over a case with no legal standing, that violates constitutional rights, and that have been facilitating harm to children, raises serious concerns about his adherence to the oath of office and his duty to uphold the law. These questions are not simply about legal technicalities but about protecting the fundamental rights of individuals and ensuring the integrity of the judicial system. The people expect transparency, accountability, and a commitment to justice.
As this case continues, it is essential that Judge Menges answers these questions and provides a clear explanation of his actions. If his decisions are not rectified, further scrutiny by a judicial conduct board or other oversight authorities may be necessary to ensure that justice is properly served.