On appeal (de novo), Frogale’s ruling (of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt) was in effect thrown out.
On appeal (de novo), Frogale’s ruling (of guilty beyond a reasonable doubt) was in effect thrown out. On the bench, she yawned during cross-exam of the prosecution’s key witness—the alleged victim, and Frogale even paused cross-examination so she could go and eat in her chambers, further appearing disinterested in the defense. Frogale refused to see the lying and manipulation of the alleged victim that was clear to everyone else who witnessed the alleged victim being impeached. Looks of shame filled the courtroom as the alleged victim was exposed on lie after lie after lie. Judge Frogale in contrast was disinterested. The prosecutor beforehand explained Frogale’s reputation for ruling people guilty on little evidence. Frogale’s judgment in my case confirmed her bias in favor of any woman who merely claims “feeling afraid.” My freedom and custody of my very young child was at stake. Frogale, minutes before trial, let the prosecutor amend the warrant from encompassing the previous 3 months to suddenly encompass the previous 3 years; even though the prosecutor’s rationale was “we need more than one incident to prove stalking.” The prosecutor was admitting a lack of evidence! But Frogale shamefully permitted the egregious amendment. She is not honorable. On appeal, the circuit court judge rebuked the alleged victim for her non-responsive comments to evidence that was used to impeach her allegations. Barely 1/3 of the cross-examination was done before the judge called both attorneys into chambers. Suddenly, upon leaving chambers, the prosecutor offered a settlement that ultimately threw out the charges against me. I lost so much time, energy and money, because Frogale is a biased judge past any good days she may have had on the bench. Shame on her! And shame on the prosecutor and the police too, for refusing to do any diligent work towards the truth. Close the case and meet the quota is what they think “justice” is.