Ladies and gentlemen, before Ms. Dabkowski gives her first argument, I am going to take judicial notice of certain facts. Judicial notice is a process where I can receive evidence if it is considered indisputable and these next facts, I've determined, are indisputable, so you are to consider them as having been proven. The law recognizes that sleep is a physiological need, not an option for humans. It is common knowledge that the loss of sleep produces a host of physical and mental problems.The judge also claimed there was no right to sleep, that the Constitution protects political rights but not physical rights.
The judge did other questionable things but in my opinion this particular example of cognitive dissonance took the cake.
Does a rational argument exist to support the denial of an indisputable physical need? I am not aware of the existence of such an argument. I disagree vehemently with the judge. I am currently free on bail pending appeal.
And I need to sleep.