A magistrate will rule next month on whether a man used threatening behaviour to intimidate a female magistrate.Laurie Furbert was arrested following an exchange of words with Magistrate Nicole Stoneham outside a supermarket.He has argued that the justice system is stacked against him and denies using threatening words to Ms Stoneham outside the Modern Mart on June 12.The Warwick resident told Magistrates’ Court on Monday that he appeared before Ms Stoneham twice in Family Court over a child payment case with his previous partner.Mr Furbert, 39, said he believed the magistrate became “angry” after he petitioned to have his case heard by someone else.“Ever since 2011, when I got my case overturned, it’s been going on,” Mr Furbert said, of what he alleges was an intimidating attitude toward him on the part of Ms Stoneham.He told the court that the arrest followed his chance encounter with Ms Stoneham outside the Paget store.He said he called to her: “Why are you always staring at me?”Ms Stoneham appeared “shocked” by the question, he added.Mr Tokunbo asked him: “Shocked because you were talking to her?”The defendant replied: “Shocked because ‘Who am I to talk to her in that manner?’ ... She didn’t like the fact that little old me can talk to a high sitting judge.”He admitted telling Ms Stoneham: “Yeah, you can do all that wickedness to me in court, but guess what, you can’t do that to me no more because this is the real world and you’re in it.”He said Ms Stoneham thrust her hand with a BlackBerry phone into the open passenger window of his car, and demanded that he repeat what he had said. He presumed that she had contacted the police.He in turn filed an incident report at Somerset Police Station that same day. He returned home at about 7pm and found “eight police officers outside my door, which turned to 15 and four squad cars”. He was arrested, charged with threatening a magistrate, and released the next day.Under cross-examination by Crown counsel Takiyah Burgess Mr Furbert insisted he didn’t harbour any ill feelings for Ms Stoneham.“You’d been in front of her twice on Family Court matters and both matters were unfavourable to you. That made you unhappy, didn’t it?” Ms Burgess asked.Mr Furbert conceded that he had been “unhappy with what she ruled”.He agreed with counsel that he felt Ms Stoneham had “thrown her weight around” but said he didn’t know her personally.Mr Furbert admitted he’d written letters to the media and judiciary following his cases in which he said Ms Stoneham was “dishonest, abused her power and had an agenda”, but insisted he wasn’t angry toward her.“Why did you write to the media?” Ms Burgess asked.Mr Furbert said his Family Court case was a legitimate social issue worth sharing.He denied telling Ms Stoneham: “You’re going to get yours.”Lawyer Saul Dismont told the court the case boiled down to “one person’s word against another”.He said it suggested to “some in the community” that Mr Furbert felt there was “no point in attempting a defence” because “the odds were stacked against him”.“Where does that come from?” Mr Tokunbo asked, stating that the court dealt with all cases fairly, based solely on evidence.The case was adjourned until next month.