Pater dicit iustum iudicem rumorem falsum non sequi.

Because after dicit Latin uses an indirect statement construction, often called the accusative-and-infinitive.

Instead of saying something like Father says that the just judge does not follow a false rumor, Latin says, more literally:

Father says the just judge not to follow a false rumor.

In this construction:

• the subject of the embedded statement goes into the accusative
• the verb of the embedded statement goes into the infinitive

So:

• iustum iudicem = the just judge (accusative subject of the infinitive)
• sequi = to follow (infinitive)

For the same reason: it is part of the indirect statement after dicit.

Latin commonly uses:

• a verb of saying/thinking/perceiving
• followed by an accusative subject
• plus an infinitive verb

So dicit ... sequi means says ... follows / is following / does follow, depending on context.

Even though Latin uses the infinitive, English usually translates it with that plus a normal finite verb:

• Pater dicit iustum iudicem rumorem falsum non sequi
• The father says that the just judge does not follow a false rumor

Because sequi is a deponent verb.

A deponent verb:

• has passive forms
• but an active meaning

So:

• sequor = I follow
• sequi = to follow

It is not passive here. It does not mean to be followed. It means to follow.

This is very common in Latin, and learners often just have to memorize that sequor, sequi is deponent.

Because non negates the infinitive clause: not to follow.

So the idea is:

• dicit = he says
• iustum iudicem ... non sequi = that the just judge does not follow ...

Latin often places non directly before the word or phrase being negated, and here it naturally goes before sequi.

You could think of it as negating the action itself:

• non sequi = not to follow

Because the adjectives agree with the nouns they modify in gender, number, and case:

• iustum matches iudicem
• falsum matches rumorem

Both pairs are:

• masculine
• singular
• accusative

So grammatically, each adjective can match its nearby noun.

Also, semantically the pairings make good sense:

• iustus iudex = a just judge
• falsus rumor = a false rumor

These are very natural combinations.

This is a very good question, because English speakers often expect the subject and object to have different forms.

In this sentence, both are accusative because:

• iustum iudicem is the subject of the infinitive in indirect statement
• rumorem falsum is the direct object of sequi

So yes, both end up in the accusative.

How do we tell them apart?

1. Construction After dicit, the first accusative noun phrase is very often the subject of the infinitive.

2. Meaning A judge follows a rumor makes more sense than a rumor follows a judge.

3. Adjective pairings just judge and false rumor are very natural combinations.

So although there is some formal ambiguity on the surface, the intended reading is clear: the just judge is the one doing the following.

Pater is nominative singular.

It is the subject of the main verb dicit:

• pater = the father
• dicit = says

So pater dicit means the father says.

This is separate from the indirect statement that follows.

Because iudicem is the accusative singular form of iudex.

The dictionary form is:

• iudex = judge (nominative singular)

But in this sentence it appears in the accusative because it is the subject of the infinitive in indirect statement.

So:

• iudex = nominative
• iudicem = accusative

This kind of change is very common in third-declension nouns.

Because rumorem is the accusative singular form of rumor.

Here it is the direct object of sequi:

• sequi rumorem = to follow a rumor

So the noun must be in the accusative.

Like iudex / iudicem, this is also a third-declension pattern:

• rumor = nominative singular
• rumorem = accusative singular

Any of these may be possible depending on context.

Latin present tense can often be translated as:

• says
• is saying
• sometimes even does say

So pater dicit could mean:

• the father says
• the father is saying

In a simple sentence like this, says is usually the most natural English translation.

Yes. Latin word order is much freer than English word order because endings show grammatical relationships.

So the sentence could be rearranged in various ways without changing the basic meaning, for example:

• Pater dicit iustum iudicem non sequi rumorem falsum.
• Iustum iudicem pater dicit rumorem falsum non sequi.

The original order is perfectly acceptable, but Latin often moves words around for emphasis, rhythm, or style.

That said, changing the order can slightly change what feels emphasized.

Yes. Sequor, sequi is deponent, but it still governs a direct object in the accusative when it means follow.

So:

• rumorem sequi = to follow a rumor
• hostem sequi = to follow an enemy
• viam sequi = to follow a road / route

Its deponent form does not change the fact that it can take a direct object.

In a sense, yes.

English usually says:

• The father says that the just judge does not follow a false rumor.

Latin usually does not use a separate word for that in this kind of sentence. Instead, it uses the accusative-and-infinitive construction:

• dicit
  • accusative subject
    • infinitive

So the idea of English that is present in the structure, even though no Latin word directly corresponds to it here.