User Tag List

First 23456 Last

Results 31 to 40 of 111

  1. #31
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,813

    Default

    It's amazing the more and more I read about this case the more and more find things that the media made a big deal of which had nothing to do with the case.


    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    What kind of thing would you be expecting? A silly law being applied appropriately does not make it any less silly. While the legal system may not have a way for dealing with silly laws, that doesn't mean they aren't silly laws.
    As Lowtech asked, what silly law are you referring to?
    Self-Defense?
    Burden of Proof?
    The standard of proof?


    Also, I view legal trials as higher stakes debate teams.
    I'm somewhat familiar with both and I can tell you they aren't the same.

    Lawyers have no obligation to the truth, they they have obligations to their clients (or the state, if they are a DA).
    It's more complicated then that. Lawyers have plenty of ethical duties and sometimes, yes they are required to tell the truth.
    Among those duties is the duty to not withhold evidence from the other side which the Prosecution did in this case.


    Pretty much everyone agrees that about lawyers, probably even lawyers themselves.
    Believing Lawyers are liars and believing they have no obligation to tell the truth is not the same.


    The relevant things in any given case are determined by the lawyers themselves, and maybe the judge. They aren't ironclad timeless truths.
    I couldn't disagree more. Especially when it comes to fundamental criminal law issues like murder and self defense.
    The laws around those issues are built on very basic principles of justice.

    If the only thing relevant to this case is whether Zimmerman needed to defend himself, that's because the defense lawyers are smart and knew that was the best way to frame this. A more skilled prosecution may have been able to frame it differently.

    They tried to go around their duties to prove the case against Zimmerman with those ridiculous child abuse charges where they were basically trying to hold Zimmerman strictly liable.

    Thankfully the judge had enough sense to stop that nonsense.

    So, no I'm not a fan of prosecutions getting creative. Either they can prove their case or they can't.


    If the lawyers aren't setting the parameters of the case or establishing what's relevant and what isn't, why are they there? What do you think they are doing?
    Legal tradition should establish what's relevant and what's not... not creativity.

    Why?

    Because, that goes against notions of predictability in the dealing out of justice.

    I'm sure if I did enough research, I could find a legal precedent that would point to a different outcome.
    Like a case where someone is convicted not on the basis of trial by jury, but on the basis of public opinion that's based on ridiculous media coverage and hack biased lawyers in it to build controversy.



    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    First of all, it wasn't necessarilly the appropriate application of the law. The opinion I've seen from the general body of legal experts is that the prosecution aimed to high, and that if they had pursued manslaughter and built the case for that the whole time instead, they might have had a shot.

    Instead, they went for murder 2 and suggested manslaughter at the last minute. They should have gone with manslaughter, and if that was failing, suggest assault at the last minute. the prosecution left itself with the need to prove Zimmerman somehow had ill will toward Martin, which of course made no contextual sense outside of the possiiblity of racism. Had they been going for manslaughter, they could have framed Zimmerman as a vigilante and Martin an innocent kid who paid for Zimmerman's silly fanatasies and poor judgment with his life (as far as I can tell, that is reality's version).
    No, from an ethical standpoint they shouldn't have gone after murder 2 as it wasn't substantiated at all.

    However, even with manslaughter they still would have had to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Zimmerman didn't act in self-defense which is nigh on impossible based on the evidence the vigilante stuff not withstanding.

    From a strategic standpoint since they were trying to stick it to him going for murder 2 wasn't a bad idea if your hope is to get a couple of dummies to bite on murder 2 and then hope they go outside their instructions and just compromise and go for manslaughter.

    Thankfully, as best as I can tell the jurors adhered to the jury instructions and didn't do that.


    But secondly, msg specifically listed the problem of dumbass laws being considered sensible just because they are laws. Like I already said, there are two levels to this debate. One is how the law applies to Zimmerman, and the other is whether the laws are any good in the first place.
    As I asked msg above please tell me what dumbass law you're referring to.
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  2. #32
    LL P. Stewie Beorn's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    4,813

    Default

    Also, this:


    1. Your cries for an appeal are hurting my eyes. There is no appeal. Stop letting the world know how ignorant you are. If you don't know criminal law or procedure, shut up. Ask someone before you display your stupidity to the world.

    2. If you didn't see the trial, stop criticizing the verdict, it just makes you look stupid.

    3. HLN, get rid of Nancy Grace and Jane Velez-Mitchell. They are not legal commentators helping the public understand our important, essential, and treasured criminal justice system. Neither are many of their guests who should never be asked back. There are 95,000 lawyers in Florida, there is no reason a lawyer from another state who doesn't know Florida law needs to be on daily telling everyone "I don't practice in Florida, I don't know Florida law" just because they can yell. Their daily display of drama may be what you believe to be the "First Amendment," but it is also pathetic, and making people dumber and angrier.

    4. CNN needs to send Sonny Hostin and Gloria Allred packing. First of all Piers Morgan, this is a criminal trial in Florida. Why is the only guest you continue to have on is someone from California that doesn't practice criminal law and is known for representing, at press conferences, women victims? What could she possibly have to offer about this case?

    And CNN, especially Anderson Cooper, get rid of Sonny Hostin. This woman was a prosecution shill from the beginning of this trial, struggling to say anything positive about the defense. Last night, after the verdict, she said "justice took the day off." She wasn't there to provide commentary, she was shilling for the state. She should have disclosed from the begining that she desperately wanted a conviction, that way it would have been easier to listen to her biased commentary. She's terrible and should never be asked to appear in the media again when there is an important trial.

    5. The media, especially TV, needs to start vetting their guests. I know these are lawyers with agents, but they've never been in a criminal courtroom, or at least not since they spent a year as a prosecutor in 1978. Can you not find lawyers that actually know what they are talking about? Piers Morgan is asking Gloria Allred what she would do in opening in the Zimmerman case? I have a better question, Gloria, when is the last time you gave an opening statement, in any case?
    More at
    http://criminaldefenseblog.blogspot....zimmerman.html


    Thankfully nobody here has mentioned an appeal.
    Take the weakest thing in you
    And then beat the bastards with it
    And always hold on when you get love
    So you can let go when you give it

  3. #33
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    So you've given up on any pretense of applying logic and are just using whatever the hell this is. You know, stranger danger paranoia about crime is as much of an irrational emotional response as the overzealous political correctness that everyone who disagrees with this verdict supposedly has.


    I got one: "If only I hadn't drank fifteen bottles of Everclear and pushed that bus full of nuns of a cliff with my 18 wheeler, those nuns would be alive."
    The case is over. Not guilty. What better logic do you need?
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  4. #34
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,912

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by trancemode View Post
    Unfortunately, that’s what it comes down to. A trial ultimately is not about whether a defendant is “really” guilty or innocent. And quality defense is like quality health care: it ain't cheap.
    It's only what it comes down to in some systems. Now, of course, in all systems the law is a code that may or may not reflect the actual innocence or guilt of the defendant, but they don't all involve to attorneys fighting to convince a jury (which is often selected to be the stupidest jury possible).

    And as it turns out, some quality health care may be cheaper than some poor health care.

    Quote Originally Posted by DiscoBiscuit View Post
    I would pay cash money to watch that.
    I suppose you'd be less interested upon releasing that I did not mean acting as my own attorney.

    But if you said that as a dig against such a system and not just me, there are actually quite a few developed countries that often use a court like that. It's not an aberration.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  5. #35
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,019

    Default

    Here is the Truth according to the pro-Trayvon side:


    >The Klansman takes chase
    >The football star nearly outruns him, but he is trapped by a "do not enter" sign
    >Faced with certain death or disobeying the law, he makes his stand
    >Trayvon attempts to reason his attacker, but the illiterate racist will have none of it
    >Zimmerman steps out of his vehicle and asks "Any last words?"
    >Trayvon looks his executioner in the eye and replies "World Peace"
    >"WHITE POWER!" exclaims Zimmerman as he unloads with his fully-automatic assault rifle
    >If not for the Republican party he may have survived, but the skinhead's extended magazine, unfettered by their legislation unloads hundreds of rounds into the future Nobel Peace Prize recipient
    >Zimmerman then bashes his own head into the curb repeatedly screaming "help me!"
    >When he is finished, Hitler himself steps back into his gas-guzzling vehicle
    >As Trayvon lay dying, the last thing he sees is the "Bush-Cheney 2004" bumper sticker disappear into the night

    (From Facebook)
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  6. #36
    & Badger, Ratty and Toad Mole's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    18,545
    Looking at this from a distance, it is obvious this is an internal racial matter for the USA.

    And it is a comsuming matter of interest for Americans on either side of the racial divide.

    But what is bizarre is that Americans seem to think that this parochial matter is of equal interest to the world.

  7. #37
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mole View Post
    Looking at this from a distance, it is obvious this is an internal racial matter for the USA.

    And it is a comsuming matter of interest for Americans on either side of the racial divide.

    But what is bizarre is that Americans seem to think that this parochial matter is of equal interest to the world.
    Which Americans think that?
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  8. #38
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    PORG
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,059

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mal+ View Post
    The case is over. Not guilty. What better logic do you need?
    So OJ and Casey Anthony are innocent now? They were acquitted! In a court of law!

    >The Klansman takes chase
    >The football star nearly outruns him, but he is trapped by a "do not enter" sign
    >Faced with certain death or disobeying the law, he makes his stand
    >Trayvon attempts to reason his attacker, but the illiterate racist will have none of it
    >Zimmerman steps out of his vehicle and asks "Any last words?"
    >Trayvon looks his executioner in the eye and replies "World Peace"
    >"WHITE POWER!" exclaims Zimmerman as he unloads with his fully-automatic assault rifle
    >If not for the Republican party he may have survived, but the skinhead's extended magazine, unfettered by their legislation unloads hundreds of rounds into the future Nobel Peace Prize recipient
    >Zimmerman then bashes his own head into the curb repeatedly screaming "help me!"
    >When he is finished, Hitler himself steps back into his gas-guzzling vehicle
    >As Trayvon lay dying, the last thing he sees is the "Bush-Cheney 2004" bumper sticker disappear into the night
    Nope, no emotional diarrhea behind any of this! Pure Vulcan logic, it is.
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

  9. #39
    Senior Member Mal12345's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    MBTI
    IxTP
    Enneagram
    5w4 sx/sp
    Socionics
    LII Ti
    Posts
    14,019

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by msg_v2 View Post
    So OJ's innocent now?



    Nope, no emotional diarrhea behind any of this! Pure Vulcan logic, it is.
    It's not a question of innocence, but of guilty vs. not guilty. OJ was found not guilty by a jury whose captain could not pronounce the name "Orenthal." And now the word "orenthal" has become slang for "slicing and dicing your ex."
    "Everyone has a plan till they get punched in the mouth." Mike Tyson
    “Culture?” says Paul McCartney. “This isn't culture. It's just a good laugh.”

  10. #40
    Theta Male Julius_Van_Der_Beak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    MBTI
    PORG
    Enneagram
    5w6 sp/so
    Socionics
    LII None
    Posts
    9,059

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Beorn View Post
    It's amazing the more and more I read about this case the more and more find things that the media made a big deal of which had nothing to do with the case.
    Like school suspensions?




    As Lowtech asked, what silly law are you referring to?
    Self-Defense?
    Burden of Proof?
    The standard of proof?
    Whichever ironclad law apparently undoubtedly determined what happened to be self-defense and not manslaughter?

    Please tell me you are against the concept of vehicular manslaughter, because then we'd have some fucking consistency.



    It's more complicated then that. Lawyers have plenty of ethical duties and sometimes, yes they are required to tell the truth.
    Well, if defense attorneys and prosecution attorneys don't agree, what is that ? Are they fighting over who is telling the truth more?

    Among those duties is the duty to not withhold evidence from the other side which the Prosecution did in this case.
    Huh?



    Believing Lawyers are liars and believing they have no obligation to tell the truth is not the same.
    Trust me, their clients don't pay them to tell the truth. They sure as hell don't pay them to seek it.



    I couldn't disagree more. Especially when it comes to fundamental criminal law issues like murder and self defense.
    The laws around those issues are built on very basic principles of justice.
    Meh, I've wanted to knock off Mickey Mouse for a long time, so now I have a perfect way to get away with it. I can later say I didn't do it and people will believe me unconditionally, because hey, Mickey isn't around to tell his side of the story. (This is something people have actually argued here.)




    They tried to go around their duties to prove the case against Zimmerman with those ridiculous child abuse charges where they were basically trying to hold Zimmerman strictly liable.
    Or school suspensions and pot smoking?


    So, no I'm not a fan of prosecutions getting creative. Either they can prove their case or they can't.
    Either I've set up a false dichotomy or I haven't.




    Legal tradition should establish what's relevant and what's not... not creativity.
    Tell that to the entire legal profession. Unless I'm being naive and they deeply care about legal tradition?




    Like a case where someone is convicted not on the basis of trial by jury, but on the basis of public opinion that's based on ridiculous media coverage and hack biased lawyers in it to build controversy.
    Glad you agree that the controversy about gun laws is ridiculous. I suppose I'm done... wait why is the prosecution biased and the defense isn't? Do you realize how little sense that actually makes?
    [Trump's] rhetoric is not an abuse of power. In the same way that it's also not against the law to do a backflip off of the roof of your house onto your concrete driveway. It's just mind-numbingly stupid and, to say the least, counterproductive. - Bush did 9-11


    This is not going to go the way you think....

    Visit my Johari:
    http://kevan.org/johari?name=Birddude78

Similar Threads

  1. [NF] When someone won't leave you alone
    By Tiltyred in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 51
    Last Post: 07-17-2010, 04:22 PM
  2. [Fi] Leave My Walls Alone!
    By BlueFlame in forum The NF Idyllic (ENFP, INFP, ENFJ, INFJ)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-25-2010, 03:22 PM
  3. lyrics that won't leave me alone.
    By Jon in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 82
    Last Post: 12-10-2008, 09:54 PM
  4. lyrics that won't leave me alone.
    By Jon in forum Arts & Entertainment
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-06-2008, 10:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO