Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
NEWS BOX
We last left off where Seth decided to go to Valor on his black dragon Erath. And when he got there...And if anyone forgot the story, Kyan found his long lost friend Seth on Valor, and his black dragon Erath. Kyan is a mamkute that can still use swords as well as dragon stone attack.
Welcome to BEHG. We hope you enjoy your trip through our cesspool of hatred and lies.

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3
Masturbating driver killed two in crash
Topic Started: Dec 11 2008, 11:14:41 PM (821 Views)
F3nnies
Member Avatar
CANNON-BANNED
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tubba Blubba
Dec 13 2008, 02:26:30 PM
F3nnies
Dec 13 2008, 02:05:11 PM
Yes. The reason for that is that it best assures that when on trial, there may be those to hear the case that do not in some way already have a bias against the person-- since they ARE innocent until proven guilty.
Sadly, there's also a high risk that the density of morons will be great.


And no, you're not "Innocent until proven guilty". That's just silly propaganda.
And you're obviously a fucking idiot, or a member of the Inquisition.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.
- Franklin D. Fucking Roosevelt
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Breadmaster Tubba
Member Avatar
Chief Alcoholic of GHEB
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
F3nnies
Dec 13 2008, 03:51:19 PM
Tubba Blubba
Dec 13 2008, 02:26:30 PM
F3nnies
Dec 13 2008, 02:05:11 PM
Yes. The reason for that is that it best assures that when on trial, there may be those to hear the case that do not in some way already have a bias against the person-- since they ARE innocent until proven guilty.
Sadly, there's also a high risk that the density of morons will be great.


And no, you're not "Innocent until proven guilty". That's just silly propaganda.
And you're obviously a fucking idiot, or a member of the Inquisition.
You should assume that your client or the accused is innocent to get a neutral point of view. That does not mean that the person is, in fact, innocent. Yes, it's semantics, but I always hated that expression.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
F3nnies
Member Avatar
CANNON-BANNED
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Tubba Blubba
Dec 13 2008, 04:21:08 PM
F3nnies
Dec 13 2008, 03:51:19 PM
Tubba Blubba
Dec 13 2008, 02:26:30 PM
F3nnies
Dec 13 2008, 02:05:11 PM
Yes. The reason for that is that it best assures that when on trial, there may be those to hear the case that do not in some way already have a bias against the person-- since they ARE innocent until proven guilty.
Sadly, there's also a high risk that the density of morons will be great.


And no, you're not "Innocent until proven guilty". That's just silly propaganda.
And you're obviously a fucking idiot, or a member of the Inquisition.
You should assume that your client or the accused is innocent to get a neutral point of view. That does not mean that the person is, in fact, innocent. Yes, it's semantics, but I always hated that expression.
So you're interpreting this in the most distorted way possible, essentially being a dickhole over nothing because you think inability to prove someone has committed a crime is any different than them not doing the crime, which, obviously isn't unless you're wanting to split hairs.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.
- Franklin D. Fucking Roosevelt
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Waddacku


Uh, as far as I know the defense attorney won't be making a case for innocent unless there's actually something backing that up. What they're supposed to be going for is, well, a best case scenario.
If they're deliberately, well, lying about something, that's a crime in itself, if I'm not utterly mistaken.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Breadmaster Tubba
Member Avatar
Chief Alcoholic of GHEB
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Waddacku
Dec 14 2008, 01:15:34 AM
If they're deliberately, well, lying about something, that's a crime in itself, if I'm not utterly mistaken.
That would be considered perjury, I believe.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeff
Member Avatar
"Batman-" "Bat-Turian." "Whatever."

Tubba Blubba
Dec 13 2008, 12:08:30 PM
Screw your American juries. In Sweden, the jury members are picked from local party representatives, so they usually have a clue about what's going on. I believe the setup is 4 laymen and 3 lawyers in the first court, plus one vote from the judge, 3 laymen and 4 laywers + judge in the second, and only lawyers in Supreme Court, since the point of interest there is usually interpretation of the law.

As I understand it, the juries in America are just people picked at random.
Yes, they are, however for higher courts (anything beyond the first civil level) it's just judges.

I'm not sure if an attorney can be charged with perjury for arguing that their client is innocent. If it's not already in the law, it'll certainly never make into the law, given that lawyers would oppose it and have the power to stop it.
btw you're all banned
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
F3nnies
Member Avatar
CANNON-BANNED
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
If it were against the law to argue that the person you're defending is innocent, then the judicial system would immediately stop being just. Then within two decades we'd be lynching people because we just simply think they might have done something, without even bothering with any sort of investigation into it.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.
- Franklin D. Fucking Roosevelt
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Breadmaster Tubba
Member Avatar
Chief Alcoholic of GHEB
[ *  *  *  *  *  *  *  * ]
Jeff
Dec 14 2008, 03:34:05 PM
If it's not already in the law, it'll certainly never make into the law, given that lawyers would oppose it and have the power to stop it.
Ironically enough.


Anyway, there's a difference between arguing that "The client COULD have been somewhere else, a random redneck could've come in and shot the girl instead", and blatantly denying, hiding or lying about facts.
Edited by Breadmaster Tubba, Dec 14 2008, 04:32:11 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Waddacku


That's what I meant. If you're saying "He didn't kill him." when you know he did kill him, that's a crime.
Edited by Waddacku, Dec 14 2008, 05:16:05 PM.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
F3nnies
Member Avatar
CANNON-BANNED
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
So you're basically saying we shouldn't even have defendants. We should just have plaintiffs to accuse the person, and have absolutely no one to provide a different spin on everything.

Saying someone didn't kill someone is no different than saying they did. Unless you just want to assume everyone is always guilty, then either claim is equally worthy of being a crime, because either one could be blatantly lying. It's all about interpretation of evidence and preexisting circumstances. So what you two want is for a guy to just walk into court, and then be convicted, and for lawyers to not exist because they aren't allowed to voice their interpretation of a case.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.
- Franklin D. Fucking Roosevelt
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeff
Member Avatar
"Batman-" "Bat-Turian." "Whatever."

Waddacku
Dec 14 2008, 05:15:46 PM
That's what I meant. If you're saying "He didn't kill him." when you know he did kill him, that's a crime.
The lawyers are not under oath, now that I think about it. They can say whatever they want and it's not perjury. If you try to get a lawyer to swear to tell the truth, they explode.
btw you're all banned
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Waddacku


Oh? That's interesting. Though isn't presenting false evidence illegal, anyway? Just saying "He didn't" to counter evidence he did isn't going to get you far, even if it isn't a crime.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Jeff
Member Avatar
"Batman-" "Bat-Turian." "Whatever."

Waddacku
Dec 17 2008, 11:01:17 AM
Oh? That's interesting. Though isn't presenting false evidence illegal, anyway? Just saying "He didn't" to counter evidence he did isn't going to get you far, even if it isn't a crime.
Fabricating evidence is obstruction of justice, I believe.
btw you're all banned
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Waddacku


Ah, yes, that's it.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
F3nnies
Member Avatar
CANNON-BANNED
[ *  *  *  *  *  * ]
And assuming that your client is innocent-- when everyone is innocent until fucking proven guilty, isn't a crime. Nor is telling the jury he didn't commit a crime. Nor is saying that he wasn't even in the country at the time of the crime; there is no evidence to back it up if it isn't true, but no one is creating false evidence, so it's fine. Because legality is entirely up to the interpretation of people, and in boring cases that aren't going to change society in any way (read: almost every court trial), those people should just be any random citizen.
Posted ImagePosted ImagePosted Image
A conservative is a man with two perfectly good legs who, however, has never learned to walk forward.
- Franklin D. Fucking Roosevelt
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
DealsFor.me - The best sales, coupons, and discounts for you
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Somewhat Worthwhile Conversation · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 3

Auspice Zeta created by sakuragi-kun of the ZBTZ