Happy now BLM?

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crim...icle-1.2820609

Whiny little SJW

I get legal technicalities preventing a criminal conviction and that doesn't really bug me (unless they were only introduced as a consequence of the PD's stonewalling but even then, I have to tolerate it and just wish for the PD to get sued again). But that they didn't fire even the proven rapist. . .

Lewk: he resisted arrest. He deserved it. He should be jailed for his own rape.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

Lewk: he resisted arrest. He deserved it. He should be jailed for his own rape.

---

Nah, I'm pretty sure he's gonna pin this one on liberals and unions. Obama should have gotten in touch with the police dept. much sooner though, he really dropped the ball on this one :rolleyes:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/crim...icle-1.2820609

Whiny little SJW

---

No this is the whiny little SJW type crap:

https://www.thefire.org/northeastern...th-punishment/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

Nah, I'm pretty sure he's gonna pin this one on liberals and unions. Obama should have gotten in touch with the police dept. much sooner though, he really dropped the ball on this one :rolleyes:

---

You jest but I bet the union backed the officers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

No this is the whiny little SJW type crap:

https://www.thefire.org/northeastern...th-punishment/

---

Nice dodge :heart:

Hello, folks!
At present, the problem of abuse and violence is quite common in the relationships of adolescents and children, the situation aggravates due to the Internet where everybody can offend and insult not being punished, thus, many modest and shy girls and boys are not able to retaliate, follow this source to find out what to undertake in this situation
<Removed Link ~ RB>

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Olivia96

Hello, folks!
At present, the problem of abuse and violence is quite common in the relationships of adolescents and children, the situation aggravates due to the Internet where everybody can offend and insult not being punished, thus, many modest and shy girls and boys are not able to retaliate, follow this source to find out what to undertake in this situation
<Removed Link ~ RB>

---

Spam bot?

Sure looks like it.

I've removed the links. Olivia if you're a genuine poster then welcome and please join a conversation, if you're a spam bot then I'll remove any links and ban the account.

https://twitter.com/jjmacnab/status/787041264126398464

Time to start profiling white conservative dudes. Maybe run some extra patrols in white conservative neighborhoods, especially if the people in those neighborhoods aren't willing to say who the radicals are. Right, Lewk?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

https://twitter.com/jjmacnab/status/787041264126398464

Time to start profiling white conservative dudes. Maybe run some extra patrols in white conservative neighborhoods, especially if the people in those neighborhoods aren't willing to say who the radicals are. Right, Lewk?

---

Nonsense. Didn't you read, Loki, they were targeting refugees. Refugees aren't citizens, they don't count as real people.

And they're black. Maybe these white terrorists were fearful for their lives!

Have you turned in any white militia member to the FBI, Lewk? How can the rest of the country know that you can be trusted?

Something something liberal media and irresponsible immigration policies breeding frustration mumble mumble this is really Obama's fault

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...eeing-suspect/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...l_outcome.html

Bizarre.

I believe the jury has what's called a "Lewk".

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/03/ny...cial-bias.html

But let's keep on pretending the legal system treats all races equally.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Aimless

http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2...eeing-suspect/

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...l_outcome.html

Bizarre.

---

Jury system, it happens.

Though once again you have a situation where if the suspect hadn't run he likely wouldn't have gotten shot.

When I say "bizarre" I actually mean "disgusting".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

Jury system, it happens.

Though once again you have a situation where if the suspect hadn't run he likely wouldn't have gotten shot.

---

The legal system is supposed to deal with the law, not with your (or anyone else's) warped moral code.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

The legal system is supposed to deal with the law, not with your (or anyone else's) warped moral code.

---

What's your solution? Stop having juries? All it takes is one person for it to be a hung jury. Note: That doesn't mean the guy gets to walk.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

The legal system is supposed to deal with the law, not with your (or anyone else's) warped moral code.

---

Doesn't jury selection rely on inflection points of warped moral code?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

The legal system is supposed to deal with the law, not with your (or anyone else's) warped moral code.

---

No that is ignorant, its meant to deal with both, hence why we have juries.

Though I thought to deal with single people's obstructionism that judges were allowed to permit the jury to reach 11-1 decisions to reach a conviction and don't require unanimity? Is that not the case?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lewkowski

What's your solution? Stop having juries? All it takes is one person for it to be a hung jury. Note: That doesn't mean the guy gets to walk.

---

In practice, it usually does. It's incredibly difficult for the prosecution to win after a mistrial. It doesn't even try most of the time.

For starters, we could have judges decide cases involving people carrying out violence while representing the government. We already do for soldiers (in some circumstances).

So eliminate trial by jury?

I certainly wouldn't cry if that happens. The constitution guarantees it though. But that right only applies to "criminal prosecutions". Call prosecutions against cops who carry out crimes in their public capacity something else.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by RandBlade

No that is ignorant, its meant to deal with both, hence why we have juries.

Though I thought to deal with single people's obstructionism that judges were allowed to permit the jury to reach 11-1 decisions to reach a conviction and don't require unanimity? Is that not the case?

---

I can't recall if it's permissible with lesser offenses in some jurisdictions but conviction of a capital crime absolutely does require unamity, no matter what state or jurisdiction the trial is in. What is kinda surprising is that the judge was considering accepting a hung verdict at 11-1, after only three days deliberation. It is a murder trial, there is only one holdout, most judges would (and quite properly should) already be inclined to let peer pressure beat on that holdout. Dockets are overcrowded of course, but other business can proceed while the jury is deliberating so. . .

Does that mean jury selection is not all that important?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Loki

I certainly wouldn't cry if that happens. The constitution guarantees it though. But that right only applies to "criminal prosecutions". Call prosecutions against cops who carry out crimes in their public capacity something else.

---

So you're now so illiberal you're not only OK with ending basic human rights like trial by jury but you're also OK with attempting an end run around the Constitution to deny these basic constitutionally guaranteed rights?

Trial by jury is a basic human right?