• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

"Jaywalking" man with gun, 30 bags of weed freed on technicality

oldbanger

oldbanger

Regular Member
Joined
Oct 19, 2010
Messages
475
Location
beckofbeyond - Idaho
Last edited:
C

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Thread Title Should Read...

..."Court Bars Wrongful Prosecution, Slaps Down Rights Violations."


Those "technicalities" are what's left of your rights and liberties.

Starting back, say, in the 1980's, the print media started carrying stories and comments of outrage where some judge had released a dangerous criminal on a "technicality". Lots of outrage.

Actually, the judge(s) were doing their job. Those "technicalities" are your due process rights, or your 4th and 5th Amendment rights, etc. When vilifying the judge, the critics are selecting the wrong target. The correct target is the police or prosecutor who didn't play by the rules (rights), allowing a criminal to go free, when they should have been following correct procedure.

Always become alert when you read or hear someone complain that a judge freed a criminal on a "technicality". Why is the critic attempting to minimize rights or induce disregard for rights by mischaracterizing the judge's actions?

Rights are not "technicalities". They were paid for in blood, smoke, and treasure across more than five centuries.


PS: The link didn't work for me.
 
Last edited:
sudden valley gunner

sudden valley gunner

Regular Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2008
Messages
16,674
Location
Whatcom County
Citizen said:
..."Court Bars Wrongful Prosecution, Slaps Down Rights Violations."


Those "technicalities" are what's left of your rights and liberties.

Starting back, say, in the 1980's, the print media started carrying stories and comments of outrage where some judge had released a dangerous criminal on a "technicality". Lots of outrage.

Actually, the judge(s) were doing their job. Those "technicalities" are your due process rights, or your 4th and 5th Amendment rights, etc. When vilifying the judge, the critics are selecting the wrong target. The correct target is the police or prosecutor who didn't play by the rules (rights), allowing a criminal to go free, when they should have been following correct procedure.

Always become alert when you read or hear someone complain that a judge freed a criminal on a "technicality". Why is the critic attempting to minimize rights or induce disregard for rights by mischaracterizing the judge's actions?

Rights are not "technicalities". They were paid for in blood, smoke, and treasure across more than five centuries.


PS: The link didn't work for me.
Click to expand...

+1 Yay Reagan......:cry:

The reporter in this incident did the used car salesmen sleazy pitch that this just wasn't right too.

I hope the client sues and wins a case for his rights being violated.
 
color of law

color of law

Accomplished Advocate
Joined
Oct 7, 2007
Messages
5,950
Location
Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
skidmark said:
Thanks for the link.

Now I know where the spirit of Billy Mays went. That reporter could turn a summer shower into The Flood, complete with Noah and an ark. And to think, all through that
'interview' he was [reporter's voice] holding a live microphone![/reporter's voice]

stay safe.
Click to expand...
The other side of the coin is the reporter was intentionally asking the questions that every constitutional ignorant citizen would ask. The citizen got a constitutional lesson in the fundamentals of rights that the citizen should already know and understand.

Maybe the reporter was lampooning his audience; an audience who doesn't get it.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top