My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

Citizen Bob wrote:
> On Sun, 22 Apr 2007 11:31:50 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> > wrote:
>
>> And when a Perverse Public Persecutor overcharges you
>> and offers you a few months in jail and probation for the guilty
>> plea, or face dozens of individual counts with 20-Life on
>> the line if you lose any one of them, would you still demand
>> your day in court?
>
> Absolutely.

Good luck.

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 08:52:31 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> wrote:

>>> And when a Perverse Public Persecutor overcharges you
>>> and offers you a few months in jail and probation for the guilty
>>> plea, or face dozens of individual counts with 20-Life on
>>> the line if you lose any one of them, would you still demand
>>> your day in court?

>> Absolutely.

>Good luck.

Luck is on my side. All it takes is one juror to do his/her duty.

Ever watch "12 Angry Men".

A man living in Houston came home from work and discovered that the
neighborhood punk had raped his daughter. He grabbed his shotgun, went
to the punk's house and killed him. he was indicted for murder but the
judge threw the case out. The neighborhood named a street after her -
Bacon St. It's still there.

A judge can convict you, but that is not true guilt. You can plead
guilty or no contest but that is not true guilt. Only a unanimous jury
can determine your true guilt. Until that time you are innocent.

--

"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future."
--Niels Bohr

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

Citizen Bob wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 08:52:31 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
> > wrote:
>
>>>> And when a Perverse Public Persecutor overcharges you
>>>> and offers you a few months in jail and probation for the guilty
>>>> plea, or face dozens of individual counts with 20-Life on
>>>> the line if you lose any one of them, would you still demand
>>>> your day in court?
>
>>> Absolutely.
>
>> Good luck.
>
> Luck is on my side. All it takes is one juror to do his/her duty.

One juror of 12 who were too stupid to get out of jury duty.

>
> Ever watch "12 Angry Men".

Ever hear of fiction?

>
> A man living in Houston came home from work and discovered that the
> neighborhood punk had raped his daughter. He grabbed his shotgun, went
> to the punk's house and killed him. he was indicted for murder but the
> judge threw the case out. The neighborhood named a street after her -
> Bacon St. It's still there.

So therefore he didn't really kill the rapist?

>
> A judge can convict you, but that is not true guilt.

LOL! Tell it to the 1000s in prison from Bench Trials.

> You can plead guilty or no contest but that is not true guilt.

ROTFLMAO !!

> Only a unanimous jury can determine your true guilt. Until that time you are
> innocent.

Well then, that settles it ...

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

On Apr 23, 9:06 am, (Citizen Bob) wrote:
> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 08:52:31 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
>
> > wrote:
> >>> And when a Perverse Public Persecutor overcharges you
> >>> and offers you a few months in jail and probation for the guilty
> >>> plea, or face dozens of individual counts with 20-Life on
> >>> the line if you lose any one of them, would you still demand
> >>> your day in court?
> >> Absolutely.
> >Good luck.
>
> Luck is on my side. All it takes is one juror to do his/her duty.
>
> Ever watch "12 Angry Men".
>

I had no idea it was a documentary.

Ever heard of innocent people being convicted by a jury that made a
mistake?

> A man living in Houston came home from work and discovered that the
> neighborhood punk had raped his daughter. He grabbed his shotgun, went
> to the punk's house and killed him. he was indicted for murder but the
> judge threw the case out. The neighborhood named a street after her -
> Bacon St. It's still there.

Sounds like an urban legend, but it begs the question: does having a
street named after you mean you're a good person?

In Brookfield, Wisconsin there's a Capone Court, named after Al
Capone who once had a distillery there. Does that mean Capone was a
good guy, and not a thug and a killer?


>
> A judge can convict you, but that is not true guilt. You can plead
> guilty or no contest but that is not true guilt.

You are conflating legal terms with moral contexts: they are two
different things. Saying a legal procedure doesn't neccesarily equal
the same words used in a moral context, where their definitions are
different, isn't making an argument. They are different definitions
of the same words because they have different contexts. Duh. We all
know a jury said OJ wasn't guilty of the acts, while another said he
was responsible. In a legal context those are reconcilable, because
they have different burdens of proof. In a moral sense, they aren't.
All it shows is that verdicts aren't perfect reflections of reality:
again, duh.


> Only a unanimous jury
> can determine your true guilt. Until that time you are innocent.
>

Depends on when and whe jury verdicts don't always have to be
unanimous in some state courts. Go read the constitution: it
guarantees you a trial by jury, among other things, but it doesn't
mandate a unanimous verdict.


Bo Raxo

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

Bo Raxo wrote:
> On Apr 23, 9:06 am, (Citizen Bob) wrote:
>> On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 08:52:31 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
>>
>> > wrote:
>>>>> And when a Perverse Public Persecutor overcharges you
>>>>> and offers you a few months in jail and probation for the guilty
>>>>> plea, or face dozens of individual counts with 20-Life on
>>>>> the line if you lose any one of them, would you still demand
>>>>> your day in court?
>>>> Absolutely.
>>> Good luck.
>> Luck is on my side. All it takes is one juror to do his/her duty.
>>
>> Ever watch "12 Angry Men".
>>
>
> I had no idea it was a documentary.
>
> Ever heard of innocent people being convicted by a jury that made a
> mistake?
>
>> A man living in Houston came home from work and discovered that the
>> neighborhood punk had raped his daughter. He grabbed his shotgun, went
>> to the punk's house and killed him. he was indicted for murder but the
>> judge threw the case out. The neighborhood named a street after her -
>> Bacon St. It's still there.
>
> Sounds like an urban legend, but it begs the question: does having a
> street named after you mean you're a good person?
>
> In Brookfield, Wisconsin there's a Capone Court, named after Al
> Capone who once had a distillery there. Does that mean Capone was a
> good guy, and not a thug and a killer?
>
>
>> A judge can convict you, but that is not true guilt. You can plead
>> guilty or no contest but that is not true guilt.
>
> You are conflating legal terms with moral contexts: they are two
> different things. Saying a legal procedure doesn't neccesarily equal
> the same words used in a moral context, where their definitions are
> different, isn't making an argument. They are different definitions
> of the same words because they have different contexts. Duh. We all
> know a jury said OJ wasn't guilty of the acts, while another said he
> was responsible. In a legal context those are reconcilable, because
> they have different burdens of proof. In a moral sense, they aren't.
> All it shows is that verdicts aren't perfect reflections of reality:
> again, duh.
>
>
>> Only a unanimous jury
>> can determine your true guilt. Until that time you are innocent.
>>
>
> Depends on when and whe jury verdicts don't always have to be
> unanimous in some state courts. Go read the constitution: it
> guarantees you a trial by jury, among other things, but it doesn't
> mandate a unanimous verdict.
>
>
> Bo Raxo
>
>
The jury system and the whole INjustice system is in shambles and of no
relation to what the original ideals where when it was founded.

People in the USA are convicted of murder based on no evidence and only
the flimsiest circumstantial evidence. Circumstantial evidence can often
be found on anyone, including the most innocent people.
Prosecutors routinely disregard evidence that would show someone is
innocent because they do not care about the truth.

If they have a name, any name including yours, then you are guilty
unless you can prove innocence.

GK

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

On 23 Apr 2007 20:44:35 -0700, Bo Raxo >
wrote:

>does having a
>street named after you mean you're a good person?

>In Brookfield, Wisconsin there's a Capone Court, named after Al
>Capone who once had a distillery there. Does that mean Capone was a
>good guy, and not a thug and a killer?

Does the Lincoln Memorial mean Lincoln was not an evil person?

>You are conflating legal terms with moral contexts

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of
happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted
among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
governed."
--Thomas Jefferson, "Declaration of Independence"


--

"Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future."
--Niels Bohr

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

On Apr 24, 12:06 am, (Citizen Bob) wrote:
> On 23 Apr 2007 20:44:35 -0700, Bo Raxo >
> wrote:
>
> >does having a
> >street named after you mean you're a good person?
> >In Brookfield, Wisconsin there's a Capone Court, named after Al
> >Capone who once had a distillery there. Does that mean Capone was a
> >good guy, and not a thug and a killer?
>
> Does the Lincoln Memorial mean Lincoln was not an evil person?
>

Maybe I'm being dense here, but I'm not grasping what point you're
trying to make.


> >You are conflating legal terms with moral contexts
>
> "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created
> equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable
> rights, that among these are life, liberty and the pursuit of
> happiness. That to secure these rights, governments are instituted
> among men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the
> governed."
> --Thomas Jefferson, "Declaration of Independence"
>

We're discussing the legal system, right? And you do realize that the
Declaration of Independence, while a nice bit of prose, has zero
standing as a legal document, right? That it predates the U.S.
Constitution by 13 years and thus is something that is a document by
an ad-hoc body notifying the British Crown of their intent, but not
something that can be cited as any kind of precedent or law in our
legal system.

As an aside, I've always found it interesting that the brash young
revolutionaries of '76 declared that the inalienable rights were life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. The middle-aged bunch who
passed the constitution in '89 changed it to life, libery, and
property. Funny how a few years and a bit of financial success
changes one's perspective.


Bo Raxo

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

As I understand it, on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 04:20:58 GMT, GK
> wrote:

>The jury system and the whole INjustice system is in shambles and of no
>relation to what the original ideals where when it was founded.
>
>People in the USA are convicted of murder based on no evidence and only
>the flimsiest circumstantial evidence.

If it is enough to convince a jury of 12 men and women that
the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, circumstantial is
enough.
And if the defendant was convicted on nothing more than the
flimsiest circumstantial evidence, the defense attorney didn't do
his/her job properly.

>Circumstantial evidence can often
>be found on anyone, including the most innocent people.
>Prosecutors routinely disregard evidence that would show someone is
>innocent because they do not care about the truth.

Can you offer a cite for this? While I can accept it's
possible, given human nature, I know of no direct examples.

>
>If they have a name, any name including yours, then you are guilty
>unless you can prove innocence.

What a sad outlook on life you have.

--
Kent
Take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you've never
been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of
happiness you'll never get back

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

Kent Wills wrote:
> As I understand it, on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 04:20:58 GMT, GK
> > wrote:
>
>> The jury system and the whole INjustice system is in shambles and of no
>> relation to what the original ideals where when it was founded.
>>
>> People in the USA are convicted of murder based on no evidence and only
>> the flimsiest circumstantial evidence.
>
> If it is enough to convince a jury of 12 men and women that
> the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, circumstantial is
> enough.
> And if the defendant was convicted on nothing more than the
> flimsiest circumstantial evidence, the defense attorney didn't do
> his/her job properly.

Remember the idea was innocence is to be presumed. The accused should
not have to go hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt to prove they
are innocent.
>
>> Circumstantial evidence can often
>> be found on anyone, including the most innocent people.
>> Prosecutors routinely disregard evidence that would show someone is
>> innocent because they do not care about the truth.
>
> Can you offer a cite for this? While I can accept it's
> possible, given human nature, I know of no direct examples.
>
Not just human nature, but common practice. Exculpatory evidence that
would prove the accused is innocent is not only disregarded but fought
by the prosecution. Happens every day, all over.

>> If they have a name, any name including yours, then you are guilty
>> unless you can prove innocence.
>
> What a sad outlook on life you have.
>

Maybe sad, but real. Being accused of something is like getting cancer,
where you didn't ask for it and have to expend much time and money to
hopefully get rid of it. Even then there's no guarantee of honesty or
fairness.

My DUI Charges Dropped! A Great Argument
 

As I understand it, on Wed, 25 Apr 2007 10:47:29 GMT, GK
> wrote:

>Kent Wills wrote:
>> As I understand it, on Tue, 24 Apr 2007 04:20:58 GMT, GK
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> The jury system and the whole INjustice system is in shambles and of no
>>> relation to what the original ideals where when it was founded.
>>>
>>> People in the USA are convicted of murder based on no evidence and only
>>> the flimsiest circumstantial evidence.
>>
>> If it is enough to convince a jury of 12 men and women that
>> the defendant is guilty beyond a reasonable doubt, circumstantial is
>> enough.
>> And if the defendant was convicted on nothing more than the
>> flimsiest circumstantial evidence, the defense attorney didn't do
>> his/her job properly.
>
>Remember the idea was innocence is to be presumed. The accused should
>not have to go hundreds of thousands of dollars into debt to prove they
>are innocent.

No one said they should. Further, it's the prosecution who has
to prove guilt, not the defense that needs to prove innocence.
However, just because one is presumed innocent until proven
guilty doesn't mean the defense team can expect to just sit there and
do nothing.

>>
>>> Circumstantial evidence can often
>>> be found on anyone, including the most innocent people.
>>> Prosecutors routinely disregard evidence that would show someone is
>>> innocent because they do not care about the truth.
>>
>> Can you offer a cite for this? While I can accept it's
>> possible, given human nature, I know of no direct examples.
>>
>Not just human nature, but common practice. Exculpatory evidence that
>would prove the accused is innocent is not only disregarded but fought
>by the prosecution. Happens every day, all over.

Can you offer a cite where this has happened?

>
>>> If they have a name, any name including yours, then you are guilty
>>> unless you can prove innocence.
>>
>> What a sad outlook on life you have.
>>
>
>Maybe sad, but real. Being accused of something is like getting cancer,
>where you didn't ask for it and have to expend much time and money to
>hopefully get rid of it. Even then there's no guarantee of honesty or
>fairness.

It would be the rare case where a criminal ASKED to be
arrested and tried. It probably has happened, but I expect this would
be in the minority.

--
Kent
Take too many pictures, laugh too much, and love like you've never
been hurt because every sixty seconds you spend upset is a minute of
happiness you'll never get back