I just don’t understand drinking and driving

Thanks , didn't see that. Should be interesting.

Morgan has Jury duty on Tuesday May 8th. I seriously doubt its for the same trail and if it were he would quickly be dismissed.

Tomorrow will be a big day for Thom. I’m not going to say I wish him luck, I just can’t.

He had a choice and chose the wrong one and that resulted in someone’s life.

I wouldn’t want to be in his shoes.

Everything happens for a reason. I don't wish no bad luck on Swift, but gee whiz couldn't you have a little compassion for him?

I'm saving my compassion for Mr. Lancasters family.

Yes everything does happen for a reason, like when you drink and drive the end result can be taking someone’s life.

Exactly.

I wish him justice.

Yes; some people WANT to get even. I have wanted that.
I remember my lust for vengeance against the Rosenbergs for what thay did.
I celebrated in 1953.
Other people DON'T want vengeance.

Does anyone know how the Lancaster family feels about this ??





David

Stop delibereately misinterpreting stuff David. Compassion for the Lancasters does not equate to a lust for vengeance.

I wish Tom mercy & happiness.
Putting him thru hell will not help Barry.

If Barry had been heard screaming demands for vengeance & curses against Tom,
yelling: "I pay my taxes for government to AVENGE me!!"
b4 his demise, then that 'd put the situation in a different lite, in my opinion.

I don 't know, nor do I suspect, whether I 'd have any emotions toward Tom,
if I had been in Barry 's situation and survived it.

In 2008, I was in an automotive collision with a drunken elderly couple,
who were returning home from a restaurant in Upstate, NY.
It totaled out one of my cars.
I was not injured, but death had been among the possibilities.
( A funny thing: earlier that day, a shy girl of my peripheral acquaintance
had predicted danger that evening, and said something about it; warned me to me careful.)

I bear no ill will toward the drunks with whom I collided.
If I met them, I 'd be polite; not say anything hurtful.
For sure, I never wanted either of them in jail.

If I HAD been injured, then I dunno how I 'd feel toward them.
Thay were very drunk indeed; the driver was dragged away in handcuffs. I felt a little sad for her.





David

For a lawyer you've got a very casual relationship with the rule of law. If someone loses their life due to somebody else's negligence, that person should face a jail term at the very least. It's not about vengeance, it's about justice, and the sanctity of human life.

I disagree with your analysis, Izzy.
When Anthony says:
"I'm saving my compassion for Mr. Lancasters family"
I infer a tacit implication that Tom does not deserve compassion
because of his choices that evening, with the further implication
that he shud visit the meat grinder of government for several years.

I don 't say that that position is necessarily unreasonable.
In my personal opinion, its OK to throw in some mercy here for Tom Swift.
I 'm pretty sure that he has been feeling pretty bad for the last several months.
If I were the trial judge, or if I were on that jury,
I 'd help Tom out.

Incidentally, Izzy:
my lust for vengeance was ALREADY executed in 1953.





David

If there's ever a civil suit related to this incident you'll know.

Right now, this is a criminal case - it's about what the law of the appropriate jurisdiction determines in terms of charges and then whether there is a conviction.

(why doesn't someone who claims to have been a lawyer not know this?)

This is what took place in court this morning.

PRE-TRIAL HRG SET: 07/02/12/
WAIVED RIGHT TO SPEEDY TRIAL
ORDER GRANTING: D/MTN TO CONTINUE

So, the next pre-trial hearing in this case will be on July 2nd.

I don't wish to speak for Anthony, but surely whether or not an individual feels compassion for the accused is neither here nor there. It's the law that should show compassion.

Now if you think there's something wrong with the way your country treats its prisoners, that's a separate issue. The extradition treaty between our two countries is causing a lot of ill-will this side of the Atlantic, with particular respect to Gary McKinnon. That's because of your much more punative system of justice.

Incidently thank you for mentioning 1953. Don't tell me what it was that rid you of your lust for vengeance. I'd rather guess.



Was it this?

Thanks for the info firefly.

U cud argue that. I don 't worship the rule of law.
As I remember (from about 5O years ago, when last I checked it)
Black's Law Dictionary defined a lawyer inter alia
as someone who KNOWS the law,
not necessarily someone who approves of it or executes it.

If my memory is accurate, when I took the oath for admission to practice
as an attorney, I swore to support the Constitution, not the law.
To give a politically correct example:
if a lawyer were in a Southern State in the 1850s
and if he became aware of an "underground railway" for escaping slaves
but did not inform police of this conspiracy, he wud not necessarily stop being a lawyer,

or

in the 1940s, if a lawyer were in a Southern State
and he became aware of facilities that did not comply
with the extant law of racial segregation:
that wud not ipso facto DISQUALIFY him from being a lawyer,
until he was actually convicted of participation in an unlawful conspiracy.

For instance, if u came to visit and u blew a stop sign in the street,
with no witnesses, for sure I wud NOT rat u out to the police. U 'd be safe.
My first loyalty is NOT to any government, nor to the law.
Within reason, I 'd be faithful first to protecting my friends n relatives.
Come to think of it, probably in the 1970s, while I was actively
practicing law, a girlfriend, or girlaquaintance, Jane, got too drunk at a party.
She wanted to drive home. I offered to give her a lift
and I argued in support of her accepting my offer.
She rejected, based on unwillingness to abandon her car.
She drove home. I 'd never, never even for a nanosecond,
consider ratting her out to the police for drunken driving.
(2 days later, after she sobered up, she called me,
being impressed with my concern for her well-being.)



What is the very MOST ??


Please explain the difference, Izzy.
I wanna HEAR this; I do.





MY vu of it (from an American perspective)
is that we citizens were and are like owners of real estate
who decide that we don't wanna attend to its daily requirements
qua pluming, electricity, gardening maintenace, & security, etc.,
so we hire a real estate mgmt firm, called the Government Mgmt. Co.,
whose CEO applies to us for permission to hire a staff of guards.
We grant that permission. He hires them. A socialist proposes
that we pledge our allegiance to our new real estate mgmt firm.
Being sufficiently stupid, we say:
"Duh, OK. I pledge allegiance to my new employee.
It'll be fun, following his rules; crack the whip!
I promise to look up to him and to admire him and I will forget
that I own the place and I will pretend that HE is the boss."


Izzy, in my mind, government is my private security force.
He may be uppitty or he may have delusions of grandeur,
but he works for ME. I don' t work for him, nor his rules.
That is because this is a republic, based on personal freedom,
by constricting & strangling jurisdiction of government (which is INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL to liberty).
Each American logically shud endeavor to exploit the collective as well as he possibly CAN,
and to exploit our employees (government) as well as possible,
not the other way around.

Sovereignty is in US, the citizens,
the political creators (in whose shoes we stand)
NOT in the damned thing that we created to serve us.

We created government so that IT woud serve US,
not so that WE woud serve IT. We need to consciously, acutely REMEMBER that.

When "the rule of law" comes to mind,
I hold it within that context. That includes jury service.

Each of the 3OO,OOO,OOO + citizens shud apply himself to exploitation
of the collective. When I became a member of the Bar,
I did so to exploit my talents and to exploit the collective
as well as possible and to use the rule of law as an instrument toward that goal.

I 'd be ez, generous, & merciful toward Tom Swift and let him go free.





David

I wouldn’t wish what Thom is going through on anyone, however I have zero tolerance for drinking and driving. I don’t want drunks driving on the roads putting my family and my friends in danger.

Thank you Firefly. I was curious about this pretrial hearing today. Correct me if I’m wrong but this still doesn’t mean there couldn’t be some kind of plea bargain at the July 2nd hearing?

Getting behind the wheel of a car and driving drunk is a crime! If someone’s stupidly were to kill a member of my family don’t think for a minute I’m going to have compassion for him.