6/17/2020 The day that Black Lives Matter & the media lynched an innocent man

@Webb,

Quote:

OK, now please go away.

I'll continue reading your posts and critiquing your misguided comments as I wish. If you don't enjoy our discussions you might be better advised to put me on "IGNORE" and keep me there.

Quote:

Go hang out with your Antifa/BLM buddies.

You'd have to introduce me to some as I don't know of any in my social circle.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

If it is true that this White person is "charged with Murder", he will have due process. He will have a lawyer, and be able to present evidence. He will have every protection afforded to any defendant. He will be judged by a jury of his peers.

When a person who isn't White gets lynched, they don't get a jury trial. They don't get any legal protection or any chance to present evidence in their defense.

That seems like a big difference to me (and on that should be understandable to even a conservative).

Sorry, have their been a lot of lynchings lately?

The cop may also get a case that was tried in the media. The jurors may feel that there will be mob retribution, such as we see in the streets every day, against them personally if they don't decide the "right" way, and liberals on the jury may reinforce this perception.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Our legal system has protections against this, including a process of jury selection and the ability of the judge to make jurors anonymous. It isn't a perfect system, but it does provide a lot of rights for any defendants.

If you don't like the jury system, what would you propose in its place?

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Our legal system has protections against this, including a process of jury selection and the ability of the judge to make jurors anonymous. It isn't a perfect system, but it does provide a lot of rights for any defendants.

If you don't like the jury system, what would you propose in its place?

That's a dishonest question. I propose one thing that might go wrong in a trial and you tell me that I don't like the jury system. I won't lower myself to respond.

3 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Max is grandstanding. He’s trying to appear centrist by disagreeing with you. As he can’t disagree with you honestly he’s trying to put words in your mouth.

It’s a tactic he employs time and time again.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

izzythepush wrote:

Max is grandstanding. He’s trying to appear centrist by disagreeing with you. As he can’t disagree with you honestly he’s trying to put words in your mouth.

It’s a tactic he employs time and time again.

Thanks.

1 Reply

@Webb,

You're very correct Webb.

I found the interview with KGB Agent, Yuri Bezmenov. Here's a highlight of one of the most most important things he talks about. I highly recommend you at least watch this highlight if you haven't already seen it (it's about 13 mins).

Here's the entire interview (1 hour 20 mins)

People like Max really need to watch this. This interview was recorded in 1984, and now just like he predicted, we see this Marxist propaganda having taken full hold in America.

Far left Marxist extremists like hightor want to subvert the principles this country was founded on.

izzythepush said:

Quote:

I always found CNN a bit too right wing for my tastes.

This says all you need to know about these people. When far left CNN is "too right wing" for them, you know we're dealing with apostles of Karl Marx.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

Over here we have rules of sub juice meaning there are restrictions on reporting a case that will end up in court. After the verdict restrictions are lifted, but reporting on a case that’s ongoing can result in jail time.

That’s what Tommy Robinson went to prison for.

0 Replies

@Brandon9000,

So I am asking ....

What do you propose as an alternative to a trial with due process protections?

4 Replies

@maxdancona,

Is the idea of sub judice too alien or too complex for you to get your head around?

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

This is a thread about a case in the United States. Your ranting about sub judice is irrelevant.

You are being silly.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Too complex, it’s much easier making wild accusations and posturing.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

So I am asking ....

What do you propose as an alternative to a trial with due process protections?

This is the important question. Brandon.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

This is a thread about a case in the United States. Your ranting about sub judice is irrelevant.

You asked for alternatives. He is offering an alternative.

I don't like izzy's personal attacks, but he has a good point. I am in favor of the US adopting such rules to better protect the integrity of trials.

1 Reply

@Brandon9000,

Brandon9000 wrote:

That's a dishonest question. I propose one thing that might go wrong in a trial and you tell me that I don't like the jury system. I won't lower myself to respond.

I don't think he is being dishonest. He's just trying to ask what your alternative is if you are unhappy with the current system. Perhaps he worded his question poorly.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

What do you propose as an alternative to a trial with due process protections?

How about a trial with much stronger due process protections?

0 Replies

@oralloy,

I take the point. Izzy and Oralloy think that no cases should be brought against police with out a judge's permission. This way cases are much less likely to proceed from trial and police officers will be protected to some extent from prosecution.

I disagree, but I accept that you and Izzy have a point

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

I didn't say that. I didn't see him say anything like that either.

I'm not sure what to think about such a measure. If I did support it I'd want it to apply to everyone and not just to the police.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

We have a modern legal system. In my opinion the legal system in the UK is archaic, but that is the topic of another thread. This thread is clearly about the US legal system.

1. For criminal cases, the case goes in front of District Attorney who acts as prosecuter. Most District Attorneys are elected and represent the public at large. They are accountable to public opinion. The prosecutor in most US states has prosecutorial discretion, meaning that they have the right to choose not to file charges.

2. If the prosecutor does file charges, the defendant is afforded due process rights guaranteed by the Constitution and by state law. (This is why even if the prosecutor is wrong to file charges... the term "lynching" is completely inappropriate).

3. The judge has the ability to dismiss charges if the prosecutor does not have a real case. This is another protection afforded to a defendant.

4. The jury has the ability to find a defendant not guilty if the prosecutor does not have a good case.

5. In each of these steps the defendant has the right to be represented by a his own legal counsel, to file briefs, to see evidence and to present his case.

In this case Oralloy and Brandon seem to be saying that the defendant is not guilty. I am claiming that the defendant is guilty of at second degree murder.

What I don't see is a good reason that this defendant shouldn't held accountable under our normal legal system of justice. Brandon or Oralloy... do you have a good explanation for this? Some of us think he is guilty. Some of us think he is not guilty.

We have a perfectly good way to resolve issues like this. Why shouldn't we use it?

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

So I am asking ....

What do you propose as an alternative to a trial with due process protections?

The judicial system is good as is, but has never been omnipotent, nor could we ever expect it to be. Now that there are roving mobs of vigilantes doing violence all over the country, I could see a juror feeling intimidated. I can point out that a problem exists without having a solution. I suppose that part of the solution would be for the civil authorities to stop the roving vigilantes from committing crimes to give people the feeling that they may be protected from the mob. Go ahead and distort what I said. I'll just point out your distortions.

2 Replies

6/17/2020 The day that Black Lives Matter & the media lynched an innocent man

Quick Links

My Account

able2know