|
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. |
There is a lot of geographical variation at play there; Colorado is not set up the way Midwestern states like Ohio, Michigan, or Wisconsin are. Literally no one that is good at their job wants to be an Isabella or Fulton County prosecutor, especially not when they make 32k a year and have to do pretty much whatever their elected superior says. Even Wayne County had its share of idiots, and I know this based on personal experience and through my dad's work as medical examiner.
|
On August 02 2017 01:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 01:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 01 2017 22:26 pmh wrote:That's law in the usa (and probably quiet a few other countries as well). Thx to scalia amongst others. When they know that someone is innocent but they also know that they are able to get a conviction from the jury they will proceed. Its a very technical and philosophical approach to law,any human element is being removed What kind of criminal psychopath woukd work to send someone to jail for over a decade while having a document proving the person is innocent?
This woman deserves hell and it is really utterly fucked up that this can legally happen. A lawyer. Lawyers are generally more concerned about winning than they are with justice. The one type of lawyer where this is clearly problematic is the prosecutor. Ok but in any ither case a lawyer is hired by a client who has something to win. Here no one has anything to win, it's just working to destroy an innocent life for absolutely no reason. How can one sleep at night after that? It's fuckong horrifying.
Because the law attracts a certain type of high-powered asshole.
|
Also Fox New's statement on the matter :
The accusation that FoxNews.com published Malia Zimmerman’s story to help detract from coverage of the Russia collusion issue is completely erroneous. The retraction of this story is still being investigated internally and we have no evidence that Rod Wheeler was misquoted by Zimmerman. Additionally, FOX News vehemently denies the race discrimination claims in the lawsuit — the dispute between Zimmerman and Rod Wheeler has nothing to do with race.
www.mediaite.com
|
that statement by Fox basically reads as, "we're not sure what happened but WE"RE NOT RACISTS"
|
On August 02 2017 01:44 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 01:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 01 2017 22:26 pmh wrote:That's law in the usa (and probably quiet a few other countries as well). Thx to scalia amongst others. When they know that someone is innocent but they also know that they are able to get a conviction from the jury they will proceed. Its a very technical and philosophical approach to law,any human element is being removed What kind of criminal psychopath woukd work to send someone to jail for over a decade while having a document proving the person is innocent?
This woman deserves hell and it is really utterly fucked up that this can legally happen. A lawyer. Lawyers are generally more concerned about winning than they are with justice. The one type of lawyer where this is clearly problematic is the prosecutor. Ok but in any ither case a lawyer is hired by a client who has something to win. Here no one has anything to win, it's just working to destroy an innocent life for absolutely no reason. How can one sleep at night after that? It's fuckong horrifying. Because the law attracts a certain type of high-powered asshole.
That's chilling.
But that's really one side of the problem. In a functional system this woman should be immediately removed from office and tried herself. Us justice system is utterly fucked up. A good system is supposed toprotect people against power abusing lunatic psychos.
|
On August 02 2017 01:43 farvacola wrote:
There is a lot of geographical variation at play there; Colorado is not set up the way Midwestern states like Ohio, Michigan, or Wisconsin are. Literally no one that is good at their job wants to be an Isabella or Fulton County prosecutor, especially not when they make 32k a year.
That was a problem with western mass, but the state government stepped in to prop up the local DAs and public defenders. The public defenders office was running on nothing when I worked in probation.
On August 02 2017 01:46 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 01:44 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 01 2017 22:26 pmh wrote:That's law in the usa (and probably quiet a few other countries as well). Thx to scalia amongst others. When they know that someone is innocent but they also know that they are able to get a conviction from the jury they will proceed. Its a very technical and philosophical approach to law,any human element is being removed What kind of criminal psychopath woukd work to send someone to jail for over a decade while having a document proving the person is innocent?
This woman deserves hell and it is really utterly fucked up that this can legally happen. A lawyer. Lawyers are generally more concerned about winning than they are with justice. The one type of lawyer where this is clearly problematic is the prosecutor. Ok but in any ither case a lawyer is hired by a client who has something to win. Here no one has anything to win, it's just working to destroy an innocent life for absolutely no reason. How can one sleep at night after that? It's fuckong horrifying. Because the law attracts a certain type of high-powered asshole. That's chilling. But that's really one side of the problem. In a functional system this woman should be immediately removed from office and tried herself. Us justice system is utterly fucked up. A good system is supposed toprotect people against power abusing lunatic psychos.
No one polices the police and DAs in the US. They police themselves, which works exactly how you would expect.
|
On August 02 2017 01:42 xDaunt wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 01:39 Adreme wrote:On August 02 2017 01:29 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:28 ShoCkeyy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 01 2017 22:26 pmh wrote:That's law in the usa (and probably quiet a few other countries as well). Thx to scalia amongst others. When they know that someone is innocent but they also know that they are able to get a conviction from the jury they will proceed. Its a very technical and philosophical approach to law,any human element is being removed What kind of criminal psychopath woukd work to send someone to jail for over a decade while having a document proving the person is innocent?
This woman deserves hell and it is really utterly fucked up that this can legally happen. A lawyer. Lawyers are generally more concerned about winning than they are with justice. The one type of lawyer where this is clearly problematic is the prosecutor. Hey aren't you a lawyer? Yes, but my fault as a trial attorney is that I am prone to sometimes caring more about justice than winning. So maybe you could explain it to me because I must be understanding it wrong. On the suit section 18 says that a draft was sent that did NOT contain that information and then it followsup in 20 saying a few days later it was published by Zimmerman WITH the false quotes added in. That seems to imply that the version to Wheeler and the version published were not the same. If you look further down past the introductory paragraphs (after the allegations of jurisdiction, venue, etc) you will see allegations stating that additional drafts were sent to Wheeler before the publication and that Wheeler told the journalists that he did not have time to read them.
I assume you are referring to section 76 where its said Wheeler was traveling so would not have time to review the drafts sent throughout the day. From what I can gather from those sections it appears Wheeler sent some quotes to Zimmerman and then Zimmerman added in some more of his own in order to accomplish what he feels is the point of the article which is to try to convince everyone that there was no collusion and that Russia was not responsible for the hack.
The sections after seem to paint this goal but the bit that has me most curious is "“I didn’t tell you yet but the federal government is involved at this moment, behind the scenes and believe your story.” That quote is just very unusual and would lead me to wonder how involved because merely reading a story and saying "I want this printed asap" is not being involved.
edit:87-88 also look REALLY bad for Zimmerman.
|
On August 02 2017 01:46 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 01:43 farvacola wrote:
There is a lot of geographical variation at play there; Colorado is not set up the way Midwestern states like Ohio, Michigan, or Wisconsin are. Literally no one that is good at their job wants to be an Isabella or Fulton County prosecutor, especially not when they make 32k a year. That was a problem with western mass, but the state government stepped in to prop up the local DAs and public defenders. The public defenders office was running on nothing when I worked in probation. Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 01:46 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:44 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 01 2017 22:26 pmh wrote:That's law in the usa (and probably quiet a few other countries as well). Thx to scalia amongst others. When they know that someone is innocent but they also know that they are able to get a conviction from the jury they will proceed. Its a very technical and philosophical approach to law,any human element is being removed What kind of criminal psychopath woukd work to send someone to jail for over a decade while having a document proving the person is innocent?
This woman deserves hell and it is really utterly fucked up that this can legally happen. A lawyer. Lawyers are generally more concerned about winning than they are with justice. The one type of lawyer where this is clearly problematic is the prosecutor. Ok but in any ither case a lawyer is hired by a client who has something to win. Here no one has anything to win, it's just working to destroy an innocent life for absolutely no reason. How can one sleep at night after that? It's fuckong horrifying. Because the law attracts a certain type of high-powered asshole. That's chilling. But that's really one side of the problem. In a functional system this woman should be immediately removed from office and tried herself. Us justice system is utterly fucked up. A good system is supposed toprotect people against power abusing lunatic psychos. No one polices the police and DAs in the US. They police themselves, which works exactly how you would expect.
I don't want to go into a country vs country cockfight, but in any european country I believe something like that would cause national outrage and something would likely be done very quickly.
It can happen at any time to any US citizen. Why don't people go batshit nuts over something so outrageous?
|
Yes, there's a structural problem in the US with law enforcement oversight. The only remedy is to bring a 1983 claim, but, frankly, that just isn't quite good enough. Attorneys have limited capacity to bring those claims, and they're often tough to win anyway. I'll be filing one later this year over an instance of police brutality that was witnessed by the fucking assistant DA (and fortunately, caught on video). And no, GH, the victim was not black. Police abuse white people, too.
|
On August 02 2017 01:55 xDaunt wrote:
Yes, there's a structural problem in the US with law enforcement oversight. The only remedy is to bring a 1983 claim, but, frankly, that just isn't quite good enough. Attorneys have limited capacity to bring those claims, and they're often tough to win anyway. I'll be filing one later this year over an instance of police brutality that was witnessed by the fucking assistant DA (and fortunately, caught on video). And no, GH, the victim was not black. Police abuse white people, too.
Are there constitutional reasons that make the houses incapable of solving the problem or is it political?
|
On August 02 2017 01:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 01:46 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2017 01:43 farvacola wrote:
There is a lot of geographical variation at play there; Colorado is not set up the way Midwestern states like Ohio, Michigan, or Wisconsin are. Literally no one that is good at their job wants to be an Isabella or Fulton County prosecutor, especially not when they make 32k a year. That was a problem with western mass, but the state government stepped in to prop up the local DAs and public defenders. The public defenders office was running on nothing when I worked in probation. On August 02 2017 01:46 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:44 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 01 2017 22:26 pmh wrote:That's law in the usa (and probably quiet a few other countries as well). Thx to scalia amongst others. When they know that someone is innocent but they also know that they are able to get a conviction from the jury they will proceed. Its a very technical and philosophical approach to law,any human element is being removed What kind of criminal psychopath woukd work to send someone to jail for over a decade while having a document proving the person is innocent?
This woman deserves hell and it is really utterly fucked up that this can legally happen. A lawyer. Lawyers are generally more concerned about winning than they are with justice. The one type of lawyer where this is clearly problematic is the prosecutor. Ok but in any ither case a lawyer is hired by a client who has something to win. Here no one has anything to win, it's just working to destroy an innocent life for absolutely no reason. How can one sleep at night after that? It's fuckong horrifying. Because the law attracts a certain type of high-powered asshole. That's chilling. But that's really one side of the problem. In a functional system this woman should be immediately removed from office and tried herself. Us justice system is utterly fucked up. A good system is supposed toprotect people against power abusing lunatic psychos. No one polices the police and DAs in the US. They police themselves, which works exactly how you would expect. I don't want to go into a country vs country cockfight, but in any european country I believe something like that would cause national outrage and something would likely be done very quickly. It can happen at any time to any US citizen. Why don't people go batshit nuts over something so outrageous?
Because people are poor and we have limited mechanisms to address these issues. And, as Xdaunt said, many of the people that this happens to are white and don't do anything about it. And when non-whites bring the claims that police suck, everyone just ignores it or thinks they are making it up. We live in a country where police can gun unarmed people down because they are scared and they won't be found guilty of a crime. We are a nation of states and some states are just bad at law enforcement. Most of them really. But if the federal goverment tries to step in, everyone flips their shit and says its a war on police.
|
On August 02 2017 01:54 Biff The Understudy wrote:Show nested quote +On August 02 2017 01:46 Plansix wrote:On August 02 2017 01:43 farvacola wrote:
There is a lot of geographical variation at play there; Colorado is not set up the way Midwestern states like Ohio, Michigan, or Wisconsin are. Literally no one that is good at their job wants to be an Isabella or Fulton County prosecutor, especially not when they make 32k a year. That was a problem with western mass, but the state government stepped in to prop up the local DAs and public defenders. The public defenders office was running on nothing when I worked in probation. On August 02 2017 01:46 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:44 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:40 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 02 2017 01:26 xDaunt wrote:On August 02 2017 01:21 Biff The Understudy wrote:On August 01 2017 22:26 pmh wrote:That's law in the usa (and probably quiet a few other countries as well). Thx to scalia amongst others. When they know that someone is innocent but they also know that they are able to get a conviction from the jury they will proceed. Its a very technical and philosophical approach to law,any human element is being removed What kind of criminal psychopath woukd work to send someone to jail for over a decade while having a document proving the person is innocent?
This woman deserves hell and it is really utterly fucked up that this can legally happen. A lawyer. Lawyers are generally more concerned about winning than they are with justice. The one type of lawyer where this is clearly problematic is the prosecutor. Ok but in any ither case a lawyer is hired by a client who has something to win. Here no one has anything to win, it's just working to destroy an innocent life for absolutely no reason. How can one sleep at night after that? It's fuckong horrifying. Because the law attracts a certain type of high-powered asshole. That's chilling. But that's really one side of the problem. In a functional system this woman should be immediately removed from office and tried herself. Us justice system is utterly fucked up. A good system is supposed toprotect people against power abusing lunatic psychos. No one polices the police and DAs in the US. They police themselves, which works exactly how you would expect. I don't want to go into a country vs country cockfight, but in any european country I believe something like that would cause national outrage and something would likely be done very quickly. It can happen at any time to any US citizen. Why don't people go batshit nuts over something so outrageous?
I don't nkow why people don't take more action against it; maybe the misconduct has become so normalized it doesn't cause outrage?
also some people have very pro law enforcement attitudes and vote based on those which makes it harder to hold people accountable.
even someone like Sessions had a fair bit of support for some of his stuff; like weakening the consent decrees (not sure whatever happened on that)
|
The worst part of the entire Fox/really-fake-news-this-time story is that is skips over the part that the entire thing is taking advantage of some poor kids death. It is shameful, but I'm so numb to it all at this point.
|
Anyone know anything about this prison general Sessions is using? I generally have more faith in the military than our political climate. On issues like climate change, the military needs to be using appropriate, correct information. I am hopeful the military will use a similarly utilitarian perspective with our prison system..?
|
60 days from now, we might have a shut down for no real good reason.
|
The whole debt ceiling system should be tossed; it causes trouble for not enough benefit.
|
But folks who depend on the votes of people who don't know what a debt ceiling is yet think it's a good idea can't abide by such a thing zlefin, now now 
|
The debt ceiling is a necessary balance to treasure(I think, I can’t remember, it is so stupid we fight about this). The tea party decided it needed to be a political football. Only they are dumb enough to grind everything to a halt to demand budget cuts by threaten to stop paying bills racked up last year.
|
On August 02 2017 02:51 Plansix wrote:
The debt ceiling is a necessary balance to treasure(I think, I can’t remember, it is so stupid we fight about this). The tea party decided it needed to be a political football. Only they are dumb enough to grind everything to a halt to demand budget cuts by threaten to stop paying bills racked up last year.
I don't think the debt ceiling does anything all that useful; and it causes a LOT of trouble. I don't see the benefit of it outweighing the costs. I don't see how it helps balance out treasury issues at all. I also consider it just plain dumb from a legal standpoint; making laws that directly contradict each other is dumb. while it has been more of a problem in recent years, it did cause some issues prior to the tea party.
|
Hey, Republicans will finally get their wish for no government.
I mean, this is no laughing matter, and my life will probably be thrown sideways if these morons can't keep the ship upright, but I have to see some kind of upside.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
