|
|
CE8
Mar 30, 2005 17:33:02 GMT -5
Post by Thorngrub on Mar 30, 2005 17:33:02 GMT -5
What I think is funny is how people honor the law only when it suits them. For instance, Cochran managed to acquit OJ: a court of law has found OJ to be "Not Guilty" of the double homicide. Yet try and find someone who believes he is innocent. Same thing with Michael Jackson. If he is indeed acquitted, millions will continue to vehemently maintain he was guilty as sin; if he is convicted there will remain millions, ok thousands of fans who will absolutely refuse to accept the possibility he could be a child molestor. In these instances the law means nothing. At best, it means the arbitrary point of whether or not the defendant ends up spending time in jail. But the actual truth -- that is something that not even a court of law can always ascertain. In such rare cases, I suspect the defendant will nonetheless face ultimate justice, dealt squarely and fairly, by the Karma Court. (That is my euphemism for "God". Interesting to note that Christians and I are in agreement on this matter; only our respective terminologies differ.)
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 30, 2005 17:37:01 GMT -5
Post by alexiscarrington on Mar 30, 2005 17:37:01 GMT -5
The American Justice system isn't about truth. It's about winning. So that's how the public look at it. Mostly it's not to them about whether or not someone did it, but whether or not they want that person in jail.
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 30, 2005 17:43:29 GMT -5
Post by chrisfan on Mar 30, 2005 17:43:29 GMT -5
What I think is funny is how people honor the law only when it suits them. For instance, Cochran managed to acquit OJ: a court of law has found OJ to be "Not Guilty" of the double homicide. Yet try and find someone who believes he is innocent. Same thing with Michael Jackson. If he is indeed acquitted, millions will continue to vehemently maintain he was guilty as sin; if he is convicted there will remain millions, ok thousands of fans who will absolutely refuse to accept the possibility he could be a child molestor. In these instances the law means nothing. At best, it means the arbitrary point of whether or not the defendant ends up spending time in jail. But the actual truth -- that is something that not even a court of law can always ascertain. In such rare cases, I suspect the defendant will nonetheless face ultimate justice, dealt squarely and fairly, by the Karma Court. (That is my euphemism for "God". Interesting to note that Christians and I are in agreement on this matter; only our respective terminologies differ.) Of course you're going to have cases where a person is found not guilty, and some people still believe they are guilty. You also have cases where a person is found guilty, and proven later to not be. The goal of a trial may be to find what is true, but an awful lot of it boils down to process. If the correct process is not followed, then a person is found not guilty ... not because they did not do it, but because their legal rights were not respected. I've always understoond that is why defense attorneys don't ask a client if he or she did the crime. They're not concerned about whether or not hte person did it -- they're concerned about making sure the legal process was followed and respected. |
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 30, 2005 17:46:31 GMT -5
Post by Thorngrub on Mar 30, 2005 17:46:31 GMT -5
The American Justice system isn't about truth. It's about winning. So that's how the public look at it. Mostly it's not to them about whether or not someone did it, but whether or not they want that person in jail. That's right; and since that is how the public looks at it, now that we all know OJ "won", isn't cutting him some slack the least we can do? Oh but I forgot: those vested in power are quite used to having their cake and eating it too. |
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 30, 2005 18:01:05 GMT -5
Post by Galactus on Mar 30, 2005 18:01:05 GMT -5
You've confused me here thorny...why exactly are we cutting OJ some slack? Honestly I think not being in prison is quit a bit of slack don't you? So he "won", are we all suposed to pretend we don't still think he did it? What slack are we talking about?
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 30, 2005 18:09:03 GMT -5
Post by Galactus on Mar 30, 2005 18:09:03 GMT -5
The American Justice system isn't about truth. It's about winning. So that's how the public look at it. Mostly it's not to them about whether or not someone did it, but whether or not they want that person in jail. I just don't think this true...maybe in high profile media cases...but, call me naive, I still think most cases are about process. Sure, sometimes guilty and not guilty get lost in process but all to preserve respect for the legal process. Chrisfan is right, a DA's job isn't (or shouldn't) be about getting people off. It's about making sure the trail is fair and even the rights of fucking scumbags are preserved. Sometimes that means someone who did it gets a walk but more often than not the system works. |
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 30, 2005 21:05:02 GMT -5
Post by chrisfan on Mar 30, 2005 21:05:02 GMT -5
DED, help! I need you! I missed the last 10 minutes of Lost. My nephew called me to giggle for me. Did you see it? It looked from watching but not listening like Locke's father deserted him once he had his kidney. Is that what happened?
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 30, 2005 22:54:52 GMT -5
Post by stratman19 on Mar 30, 2005 22:54:52 GMT -5
The 911 call from that 5 year old little girl was heartbreaking to me....
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 31, 2005 7:39:15 GMT -5
Post by maarts on Mar 31, 2005 7:39:15 GMT -5
You've totally lost me now  It looks to me like the American judicial system's overworked and it's indeed more like the scenes out of Law And Order where scores of defendants and lawyers parade in front of a tired judge who'll set bail or not. The re-enactment of the Michael Jackson-trial also tells me that there are clowns to the left of me and jokers to the right.... |
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 31, 2005 10:21:22 GMT -5
Post by rockysigman on Mar 31, 2005 10:21:22 GMT -5
Terry Schiavo is now dead. Can we please move on now?
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 31, 2005 10:21:49 GMT -5
Post by rockysigman on Mar 31, 2005 10:21:49 GMT -5
Oh, I should add, I mean move on as a country, not necessarily this particular board.
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 31, 2005 10:35:47 GMT -5
Post by pissin2 on Mar 31, 2005 10:35:47 GMT -5
Ok, now we can devote our full attention to Michael Jackson.
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 31, 2005 10:41:32 GMT -5
Post by chrisfan on Mar 31, 2005 10:41:32 GMT -5
Terri Schiavo died while her parents, sister, and brother were barred from her hospice. At the orders of Michael Schiavo, Bobby Schindler was removed from the hospice at midnight last night, and all four of them were barred from being with the woman they loved so dearly while those with her knew she was taking her final breaths. It was not enough for the man to just let her die ... he had to keep those who love her dearly away from her in her final moments.
How ANYONE can defend that man or stand behind that man I will never, ever, understand. Hide behind the judicial robes all you want. Hide behind the right to die all you want. Just never, ever forget that you were also standing behind a man who would do that to a family in the final moments of Terri's life.
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 31, 2005 10:50:09 GMT -5
Post by Ampage on Mar 31, 2005 10:50:09 GMT -5
I am sure he will say that was in Terri’s best interests. In case someone tried to sneak her food or water. The mans a pig.
|
|
|
|
CE8
Mar 31, 2005 10:53:52 GMT -5
Post by chrisfan on Mar 31, 2005 10:53:52 GMT -5
Terry Schiavo is now dead. Can we please move on now? Silence and lurking look good on you Rocky. But to answer your question, I hope to God that we DON'T just move on from this now. If this country is willing to just look away comfortably from the way that we will throw away unwanted or undesirable lives so easily, I will remain very very very sad. |
|
