George Floyd Protests
Comments
-
mickeyrat said:mrussel1 said:
The question is do you believe your preferred media source or the 12 jurors who actually heard what happened?brianlux said:I can't believe there are people on this site who appear to be defending this killer. Jeez Louise, where am I?
or the 12 jurors who heard what the judge allowed them to hear , you mean.....
Exactly, thank you!
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
These are conspiracy theories. You guys sound like Trumpers when it comes to voting machines and that type of bullshit.
You have to decide if you trust our legal system or not. Do you trust our voting machines or not. Do you trust our representative democracy or not. If you say no, you can live in your Q-oriented world. But you're no different than the people you laugh at on the other side.0 -
Thank you.mrussel1 said:These are conspiracy theories. You guys sound like Trumpers when it comes to voting machines and that type of bullshit.
You have to decide if you trust our legal system or not. Do you trust our voting machines or not. Do you trust our representative democracy or not. If you say no, you can live in your Q-oriented world. But you're no different than the people you laugh at on the other side.0 -
This is too over the top for me. Me a Trumper?
Have a good day all, I'm outa here!"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
oh the drama…Give Peas A Chance…0
-
Oh the bullshit...
"It's a sad and beautiful world"-Roberto Benigni0 -
You're willfully misinterpreting what I'm saying. Surely you don't think people on the left aren't capable of the mindset of those on the right. They are, even if their values are different.brianlux said:This is too over the top for me. Me a Trumper?Have a good day all, I'm outa here!
0 -
Because the jury did not come back with the decision I wanted, the judge must have tipped the scales.
Because Trump didn't win, it must have been rigged
Same mindset.0 -
I’m actually very curious. What specifically do you, or anyone else, did the judge not allow that would have changed the verdict?brianlux said:mickeyrat said:mrussel1 said:
The question is do you believe your preferred media source or the 12 jurors who actually heard what happened?brianlux said:I can't believe there are people on this site who appear to be defending this killer. Jeez Louise, where am I?
or the 12 jurors who heard what the judge allowed them to hear , you mean.....
Exactly, thank you!
They viewed lots of video and many witnesses. I can’t think of anything withdrawn by the judge hat would have made a difference.0 -
I was just about to post this exact same thing. since when do we believe 12 jurors always get it right?OnWis97 said:By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
one thing that bothers me is that so many people seem to think just because the answer to your last question is "yes", that somehow defaults to him being guilty. just because he went there looking to cause trouble doesn't mean he didn't act in self defense once he found that trouble.mrussel1 said:
You have to prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. He was found culpable in civil court based on the preponderance of the evidence. The families can always file a civil suit here as well.OnWis97 said:
Do I think OJ killed them? Yes. But that's not the legal standard.
Do I think Kyle went spoiling for a firefight? Yes.
I honestly don't know what to believe at this point. I obviously haven't seen/heard all the evidence; from a few of the details posted here it certainly seems like he acted in self defense.
I honestly think we're focusing on the wrong thing: this one particular case. the bigger problem, in my mind, is that it is perfectly legal for anyone, regardless of age, for someone to walk around with that type of weapon like they are in some dystopian war zone. it's absurd.By The Time They Figure Out What Went Wrong, We'll Be Sitting On A Beach, Earning Twenty Percent.0 -
I'm not suggesting anything other than thats how trials work. Not having followed the day to day of the trial, what motions were brought, evidence presented etc, I wont comment on specifics. The judge determines what the jury hears. so in actual fact, its not always what "actually" happened.mrussel1 said:
Always a conspiracy.mickeyrat said:mrussel1 said:
The question is do you believe your preferred media source or the 12 jurors who actually heard what happened?brianlux said:I can't believe there are people on this site who appear to be defending this killer. Jeez Louise, where am I?
or the 12 jurors who heard what the judge allowed them to hear , you mean.....
What evidence was not allowed in court that you think was so damning?
_____________________________________SIGNATURE________________________________________________
Not today Sir, Probably not tomorrow.............................................. bayfront arena st. pete '94
you're finally here and I'm a mess................................................... nationwide arena columbus '10
memories like fingerprints are slowly raising.................................... first niagara center buffalo '13
another man ..... moved by sleight of hand...................................... joe louis arena detroit '140 -
Right, that's our legal system. Lots of Trumpers were furious because election cases never even were heard on the merits because the plaintiffs lacked standing. And what did we all say? Sorry idiots, that's the law. This is the same thing.mickeyrat said:
I'm not suggesting anything other than thats how trials work. Not having followed the day to day of the trial, what motions were brought, evidence presented etc, I wont comment on specifics. The judge determines what the jury hears. so in actual fact, its not always what "actually" happened.mrussel1 said:
Always a conspiracy.mickeyrat said:mrussel1 said:
The question is do you believe your preferred media source or the 12 jurors who actually heard what happened?brianlux said:I can't believe there are people on this site who appear to be defending this killer. Jeez Louise, where am I?
or the 12 jurors who heard what the judge allowed them to hear , you mean.....
What evidence was not allowed in court that you think was so damning?
0 -
Because Tejas doesn’t have standing in Wisconsin or whatever state it was. Bad analogy because in addition to the lack of standing, evidence of fraud was never presented.mrussel1 said:
Right, that's our legal system. Lots of Trumpers were furious because election cases never even were heard on the merits because the plaintiffs lacked standing. And what did we all say? Sorry idiots, that's the law. This is the same thing.mickeyrat said:
I'm not suggesting anything other than thats how trials work. Not having followed the day to day of the trial, what motions were brought, evidence presented etc, I wont comment on specifics. The judge determines what the jury hears. so in actual fact, its not always what "actually" happened.mrussel1 said:
Always a conspiracy.mickeyrat said:mrussel1 said:
The question is do you believe your preferred media source or the 12 jurors who actually heard what happened?brianlux said:I can't believe there are people on this site who appear to be defending this killer. Jeez Louise, where am I?
or the 12 jurors who heard what the judge allowed them to hear , you mean.....
What evidence was not allowed in court that you think was so damning?
Do you believe the judge not allowing the prosecution to refer to the killed and injured as “victims” influenced the jury? Perhaps biased them to some degree?09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
I posted the Wisconsin information about mistrials, acquittals, etc and like an ass I read most of it. Also you all seemed to miss the following:
“Hours before closing arguments began on Monday, Judge Bruce Schroeder granted a defense motion to toss out the weapons charge. Rittenhouse attorneys Mark Richards and Corey Chirafisi pointed to an exception in the law that they said allows minors to possess shotguns and rifles as long as they’re not short-barreled.”
Found that while reading below and their gun laws.
https://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/explainer-judge-drop-rittenhouse-gun-charge-81285031the entire thing is messed up but time to move on everyone. Based on the evidence presented to them and the laws in Wisconsin the jury came to the correct conclusion.I don’t like not knowing what I’m talking or writing about so I tend to spend an inordinate amount of time reading so I limit my incorrect information.He will be judged some day based on most religions and if that’s a bunch of bull then it’s not gonna matter anyway.0 -
Trust our legal system? The same one that allows the killers of Arbery to walk free for months prior to being charged but for a video? The same justice system that has a cult member and a sex offender sitting on the Supreme Court where one seat was stolen from the Obama Administration? The same justice system that the POOTWH Administration appointed wholly unqualified people to? The one that is color blind and the proportion of justice is dependent on your ability to pay? Yea, I trust that justice system.
As a white male I have more faith than some but I would in no fucking way want to be before a jury of my peers accused of a serious crime.09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
Is it appropriate for the judge’s cell phone to go off during proceedings to the tune of God Bless the USA?09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
Trust the legal system? Sure.
https://www.politifact.com/factchecks/2019/sep/11/sheldon-whitehouse/its-true-millions-dark-money-has-been-spent-tilt-c/
09/15/1998 & 09/16/1998, Mansfield, MA; 08/29/00 08/30/00, Mansfield, MA; 07/02/03, 07/03/03, Mansfield, MA; 09/28/04, 09/29/04, Boston, MA; 09/22/05, Halifax, NS; 05/24/06, 05/25/06, Boston, MA; 07/22/06, 07/23/06, Gorge, WA; 06/27/2008, Hartford; 06/28/08, 06/30/08, Mansfield; 08/18/2009, O2, London, UK; 10/30/09, 10/31/09, Philadelphia, PA; 05/15/10, Hartford, CT; 05/17/10, Boston, MA; 05/20/10, 05/21/10, NY, NY; 06/22/10, Dublin, IRE; 06/23/10, Northern Ireland; 09/03/11, 09/04/11, Alpine Valley, WI; 09/11/11, 09/12/11, Toronto, Ont; 09/14/11, Ottawa, Ont; 09/15/11, Hamilton, Ont; 07/02/2012, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/04/2012 & 07/05/2012, Berlin, Germany; 07/07/2012, Stockholm, Sweden; 09/30/2012, Missoula, MT; 07/16/2013, London, Ont; 07/19/2013, Chicago, IL; 10/15/2013 & 10/16/2013, Worcester, MA; 10/21/2013 & 10/22/2013, Philadelphia, PA; 10/25/2013, Hartford, CT; 11/29/2013, Portland, OR; 11/30/2013, Spokane, WA; 12/04/2013, Vancouver, BC; 12/06/2013, Seattle, WA; 10/03/2014, St. Louis. MO; 10/22/2014, Denver, CO; 10/26/2015, New York, NY; 04/23/2016, New Orleans, LA; 04/28/2016 & 04/29/2016, Philadelphia, PA; 05/01/2016 & 05/02/2016, New York, NY; 05/08/2016, Ottawa, Ont.; 05/10/2016 & 05/12/2016, Toronto, Ont.; 08/05/2016 & 08/07/2016, Boston, MA; 08/20/2016 & 08/22/2016, Chicago, IL; 07/01/2018, Prague, Czech Republic; 07/03/2018, Krakow, Poland; 07/05/2018, Berlin, Germany; 09/02/2018 & 09/04/2018, Boston, MA; 09/08/2022, Toronto, Ont; 09/11/2022, New York, NY; 09/14/2022, Camden, NJ; 09/02/2023, St. Paul, MN; 05/04/2024 & 05/06/2024, Vancouver, BC; 05/10/2024, Portland, OR;
Libtardaplorable©. And proud of it.
Brilliantati©0 -
Could the same argument be made for calling them 'victims', implying a pre-judgement on what happened?Halifax2TheMax said:
Because Tejas doesn’t have standing in Wisconsin or whatever state it was. Bad analogy because in addition to the lack of standing, evidence of fraud was never presented.mrussel1 said:
Right, that's our legal system. Lots of Trumpers were furious because election cases never even were heard on the merits because the plaintiffs lacked standing. And what did we all say? Sorry idiots, that's the law. This is the same thing.mickeyrat said:
I'm not suggesting anything other than thats how trials work. Not having followed the day to day of the trial, what motions were brought, evidence presented etc, I wont comment on specifics. The judge determines what the jury hears. so in actual fact, its not always what "actually" happened.mrussel1 said:
Always a conspiracy.mickeyrat said:mrussel1 said:
The question is do you believe your preferred media source or the 12 jurors who actually heard what happened?brianlux said:I can't believe there are people on this site who appear to be defending this killer. Jeez Louise, where am I?
or the 12 jurors who heard what the judge allowed them to hear , you mean.....
What evidence was not allowed in court that you think was so damning?
Do you believe the judge not allowing the prosecution to refer to the killed and injured as “victims” influenced the jury? Perhaps biased them to some degree?0 -
That wasn't the only case where that happened. It's a perfect analogy. Courts have rules of procedures. Following rules, precedent and the like is part of the social compact.Halifax2TheMax said:
Because Tejas doesn’t have standing in Wisconsin or whatever state it was. Bad analogy because in addition to the lack of standing, evidence of fraud was never presented.mrussel1 said:
Right, that's our legal system. Lots of Trumpers were furious because election cases never even were heard on the merits because the plaintiffs lacked standing. And what did we all say? Sorry idiots, that's the law. This is the same thing.mickeyrat said:
I'm not suggesting anything other than thats how trials work. Not having followed the day to day of the trial, what motions were brought, evidence presented etc, I wont comment on specifics. The judge determines what the jury hears. so in actual fact, its not always what "actually" happened.mrussel1 said:
Always a conspiracy.mickeyrat said:mrussel1 said:
The question is do you believe your preferred media source or the 12 jurors who actually heard what happened?brianlux said:I can't believe there are people on this site who appear to be defending this killer. Jeez Louise, where am I?
or the 12 jurors who heard what the judge allowed them to hear , you mean.....
What evidence was not allowed in court that you think was so damning?
Do you believe the judge not allowing the prosecution to refer to the killed and injured as “victims” influenced the jury? Perhaps biased them to some degree?
I don't know the details of your argument, but considering the point of the trial was to determine if they were in fact, victims, it could be prejudicial. Do I think that it could make literally 12 people to go from not guilty to guilty? Seems like a real stretch0
This discussion has been closed.
Categories
- All Categories
- 148.9K Pearl Jam's Music and Activism
- 110.1K The Porch
- 274 Vitalogy
- 35K Given To Fly (live)
- 3.5K Words and Music...Communication
- 39.2K Flea Market
- 39.2K Lost Dogs
- 58.7K Not Pearl Jam's Music
- 10.6K Musicians and Gearheads
- 29.1K Other Music
- 17.8K Poetry, Prose, Music & Art
- 1.1K The Art Wall
- 56.8K Non-Pearl Jam Discussion
- 22.2K A Moving Train
- 31.7K All Encompassing Trip
- 2.9K Technical Stuff and Help