Originally posted by Cow Poke
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Justice For Thee But Not For Me...
Collapse
X
-
"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostIf a judge decides, pre-trial, that "the defendant actually broke the law" then that's a really big problem, dude.Some may call me foolish, and some may call me odd
But I'd rather be a fool in the eyes of man
Than a fool in the eyes of God
From "Fools Gold" by Petra
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostUnder what authority does the judiciary compel the prosecution of a defendant when the State determines that it won't bring or continue charges."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostUnder what authority does the judiciary compel the prosecution of a defendant when the State determines that it won't bring or continue charges.
- PerryThe first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostEr, this was a suggestion from years ago - I can't remember who suggested it but the idea was to reduce the anonymity and the aggression. I know RTT was a signatory and I think Mossy was. Pretty sure Ox started doing that then. Sam picked it up later - if I recall correctly it predated him.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Mountain Man View PostYou really think that judges walk into a trial wholly ignorant of the case? They typically have a pretty good handle on the matter before they even step foot in the courtroom.
BUT the judge SHOULD have an opinion on the sufficiency of the case. If the case is sufficient and no legal grounds for dismissal are put forth, then the case proceeds."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
So here's how I see this thing going down, though probably not before I light out for the prairies again:
State supreme court overrules Suffolk judge rather quickly. If not, defendants make an emergency plea seeking some sort of relief, on the basis that the State wants to drop the charges and that they'll be irrevocably harmed by continuing a prosecution even the State thinks is unwarranted and the arraignment was unconstiutional. Defendants win plea, charges are dismissed.
I am not aware of any circumstance in memory where a judge forced the State to prosecute a low-level offense case that the State was unwilling to prosecute and certainly not aware of any situation where a judge did so for any case while refusing to articulate a reason.
I can't think of any conservative principle or legal theory that would find this remotely acceptable. I can understand that the modern conservative movement is anything but and I do see plenty of authoritarian desire for punishment and order going on.
But that's not going to carry the day.
--Sam"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostLemme guess, it was Jaltus!
Don't confuse me - I'm still trying to remember."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostSo here's how I see this thing going down, though probably not before I light out for the prairies again:
State supreme court overrules Suffolk judge rather quickly. If not, defendants make an emergency plea seeking some sort of relief, on the basis that the State wants to drop the charges and that they'll be irrevocably harmed by continuing a prosecution even the State thinks is unwarranted and the arraignment was unconstiutional. Defendants win plea, charges are dismissed.
I am not aware of any circumstance in memory where a judge forced the State to prosecute a low-level offense case that the State was unwilling to prosecute and certainly not aware of any situation where a judge did so for any case while refusing to articulate a reason.
I can't think of any conservative principle or legal theory that would find this remotely acceptable. I can understand that the modern conservative movement is anything but and I do see plenty of authoritarian desire for punishment and order going on.
But that's not going to carry the day.
--Sam"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
I find this question ironic since it's the defendants who are suffering harm by being arraigned and potentially forced to pay legal fees to defend against a charge the State doesn't actually want to bring.
--Sam
Originally posted by Teallaura View PostWhy do you hate defendants?"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Meanwhile, I love this amazingly unbiased and fair and balanced coverage from our friends at Reason.
What's odd about this whole thing, even from this very fair and balanced [cough sputter] account is that it seems that arrests were made, but this article seems to suggest that these prosecutions were before the judge without the DA's bringing them.
It seems to come back to --- did the DA bring these charges to the court, or not?
IF not, how did they get there?
If so, WHY did they get there?
It's a bind moggling thang.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostI find this question ironic since it's the defendants who are suffering harm by being arraigned and potentially forced to pay legal fees to defend against a charge the State doesn't actually want to bring.
--Sam"He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostI find this question ironic since it's the defendants who are suffering harm by being arraigned and potentially forced to pay legal fees to defend against a charge the State doesn't actually want to bring.
--Sam
An arraignment is a court proceeding at which a criminal defendant is formally advised of the charges against him and is asked to enter a plea to the charges. In many states, the court may also decide at arraignment whether the defendant will be released pending trial.
Some states require arraignments in all felony and misdemeanor cases – any case in which the defendant faces possible incarceration, whether in jail or prison. Some states require arraignments only in felony cases.The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostMeanwhile, I love this amazingly unbiased and fair and balanced coverage from our friends at Reason.
What's odd about this whole thing, even from this very fair and balanced [cough sputter] account is that it seems that arrests were made, but this article seems to suggest that these prosecutions were before the judge without the DA's bringing them.
It seems to come back to --- did the DA bring these charges to the court, or not?
IF not, how did they get there?
If so, WHY did they get there?
It's a bind moggling thang."He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot
"Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman
My Personal Blog
My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)
Quill Sword
Comment
-
Reportedly, the judge refused the DA's request that they not be arraigned.
Originally posted by Cow Poke View PostHow did they get arraigned, Sam?"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / So close to our dwelling place?" — Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Cow Poke, Today, 09:08 AM
|
5 responses
33 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by RumTumTugger
Today, 10:30 AM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Today, 07:44 AM
|
0 responses
12 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 07:44 AM | ||
Started by seer, Today, 07:04 AM
|
14 responses
73 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 09:33 AM
|
||
Started by seer, 04-21-2024, 01:11 PM
|
89 responses
483 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 08:30 AM
|
||
Started by seer, 04-19-2024, 02:09 PM
|
18 responses
162 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 07:45 AM
|
Comment