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.
See more
See less

Sondland admits quid pro quo

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
    As this article points out, Jim, it happens far more than you'd imagine...

    Criminally Yours: Lying To Get To The Truth

    Why would someone ever admit to a crime he didn't commit? How could anyone be so naive or stupid? But not only does it happen, it happens more frequently than you would imagine. Why?

    A hot topic in criminal law is “false confessions.” Why would someone ever admit to a crime he didn’t commit? How could anyone be so naive or stupid?

    But not only does it happen, it happens more frequently than you would imagine. Why?

    In large part because it’s legal for police to tell suspects the boldest lies in order to wrangle a confession from them. Among the most common lies are:

    – “We’ve got you on video doing the crime, so you might as well admit it.”

    – “This is only a small case, just say you did it and you’ll get a drug program.”


    and...

    The only way psychological gamesmanship might be disapproved by the court is if it’s so egregious as to offend “the notion of fundamental fairness.” But boy, is that a big hurdle.

    Take the case of Matthew Thomas. Police lied to him in a manner so egregious, even John McCain would have cracked. Thomas was accused of killing his four-month-old son. After being interrogated for more than nine hours, he was told that if he didn’t admit to doing the crime, his wife would be arrested for it and dragged from the baby’s hospital bedside because “one of them had to have done it.” They told him the baby was still alive, and that his information would save the child’s life. Another lie — the baby was already dead. They told him they were sure it was an accident, and if he just admitted it, he could go home. Right.

    The trial judge found that the confession was not only voluntary, but that defense counsel had no right to put on an expert in police interrogation techniques to speak about the phenomenon of false confessions.

    Police fed Thomas information about how they believed the death occurred then prodded him to parrot it back.


    I was taught in basic police school this "it's ok to lie to get a confession" -- I never felt comfortable with that, but, yeah - it happens FAR more than you'd ever imagine.
    They obviously did that to a naive person without a lawyer present. Cohen is a lawyer himself, and was also represented by a team of lawyers.

    Comment


    • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
      I was taught in basic police school this "it's ok to lie to get a confession" -- I never felt comfortable with that, but, yeah - it happens FAR more than you'd ever imagine.
      I covered a story once where a guy was falsely accused of stealing $100 from a convenience store. First of all, the police had the store clerk identify the "suspect" based on a low-quality photocopy of his drivers license, which was sketchy enough, but once they had him in questioning, the police really leaned on him and told him things like, "Look, man, the store owner doesn't want the hassle of a trial, and frankly neither do we, so if you just give us the money you stole, we'll close the investigation, and you'll be free to go." He said he was really tempted to go along with it because he just wanted out of there, but he was savvy enough not to fall for it, and eventually the police were forced to admit that it was case of "misidentification". Of course then the poor guy still had an arrest on his record and was fighting to have it expunged, which the city was curiously reluctant to do.
      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 Cow Poke View Post
        So, the Senate is only 'scrupulous' if they convict?
        No, they have shown themselves to be pretty unscupulous regardless, which was my point.


        Can we see the testimony under oath, subject to cross-examination first, please?
        Can't wait, although much of it is already been out there for your consumption.
        But, yes, you're pretty much admitting this is all political, like I stated before - it's a "show trial", the ultimate outcome of which will probably be the way people vote in an upcoming election.
        No, it is not a "show trial" by which I assume you to mean "not legit".

        Comment


        • Originally posted by JimLamebrain View Post
          They obviously did that to a naive person without a lawyer present. Cohen is a lawyer himself, and was also represented by a team of lawyers.
          Yep, and the prosecutors made him an offer: confess to a crime you didn't commit so we have something to use against Trump, and we'll give you a lighter sentence on the crimes you did commit.

          Why wouldn't he have taken that deal? He had nothing to lose.
          Last edited by Mountain Man; 11-08-2019, 10:43 AM.
          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 JimL View Post
            They obviously did that to a naive person without a lawyer present. Cohen is a lawyer himself, and was also represented by a team of lawyers.
            That was only one example, Jim. I've personally been involved in cases where the accused swears he is innocent, but the lawyer talks him into "taking a deal" because of the tremendous expense of a trial, and the possibility that the jury will convict anyway.

            It's not at all unusual for a lawyer to convince his client "you MIGHT be found not guilty, but if you plead to this misdemeanor, I can pretty well guaranty no jail time and only probation and community service" as opposed to doing 15 years in prison if you happen to lose. It literally happens all the time, Jim.
            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by JimL View Post
              No, they have shown themselves to be pretty unscupulous regardless, which was my point.
              They're politicians.

              Can't wait, although much of it is already been out there for your consumption.
              Actually, what's 'out there' is one-sided accusations and leaked information, none of which has been under oath and subject to cross-examination in a formal setting.

              No, it is not a "show trial" by which I assume you to mean "not legit".
              Never said it was "not legit" - but impeachment is, by its very nature, a PARTISAN affair of late - and the rules of evidence of an actual LEGAL trial are not the same.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                Hasn't Pelosi given the green light for impeachment?
                No. This is an investigation. Early days.
                “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                “not all there” - you know who you are

                Comment


                • Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                  No. This is an investigation. Early days.
                  No, it's far more than that.

                  An impeachment inquiry has begun

                  Those eager for the start of an official inquiry by the U.S. House Judiciary Committee into the possible impeachment of President Trump need wait no longer.

                  A memorandum, submitted by the committee on July 26 to the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and signed by the general counsel of the U.S. House of Representatives, makes clear that such an inquiry has begun.

                  The memorandum is in support of an application for access to all redactions of grand jury material in the Mueller report, in grand jury materials referenced in the report, and to any grand jury testimony or material directly related to four topics. The topics include the president’s knowledge of Russian interference in the 2016 election, links and contacts of his associates directly or indirectly with Russia, and criminal acts by anyone associated with his administration or campaign.

                  Under Rule 6(e) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, a judge may grant access to confidential grand jury material when sought in preparation for, or use in, a judicial proceeding. The committee urges that an impeachment investigation is a judicial proceeding for purposes of this exception to grand jury secrecy.


                  Here is a link to the memorandum in question.
                  The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Mountain Man View Post
                    You say this like it isn't a foregone conclusion. Of course Pelosi is going to "do impeachment". That was the plan from day one when Democrats took control of the House in 2018. The only reason she has feigned hesitation is because of unexpectedly losing seats in the Senate which really upset their plans, because otherwise there is no doubt in my mind that they would have voted for impeachment and removal from office on the first day Congress was back in session in early 2019.

                    Plan B, of course, was to keep the sham "inquiry" going late into 2020 in order to tip the scales against Trump during the general election, but with Barr and Durham getting ready to open a can of you-know-what, the Democrats have had to put impeachment on the fast-track. It will be interesting to see how all this plays out, but chances are good that low-info sky-screamers like you are going to be bitterly disappointed yet again.
                    If the investigation turns up some wrongdoing, and there are no consequences, the leader of the free world has set a new standard of swampiness.

                    Personally, I think it is the duty of every POTUS to look after the office and had it over in good or better condition when he leaves. He is not there just to not get caught committing crimes.
                    “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                    “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                    “not all there” - you know who you are

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                      If the investigation turns up some wrongdoing, and there are no consequences, the leader of the free world has set a new standard of swampiness.
                      Trump is by far the jackassiest POTUS in my lifetime, but being a jackass is not an impeachable offense.

                      Personally, I think it is the duty of every POTUS to look after the office and had it over in good or better condition when he leaves.
                      That's called "good stewardship" and 100% agree!!!

                      He is not there just to not get caught committing crimes.
                      A) So he needs to be sneakier and not get caught?
                      2) Let's see if there is actually a formal charge of an actual crime under oath and subject to cross-examination.
                      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by dirtfloor View Post
                        If the investigation turns up some wrongdoing, and there are no consequences, the leader of the free world has set a new standard of swampiness.

                        Personally, I think it is the duty of every POTUS to look after the office and had it over in good or better condition when he leaves. He is not there just to not get caught committing crimes.
                        They've been investigating Trump since before he was even elected. If they haven't found conclusive evidence of wrongdoing by now, then they never will.
                        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 Mountain Man View Post
                          They've been investigating Trump since before he was even elected. If they haven't found conclusive evidence of wrongdoing by now, then they never will.
                          Mueller catalogued his crimes for posterity. Not enough Americans care to read the evidence. It will make a good movie but it might not have a satisfying ending; the crook walks free.
                          “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                          “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                          “not all there” - you know who you are

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                            Mueller catalogued his crimes for posterity.
                            Care to list those CRIMES here?
                            The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                              Care to list those CRIMES here?
                              There are several instances of obstruction. I will get a list. While you are waiting:

                              A New York judge has ordered President Donald Trump to pay $2m (£1.6m) for misusing funds from his charity to finance his 2016 political campaign.

                              The Donald J Trump Foundation closed down in 2018. Prosecutors had accused it of working as "little more than a chequebook" for Mr Trump's interests.

                              Charities such as the one Mr Trump and his three eldest children headed cannot engage in politics, the judge ruled.
                              “I think God, in creating man, somewhat overestimated his ability.” ― Oscar Wilde
                              “And if there were a God, I think it very unlikely that He would have such an uneasy vanity as to be offended by those who doubt His existence” ― Bertrand Russell
                              “not all there” - you know who you are

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by firstfloor View Post
                                There are several instances of obstruction. I will get a list. While you are waiting:
                                Crimes, please.

                                Charities such as the one Mr Trump and his three eldest children headed cannot engage in politics, the judge ruled.
                                Two words - Clinton Foundation.
                                The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by little_monkey, 03-27-2024, 04:19 PM
                                16 responses
                                157 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post One Bad Pig  
                                Started by whag, 03-26-2024, 04:38 PM
                                53 responses
                                400 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Mountain Man  
                                Started by rogue06, 03-26-2024, 11:45 AM
                                25 responses
                                114 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post rogue06
                                by rogue06
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 09:21 AM
                                33 responses
                                198 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Roy
                                by Roy
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-26-2024, 08:34 AM
                                84 responses
                                373 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Working...
                                X