|
I guess its a weird form of "love at first sight".
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 10:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
Baloogan posted:I guess its a weird form of "love at first blight". I think that is what you meant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 10:53
|
|
|
It's also a pretty clear example of the Internet helping people find others in their weird niche. It's just a very weird niche.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 12:35
|
|
|
 So I saw this picture on tumblr, did someone illegally film the appearance?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 12:51
|
|
|
It looks like they did it from the witness stand. 
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 14:13
|
|
|
I've never been to a high-profile case like this, do they show the courtroom proceedings in the viewing rooms in the courthouse? I know you probably couldn't fit everyone into a single courtroom who wants to follow the case, so it would stand to reason that they would have a CCTV feed to another separate room. Maybe that's where this came from, but the person who took those pictures violated the court's ruling by taking pictures even if they weren't in the same room as the defendant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 14:20
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:I've never been to a high-profile case like this, do they show the courtroom proceedings in the viewing rooms in the courthouse? I know you probably couldn't fit everyone into a single courtroom who wants to follow the case, so it would stand to reason that they would have a CCTV feed to another separate room. Maybe that's where this came from, but the person who took those pictures violated the court's ruling by taking pictures even if they weren't in the same room as the defendant. That's what it looks like to me as well, but not sure if that's the actual case here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 14:25
|
|
|
Apparently those are screenshots from a 5 second video that was posted https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ZRnfDgASME At least we know what the deal is with the sock puppet Sloth drawing from the courtroom artist.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 14:54
|
|
|
Crunch Bucket posted:Apparently those are screenshots from a 5 second video that was posted Can we enhance that?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 15:08
|
|
|
Young Freud posted:I've never been to a high-profile case like this, do they show the courtroom proceedings in the viewing rooms in the courthouse? I know you probably couldn't fit everyone into a single courtroom who wants to follow the case, so it would stand to reason that they would have a CCTV feed to another separate room. Maybe that's where this came from, but the person who took those pictures violated the court's ruling by taking pictures even if they weren't in the same room as the defendant. From my understanding, filming isn't allowed in federal cases/courts which is why crews weren't allowed in yesterday. I'd really like to know what the deal is with those fuzzy pictures though because that's an interesting angle to see from...
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:Can we enhance that?  bogus!
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 16:40
|
|
|
hybriseris posted:From my understanding, filming isn't allowed in federal cases/courts which is why crews weren't allowed in yesterday. Didn't they have an overflow room with a TV for the victims who couldn't get a spot IN the courtroom? That looks like a shot of a TV showing such a broadcast. So maybe one of the victims leaked that? Edit: I know that's sort of been said already, so that was more to verify that I do recall reading that there was an overflow room.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 16:42
|
|
|
Phobophilia posted:Or that American girl arrested in Italy (even though she probably didn't do it). I personally think it's an excuse to objectify someone (in its most literal form). Amanda Knox. Jodi Arias, too.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:12
|
|
|
The comments on that video ugh
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
Is there a reason they don't allow filming in federal court cases while they allow it in trials such as the George Zimmerman one? Also, is there even a reason to believe his court appointed attorney will put up more than a token gesture at defending him?
Agrajag fucked around with this message at 17:29 on Jul 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
Do the FreeJahar people have any real reasoning behind their point or is it all just teenage idiots screaming into the ether? Like, what's the idea here, was he framed because of his background or are we into Alex Jones territory?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:25
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Is there a reason they don't allow filming in federal court cases while they allow it in trials such as the George Zimmerman one? Zimmerman is in State court and Florida allows open courtrooms. Federal ones don't. Although we do have access to transcripts I think.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:28
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Is there a reason they don't allow filming in federal court cases while they allow it in trials such as the George Zimmerman one? Also, is there even a reason to believe his court appointed attorney will put up more than a token gesture at defending him? Federal defense attorneys don't put up "token defenses" but on the other hand the evidence against him is completely overwhelming so I'm not exactly sure what the defense can do other than try to avoid the death penalty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:31
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Federal defense attorneys don't put up "token defenses" but on the other hand the evidence against him is completely overwhelming so I'm not exactly sure what the defense can do other than try to avoid the death penalty. The prosecution probably isn't offering the common "plead guilty and you'll get life" because they have him so dead to rights. He's really got no choice but to plead not guilty to save his rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:Federal defense attorneys don't put up "token defenses" but on the other hand the evidence against him is completely overwhelming so I'm not exactly sure what the defense can do other than try to avoid the death penalty. Are they somehow different from normal attorneys?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:36
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Are they somehow different from normal attorneys? A larger reputation at stake.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:39
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:Do the FreeJahar people have any real reasoning behind their point or is it all just teenage idiots screaming into the ether? Like, what's the idea here, was he framed because of his background or are we into Alex Jones territory?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:41
|
|
|
jim truds posted:Yeah, this is pretty textbook stuff.People are weird and becoming romantically fixated on unobtainable people is common. Lots of famous lifers have fans. It makes you wonder if they're even aware of who they're writing to. It's hosed up. melon cat fucked around with this message at 17:45 on Jul 11, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:42
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Are they somehow different from normal attorneys? In that they're employed by the federal government and go to court all the time instead of a private attorney that is either paid a flat rate by the state on a contract (no incentive to do anything but plead out because its not profitable) or is so incredibly expensive nobody can afford to take them to trial.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:48
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Also, is there even a reason to believe his court appointed attorney will put up more than a token gesture at defending him? Judy Clark is as good as you'll find.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 17:49
|
|
|
joat mon posted:Because this is real life and not TVTropes? Jesus, the Free Jahar troupe can even be found in the comments for that article.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 18:27
|
|
Jahar
|
Fryhtaning posted:Jesus, the Free Jahar troupe can even be found in the comments for that article. "He is much too gorgeous for that" is a little to on the nose for me to think that's an honest comment but maybe that's just my own futile hope.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 18:29
|
|
|
Agrajag posted:Is there a reason they don't allow filming in federal court cases while they allow it in trials such as the George Zimmerman one? I think Florida explicitely allows filming unlike a lot of other states. That's why their trials turn out to be such unbelievable spectacles.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 19:27
|
|
|
OldTennisCourt posted:"He is much too gorgeous for that" is a little to on the nose for me to think that's an honest comment but maybe that's just my own futile hope. You don't spend a lot of time reading comments on public websites, do you? Judy Clarke, however, does spend a lot of time on getting her high-profile clients life instead of the death penalty. She's had some easy shots with that, like Jared Lee Loughner, because he was loving bonkers. She's going to have a much harder time of things here.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:49
|
|
|
I dunno, "His brother was the real bad guy, poor Jahar was just afraid" or something along those lines is likely to avoid the death penalty.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 20:52
|
|
|
Assuming Jahar was literally fearing for his life, he had multitudes of opportunities to get away and report to the authorities what Tamerlan was building/planning in the days leading up to and the day of the attack. Also being afraid for your own life is not allowed as a defense or justification for murder.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:03
|
|
|
Lets just stick to his proper name. The fact that his supporters affectionately refer to him as "Jahar" makes any other usage of the name just plain irritating. I found a link on tumblr where one of his fangirls was openly mocking one the victims who had his legs blown off. Because she thought he was faking it. This poo poo gets pretty goddamn deep in the crazy trenches. When someone is fixated on their own version reality all else fails to break through.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:33
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:Assuming Jahar was literally fearing for his life, he had multitudes of opportunities to get away and report to the authorities what Tamerlan was building/planning in the days leading up to and the day of the attack. Also being afraid for your own life is not allowed as a defense or justification for murder. No, but it is a consideration during sentencing.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:37
|
|
|
He refers to himself as Jahar. As with most non-English names, there are multiple spellings and no "correct" way.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:38
|
|
|
Flopsy posted:I found a link on tumblr where one of his fangirls was openly mocking one the victims who had his legs blown off. Because she thought he was faking it. This poo poo gets pretty goddamn deep in the crazy trenches. When someone is fixated on their own version reality all else fails to break through. What the gently caress is wrong with people?
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:39
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:Assuming Jahar was literally fearing for his life, he had multitudes of opportunities to get away and report to the authorities what Tamerlan was building/planning in the days leading up to and the day of the attack. Also being afraid for your own life is not allowed as a defense or justification for murder. No, but it is a way to get your sentence reduced. Look at Terry Nichols. And my honest opinion is that death is probably preferable to life without parole in a supermax, and based on the massive evidence the government seems to have here, those are the only two likely options of where he's going to end up. ADX Florence eats minds. Also, Jahar is WAY easier to spell than the way that's got a d and a v and a k or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:50
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:Assuming Jahar was literally fearing for his life, he had multitudes of opportunities to get away and report to the authorities what Tamerlan was building/planning in the days leading up to and the day of the attack. Also being afraid for your own life is not allowed as a defense or justification for murder. No-one will argue in court anything like what you posted. Where Dzhokhar's age, his brother's influence, and lack of a criminal record will come into play is in the penalty phase of the trial. (And during the whether-or-not-to-pursue-the-death-penalty part of the case that is happening right now and will be resolved long before the trial takes place) Maybe some background would help. Assuming (1)the case goes to trial (2)as a death penalty case: There will be a 'merits' stage of the trial, where guilt or not-guilty of the charged crimes is determined. The only issues in this part of the trial will be, "Did Dzhokhar do those specific illegal things that the indictment alleges that he did?" The prosecution will have to prove each underlying fact (element) of each charge to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt. Determining punishment is not be part of the the merit side of the case. If he is found guilty, the case will move into the sentencing stage. The jury will be the same as for the merits stage. In this stage the prosecution will present additional evidence to support the death penalty. The defense will present evidence to support a life sentence. The prosecution will have to prove the existence of at least one 'aggravating circumstance' [subsection (c)] to the jury beyond a reasonable doubt to keep the death penalty on the table. (they will - there are at least 6 slam-dunk aggravators at play in this case) The defense will establish mitigating circumstances. Since the existence of aggravators beyond a reasonable doubt will be a foregone conclusion, the only hard decision the jury will have to make is whether to kill Dzhokhar or to keep him in prison the the rest of his life - probably at Florence, for a lifetime of cruel and unusual punishment.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:52
|
|
|
Flopsy posted:I found a link on tumblr where one of his fangirls was openly mocking one the victims who had his legs blown off. Because she thought he was faking it. This poo poo gets pretty goddamn deep in the crazy trenches. When someone is fixated on their own version reality all else fails to break through. Never before have I wanted to oval office punt someone.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:53
|
|
|
ClemenSalad posted:Assuming Jahar was literally fearing for his life, he had multitudes of opportunities to get away and report to the authorities what Tamerlan was building/planning in the days leading up to and the day of the attack. Also being afraid for your own life is not allowed as a defense or justification for murder. No but I said avoid the death penalty, not be acquitted. Thats certainly the kind of thing that a jury will consider during a penalty phase. Its not like hes Timothy McVeigh.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 21:54
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 18:12 |
|
|
hobbesmaster posted:No but I said avoid the death penalty, not be acquitted. Thats certainly the kind of thing that a jury will consider during a penalty phase. Its not like hes Timothy McVeigh. Ah okay. I misunderstood. Thanks for the explanations guys.
|
|
#
?
Jul 11, 2013 22:08
|
|