|
ActusRhesus posted:The three big errors I saw were (1) giving the jury a copy of a statute that has been unconstitutional since 1986 ... From what I read she gave them a copy of this unconstitutional statute and then told them to 'fold it in half' later on. She told them parts of it were wrong but refused to explain to them WHICH parts, even after being asked by jurors. That seems very strange and shady to me, but maybe that is normal attorney conduct?
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 03:08
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 16:07 |
|
|
Lawrence O'Donnel said this a while back:quote:When one juror asked if “federal court overrides Missouri statutes,” O’Donnell says that she ignored a simple, clear, one-word answer, “yes.” Is that inaccurate? He is a person who talks about the news on television so I would not be shocked, but I haven't heard anyone comment on it until now.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 05:29
|
|
|
ActusRhesus posted:Re: O'Donnell, first off, stop listening to O'Donnell. Citing O'Donnell is like citing Glenn Beck. He's not a journalist, he's a television agitator, and his comments are oversimplified and deliberately inflammatory. You can take this quote and replace O'Donnell with "anyone in cable 'news'". I don't really know who Lawrence O'Donnell is, I've only seen people quoting him second-hand. Dzhay posted:Is "what's up with this?" too general a question for this thread? Because, if not: what's up with this? Massive wealth inequality, draconian drug policies, and for-profit prison systems all contribute.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 21, 2014 21:20
|
|
|
Vaall posted:SedenChair is a mentally ill piece of poo poo who been pretending to be black (he's not) on the internet for years now as part of his relentless one man brigade of social justice shitposting. He's always throwing the ad-hominems towards anyone who thinks he's loving retarded you're not the first I wouldn't worry too much about it RonMexicosPitbull posted:He came to our website and eventually started ranting about having "black people blood". Hes super mentally ill. My theory is he became so self hating reading all that poo poo on tumblr and dnd, noticed he had a minority relative, and just ran with it realizing he can beat people over the head and make people pay attention to him. Which is kind of sad that thats the case in the first place but w/e. ActusRhesus posted:I just realized that given my boss's temperament, pissing off SJWs like him would probably get me promoted Did I wander into the [Ask] me about SASS thread by mistake? I have a question about the grand jury proceedings. Recently McCulloch gave an interview where he said that he knew the crazy witness lady was lying about being there but she was called to give testimony anyway. I assume it's not counted as suborning perjury, but is it considered unethical?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 19:46
|
|
|
http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/...93587847c7.html http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/prosecutor-ferguson-witnesses-lied-27722154 quote:Clearly some were not telling the truth," McCulloch said. I listened to the interview itself and in it he says this woman was a well known crazy person and that everyone knew that she was lying about being there, but that he thought it was better to just throw anyone who claimed to see it in front of the grand jury and let them decide.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
Double post 
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2014 23:35
|
|
|
According to his interview she is a crackpot who has a long history of saying she witnessed high profile cases and then spouting off a bunch of nonsense. Going off of what he said it sounds like he knew she was lying from the start but he put her on the stand anyway under the auspices of 'all the evidence'. They definitely shouldn't imprison a crazy woman because McCulloch took a dive, though. She can't help being crazy.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2014 15:17
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 16:07 |
|
|
Even if it is economical it's not going to happen in this political climate. Can you imagine the attack ads against whatever politician set up a special task force to indict and convict police officers in Missouri? Being 'tough on crime' is a big thing in state and local level politics and the kind of people who eat that poo poo up are unfortunately the ones who vote the most reliably.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2014 20:43
|
|