Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 124 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 02-26-2017 9:35 AM
442 online now:
Asgara (AdminAsgara), jar, nwr, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), Stile (6 members, 436 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 799,390 Year: 3,996/21,208 Month: 2,391/1,605 Week: 28/563 Day: 28/27 Hour: 2/9


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
4445464748
49
Author Topic:   Trump's order on immigration and the wacko liberal response
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7232
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005
Member Rating: 3.2


Message 721 of 731 (799638)
02-12-2017 1:39 PM
Reply to: Message 720 by ringo
02-12-2017 1:22 PM


Re: jurisdiction
Since provocation is an integral part of a self-defence claim, the two can not be separated.

Sorry, I thought you were having a legal argument, not a semantic one.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 720 by ringo, posted 02-12-2017 1:22 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 723 by ringo, posted 02-12-2017 1:53 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

    
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4310
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 722 of 731 (799641)
02-12-2017 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 719 by ringo
02-12-2017 1:19 PM


Re: jurisdiction
ringo writes:

No it isn't.

Yes it is.

Your own example says that the prosecutors, "went ahead with the other charges." They could have been convicted on the other charges, even if they weren't. The prosecutors had a backup plan to prevent them from getting off scot-free, as they always would.

The way it works is that the prosecution service put a charge to trial if they believe that it has a more than 50% chance of succeeding with a jury AND they believe it is in the public interest to do so. In the example they dropped the kidnapping charge because - we assume - it didn't pass that test. There's no reason to suppose there was any thought of a lessor charge at this stage because of some kind of mitigation. That's simply not part of the decision to prosecute. If, after being found guilty, there are reasons why the offender shouldn't feel the full weight of the punishment, they are raised at sentencing.

(Another reason for dropping a higher tariff charge to a lessor one is a plea bargain - this obviously didn't happen here as it was a not guilty plea.)

I realize that the term "mitigation" has a specific connotation in legalese. I wasn't using it that way. If you have a better term for what actually happens, I'm all ears.

Sorry, that's the word. There is no word for what you're trying to say because the law doesn't work the way you think it does.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 719 by ringo, posted 02-12-2017 1:19 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 724 by ringo, posted 02-12-2017 1:58 PM Tangle has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 12722
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 723 of 731 (799642)
02-12-2017 1:53 PM
Reply to: Message 721 by Modulous
02-12-2017 1:39 PM


Re: jurisdiction
Modulous writes:

Sorry, I thought you were having a legal argument, not a semantic one.


You keep trying to make distinctions out of molehills.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 721 by Modulous, posted 02-12-2017 1:39 PM Modulous has acknowledged this reply

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 12722
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 724 of 731 (799643)
02-12-2017 1:58 PM
Reply to: Message 722 by Tangle
02-12-2017 1:51 PM


Re: jurisdiction
Tangle writes:

There's no reason to suppose there was any thought of a lessor charge at this stage because of some kind of mitigation.


There's always thought of lesser charges right from the beginning. That's why there's always a slew of charges, some of which may be dropped for one reason or another and some of which may be dismissed for one reason or another and some of which may be defeated for one reason or another. Prosecutors don't waste the taxpayers' money on one magical charge and say, "Oh dearie me, better luck next time," if it fails.

Tangle writes:

There is no word for what you're trying to say because the law doesn't work the way you think it does.


I'm just going by what I see in the news, and your own examples.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 722 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2017 1:51 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 725 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2017 2:35 PM ringo has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4310
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 725 of 731 (799649)
02-12-2017 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 724 by ringo
02-12-2017 1:58 PM


Re: jurisdiction
ringo writes:

Prosecutors don't waste the taxpayers' money on one magical charge and say, "Oh dearie me, better luck next time," if it fails.

That's correct and I gave you their decision making principles. They don't include mitigation.

I'm just going by what I see in the news, and your own examples.

Yup, that's why you're getting it wrong.


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 724 by ringo, posted 02-12-2017 1:58 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 726 by ringo, posted 02-12-2017 2:39 PM Tangle has responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 12722
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 726 of 731 (799650)
02-12-2017 2:39 PM
Reply to: Message 725 by Tangle
02-12-2017 2:35 PM


Re: jurisdiction
Tangle writes:

... I gave you their decision making principles.


What you think you know about the universal, world-wide "decision-making principles" of all prosecutors doesn't seem to agree with the facts.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 725 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2017 2:35 PM Tangle has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 727 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2017 3:16 PM ringo has responded

  
Tangle
Member
Posts: 4310
From: UK
Joined: 10-07-2011
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 727 of 731 (799653)
02-12-2017 3:16 PM
Reply to: Message 726 by ringo
02-12-2017 2:39 PM


Re: jurisdiction
ringo writes:

What you think you know about the universal, world-wide "decision-making principles" of all prosecutors doesn't seem to agree with the facts.

Well I've given you the bare bones of how it's done in the UK. Canada adopts most of our legal processes but if you think you know better.....

Here's the full gen. No doubt you can find your equivalent.

https://www.cps.gov.uk/...or_crown_prosecutors/codetest.html


Je suis Charlie. Je suis Ahmed. Je suis Juif. Je suis Parisien.

"Life, don't talk to me about life" - Marvin the Paranoid Android

"Science adjusts it's views based on what's observed.
Faith is the denial of observation so that Belief can be preserved."
- Tim Minchin, in his beat poem, Storm.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 726 by ringo, posted 02-12-2017 2:39 PM ringo has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 728 by ringo, posted 02-13-2017 10:58 AM Tangle has not yet responded

  
ringo
Member
Posts: 12722
From: frozen wasteland
Joined: 03-23-2005
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 728 of 731 (799690)
02-13-2017 10:58 AM
Reply to: Message 727 by Tangle
02-12-2017 3:16 PM


Re: jurisdiction
Tangle writes:

Canada adopts most of our legal processes but if you think you know better.....


I was talking about Canada and the examples you gave were from Canada.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 727 by Tangle, posted 02-12-2017 3:16 PM Tangle has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 28190
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 729 of 731 (799692)
02-13-2017 11:29 AM


You can go home again:
It seems that the facts (despite what il Donald claims) about Mexicans is that since around 2009 more Mexicans have chosen to leave the US than have come into the US.

source.


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

  
Rrhain
Member
Posts: 5935
From: San Diego, CA, USA
Joined: 05-03-2003
Member Rating: 4.2


(5)
Message 730 of 731 (799698)
02-13-2017 2:01 PM


I'm going to leave this here:


Rrhain

Thank you for your submission to Science. Your paper was reviewed by a jury of seventh graders so that they could look for balance and to allow them to make up their own minds. We are sorry to say that they found your paper "bogus," specifically describing the section on the laboratory work "boring." We regret that we will be unable to publish your work at this time.

Minds are like parachutes. Just because you've lost yours doesn't mean you can use mine.

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28190
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.4


Message 731 of 731 (799732)
02-14-2017 9:39 AM


And now from the Old Dominion...
As Trump seems to have decided that going to the Supreme Court right now is a lost cause and so tries to get the 9th to do a Mulligan, the Old Dominion has taken a different tack with an Establishment Clause decision using statements from il Donald, Giuliani and other of il Donalds sycophants as the basic evidence to find a high probability that any Establishment Clause challenge would find the order was unconstitutional.

quote:
Brinkema — following a hearing on the issues this past week — pointed to Trump’s campaign statements calling for a ban on Muslim immigration and more recent statements by Trump adviser Rudolph Giuliani about being asked to help craft such a ban as evidence that the executive order was not motivated by “rational national security concerns.”

“The Commonwealth has produced unrebutted evidence supporting its position that it is likely to succeed on an Establishment Clause claim,” Brinkema wrote. “The ‘Muslim ban’ was a centerpiece of the president’s campaign for months, and the press release calling for it was still available on his website as of the day this Memorandum Opinion is being entered.”

Brinkema went on to say in a footnote that she gave “little weight” to statements from administration officials that the travel ban was not targeted at Muslims, since they were made after legal challenges were filed.


source:


My Sister's Website: Rose Hill Studios     My Website: My Website

  
RewPrev1
...
4445464748
49
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017