Another WTF in the Anthony case. Her probation.

Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Another WTF in the Anthony case. Her probation.

A judge ordered Casey back to FLA to serve probation. Problem is that the corrections department already made her serve the probation while she was in jail.

The judge claims that his orders were not followed and that her probation was supposed to be served AFTER she got out of jail.

MY POINT,

What does it matter if the judge made the mistake in not making it clear, or the corrections department made the mistake by not following the order.

SHE STILL SERVED THE PROBATION

This is a no brainer to me and this waste of money I am seeing on tv right now in the state trying to get her to serve a sentence she already served is absurd.

This stems from a check fraud case independent from the murder trial.

If the system works the judge hearing the probation case should rightfully throw out the state's mistake and uphold the probation she served.

I get a fucking lip twitch in any case when the state wants do-overs. It is not the fault of the founders or the constitution or even society in general that the original judge on the check fraud probation didn't make it clear, nor is it the fault of the constitution or society that the correction department didn't follow the judges orders.

SHE ALREADY SERVED THE PROBATION. PERIOD!

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 You seem enthralled by the

 You seem enthralled by the life of this person.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: You seem

Gauche wrote:

 You seem enthralled by the life of this person.

No, jebus kristos on a cracker.

You could be talking about Glen Beck or Obama being accused of the same damned thing.

THE ISSUE IS NOT THE PESON

The issue is procedural in the context of the constitution. You could stick anyone's name in to the case, and my objection would be the same. Casey simply is the person in this example. The example is the issue, not her.

If you or I or your neighbor were in the same position my point is the same. The probation was served regardless of whether you want to blame the judge or the correction department.

My point is in the context of the parameters of this case, if I were the judge ruling on this, the state fucked up and the probation was already served and they should not have the right to make her serve it again.

The state does not get a do over.

Since paperwork was signed and a probation officer visited her, the action was implemented and carried out.

You could stick Micky Mouse or Jimmy Hoffa in as a name instead of Casey Anthony and the example would be the same.

It just so happens that she is the name involved in this case. If anyone else in the history or the future of law ends up in this same position, my objection would be the same.

Double jeopardy clearly states you cannot punish someone twice for the same crime. In this case she already signed the paperwork for the probation and served the probation, REGARDLESS of the mistake of the judge or the correction department.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 You may be genuinely

 You may be genuinely interested in that subject. I don't know. I'm just saying that you comment about this individual at the slightest pretext. 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: You may

Gauche wrote:

 You may be genuinely interested in that subject. I don't know. I'm just saying that you comment about this individual at the slightest pretext. 

I could give a shit less what happens to her. I take an interest in the case because of the reaction to it's outcome and some in our zealous society who want to throw out the system because they didn't like the outcome.

This stems from, outside of crime, growing up in school having an entire private school hate me for something I did not do and refused to confess to. My interest in her case is merely in defending the concept of letting the guilty go free as a default rather than risk convicting and innocent person. Having been falsely accused and been hated by an entire private school, I take the justice system even more seriously. I wasn't arrested or put in jail, but emotionally it damned well felt like it, and it wasn't even a criminal case.

The judge trying to make Casey try to reserve her probation is nothing but a backdoor way to punish her more for something she wasn't convicted of.

THE Constitution and what we would want for ourselves as a society is WHY I bring this case up, not the person themselves that this case involves.

I have to mention her name because it happens to be the name involved in this particular case, nothing more. If the name was Joe Blow or Jane Blow, I would be using those names instead. The principle of the case is my issue, not the person involved.

The probation on the check fraud was served and for the judge who issued the probation to cry foul now is absurd. I would throw this case out, and quite frankly want this judge who even dared to put her back on probation she already served disbarred and thrown off the bench.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 I know you don't want to

 I know you don't want to hear this but I did a term search and you commented on every thread that mentions the person. First you were angry that everyone was speculating. Then you were upset that others didn't like the verdict. Then you were outraged she might have federal charges brought against her. Now you don't want her to serve probation. 

 I never even heard about it until I read about the verdict on this website because I don't follow tabloid news. I know people get all moist over real human tragedy but give it a rest, it's unhealthy.

 

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
This is nothing more than

This is nothing more than the judge and the state attempting to save face for a mistake in communication. The probation ruling handed down by the judge said "after she gets out". The correction department, for whatever reason did not understand or see that. THAT STILL does not change the fact that probation paperwork was signed by both the state and Casey's lawyer and Casey. It does not change the fact that she was visited by a probation officer and served her probation on the check fraud in prison.

It scares the shit out of me to suggest that anyone, accused or convicted of something, could be subject to being punished twice. Mistakes made by the court or law enforcement should not benefit them and if we demand a high quality control so that mistakes do not happen, the answer to this is obvious.

This is about what kind of system we should want for ourselves on the off chance we ourselves end up accused or even convicted.

"Do-overs" as a concept should benefit the accused. If the state fucks up, then the state should take responsibility in the future with other cases, not to fuck up. But once you fuck up, you have no right to put someone through something they have already gone through.

Otherwise there is no point in having our system and we should just let our government come after us as individuals as much as they want. Oversight and accountability were what were lacking in this case. If no probation had been served then I would be all for this judge demanding she serve her probation now. But what is done is done and to suggest more probation after the paperwork was signed scares the shit out of me.

So please, skip her name and put it aside. This cuts to the Constitution and what kind of society we should want to live in. I do not want to live under a government that can make up shit when they fuck up in order to make excuses to pursue it's citizens indefinitely.

 

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: I know you

Gauche wrote:

 I know you don't want to hear this but I did a term search and you commented on every thread that mentions the person. First you were angry that everyone was speculating. Then you were upset that others didn't like the verdict. Then you were outraged she might have federal charges brought against her. Now you don't want her to serve probation. 

 I never even heard about it until I read about the verdict on this website because I don't follow tabloid news. I know people get all moist over real human tragedy but give it a rest, it's unhealthy.

 

Holy shit! Will you stop accusing me of being focused on Casey. How can I give you an example to SHOW you that this is about the concepts of Constitutional law and precedence and not an individual person?

Lets say I was convicted of shoplifting a 5,000 dollar ring out of a jewelery store. Ok, so the jury convicts me. I get two years in prison. Lets say the judge sentences me to two more years probation when I get out. But that message lets lost and the correction department gives me paper work to serve my probation in jail? How is that my fault that the judge and the correction department were not on the same page?

Maybe if the judge who sentenced me and the corrections department should have done a better job? Maybe in the future when they make similar rulings on other people, THEY WILL NOT MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE.

To me, unless you are willing to hold the system accountable, there is no fucking point in having the system.

Sometimes the bad guy benefits. I would rather have that than a system that doesn't feel it needs to be held to account.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 I don't even understand

 I don't even understand what you're saying right now. People are on probation when they are monitored outside of jail. If you are in jail then you're not on probation.

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Enough of Anthony

Brian37 wrote:

A judge ordered Casey back to FLA to serve probation. Problem is that the corrections department already made her serve the probation while she was in jail.

The judge claims that his orders were not followed and that her probation was supposed to be served AFTER she got out of jail.

MY POINT,

What does it matter if the judge made the mistake in not making it clear, or the corrections department made the mistake by not following the order.

SHE STILL SERVED THE PROBATION

This is a no brainer to me and this waste of money I am seeing on tv right now in the state trying to get her to serve a sentence she already served is absurd.

This stems from a check fraud case independent from the murder trial.

If the system works the judge hearing the probation case should rightfully throw out the state's mistake and uphold the probation she served.

I get a fucking lip twitch in any case when the state wants do-overs. It is not the fault of the founders or the constitution or even society in general that the original judge on the check fraud probation didn't make it clear, nor is it the fault of the constitution or society that the correction department didn't follow the judges orders.

SHE ALREADY SERVED THE PROBATION. PERIOD!

Though I agree with you on the probation, can we please stop blogging about her. I've had enough.

You can read the most accurate information on the subject of Anthony on my hometown newspaper, the Orlando Sentinel.

Go here for the link if you must - http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-probation-decision-20110805,0,4130840.story

The judge from the murder trial now has jurisdiction as Strickland has reclused himself. Damn good thing too as he has demonstrated his bias on Nasty Grace.

Strickland will likely not be a judge after he goes for election next time unless the state gets to him first. He has violated several judicial rules and needs to be repriminded.

Judge Perry has not made a decision on the probation issue so look for more media bullshit to come next week.

Hope the bitch stays in Ohio or goes somewhere hiding into oblivion and we never hear about her again.

 

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: I don't even

Gauche wrote:

 I don't even understand what you're saying right now. People are on probation when they are monitored outside of jail. If you are in jail then you're not on probation.

No you don't obviously understand. Probation, I agree is typically served outside prison. But once the correction department made the deal that she could serve probation in prison, and the paperwork was signed, the deal was done and should not negate the agreement.

The blame does not belong on the lawyers who got the deal on her behalf. The blame belongs to the correction department for allowing it in the first place. The original judge should send a letter of condemnation to the correction department and have the persons/people fired for allowing the deal to be made. But that does not negate the deal itself.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Cpt_pineapple
atheist
Cpt_pineapple's picture
Posts: 5486
Joined: 2007-04-12
User is offlineOffline
(No subject)


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

A judge ordered Casey back to FLA to serve probation. Problem is that the corrections department already made her serve the probation while she was in jail.

The judge claims that his orders were not followed and that her probation was supposed to be served AFTER she got out of jail.

MY POINT,

What does it matter if the judge made the mistake in not making it clear, or the corrections department made the mistake by not following the order.

SHE STILL SERVED THE PROBATION

This is a no brainer to me and this waste of money I am seeing on tv right now in the state trying to get her to serve a sentence she already served is absurd.

This stems from a check fraud case independent from the murder trial.

If the system works the judge hearing the probation case should rightfully throw out the state's mistake and uphold the probation she served.

I get a fucking lip twitch in any case when the state wants do-overs. It is not the fault of the founders or the constitution or even society in general that the original judge on the check fraud probation didn't make it clear, nor is it the fault of the constitution or society that the correction department didn't follow the judges orders.

SHE ALREADY SERVED THE PROBATION. PERIOD!

Though I agree with you on the probation, can we please stop blogging about her. I've had enough.

You can read the most accurate information on the subject of Anthony on my hometown newspaper, the Orlando Sentinel.

Go here for the link if you must - http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-probation-decision-20110805,0,4130840.story

The judge from the murder trial now has jurisdiction as Strickland has reclused himself. Damn good thing too as he has demonstrated his bias on Nasty Grace.

Strickland will likely not be a judge after he goes for election next time unless the state gets to him first. He has violated several judicial rules and needs to be repriminded.

Judge Perry has not made a decision on the probation issue so look for more media bullshit to come next week.

Hope the bitch stays in Ohio or goes somewhere hiding into oblivion and we never hear about her again.

 

 

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU.

The issue is not Casey. The issue is the public's reaction to the verdict, which was ONE ISSUE. But this probation issue also disturbs me. AGAIN, you could stick anyone's name into this story and my objections would be the same. This has everything to do with what kind of system we should want to live under and VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH CASEY.

OK HERE ANOTHER EXAMPLE,

Lex Luthor kills Superman. A jury of his peers finds him not guilty. The public demands blood because they don't like Lex Luthor. GET IT!

Now, again, I DO find it fucked up that ANYONE would be allowed to serve probation in prison. But if that is what their lawyer manages to get and the state signs it. THAT'S IT.

FUCK CASEY ANTHONY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT HER other that in this case, she is the name involved, NOTHING MORE.

Please stop accusing me of things that are not in my head.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Brian37

Brian37 wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

A judge ordered Casey back to FLA to serve probation. Problem is that the corrections department already made her serve the probation while she was in jail.

The judge claims that his orders were not followed and that her probation was supposed to be served AFTER she got out of jail.

MY POINT,

What does it matter if the judge made the mistake in not making it clear, or the corrections department made the mistake by not following the order.

SHE STILL SERVED THE PROBATION

This is a no brainer to me and this waste of money I am seeing on tv right now in the state trying to get her to serve a sentence she already served is absurd.

This stems from a check fraud case independent from the murder trial.

If the system works the judge hearing the probation case should rightfully throw out the state's mistake and uphold the probation she served.

I get a fucking lip twitch in any case when the state wants do-overs. It is not the fault of the founders or the constitution or even society in general that the original judge on the check fraud probation didn't make it clear, nor is it the fault of the constitution or society that the correction department didn't follow the judges orders.

SHE ALREADY SERVED THE PROBATION. PERIOD!

Though I agree with you on the probation, can we please stop blogging about her. I've had enough.

You can read the most accurate information on the subject of Anthony on my hometown newspaper, the Orlando Sentinel.

Go here for the link if you must - http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-probation-decision-20110805,0,4130840.story

The judge from the murder trial now has jurisdiction as Strickland has reclused himself. Damn good thing too as he has demonstrated his bias on Nasty Grace.

Strickland will likely not be a judge after he goes for election next time unless the state gets to him first. He has violated several judicial rules and needs to be repriminded.

Judge Perry has not made a decision on the probation issue so look for more media bullshit to come next week.

Hope the bitch stays in Ohio or goes somewhere hiding into oblivion and we never hear about her again.

 

 

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU.

The issue is not Casey. The issue is the public's reaction to the verdict, which was ONE ISSUE. But this probation issue also disturbs me. AGAIN, you could stick anyone's name into this story and my objections would be the same. This has everything to do with what kind of system we should want to live under and VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH CASEY.

OK HERE ANOTHER EXAMPLE,

Lex Luthor kills Superman. A jury of his peers finds him not guilty. The public demands blood because they don't like Lex Luthor. GET IT!

Now, again, I DO find it fucked up that ANYONE would be allowed to serve probation in prison. But if that is what their lawyer manages to get and the state signs it. THAT'S IT.

FUCK CASEY ANTHONY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT HER other that in this case, she is the name involved, NOTHING MORE.

Please stop accusing me of things that are not in my head.

 

 

 

Touchy. I don't see where I accused you of anything Brian.  All I said was can we stop blogging about her. That's all. I just want the daily Anthony hater drones to get off my TV and off my news sites.

And the inept DOC and judges in Orlando have once more shown their colors. I agree that she's done her probation, it's not the first time this has happened here, read the link.

I also agree the public has been enflamed to a lynch mob frenzy. The best thing for people to do is to get on with their lives and let this drop into the past. Those that are so upset over Anthony need to do some volunteer work for abused children or something else constructive. I know that is not you Brian.

Please read what I did say and stop accusing me of something I did not say.

Thanks and have a good day Brian, or a beer or 2.

Later.

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

A judge ordered Casey back to FLA to serve probation. Problem is that the corrections department already made her serve the probation while she was in jail.

The judge claims that his orders were not followed and that her probation was supposed to be served AFTER she got out of jail.

MY POINT,

What does it matter if the judge made the mistake in not making it clear, or the corrections department made the mistake by not following the order.

SHE STILL SERVED THE PROBATION

This is a no brainer to me and this waste of money I am seeing on tv right now in the state trying to get her to serve a sentence she already served is absurd.

This stems from a check fraud case independent from the murder trial.

If the system works the judge hearing the probation case should rightfully throw out the state's mistake and uphold the probation she served.

I get a fucking lip twitch in any case when the state wants do-overs. It is not the fault of the founders or the constitution or even society in general that the original judge on the check fraud probation didn't make it clear, nor is it the fault of the constitution or society that the correction department didn't follow the judges orders.

SHE ALREADY SERVED THE PROBATION. PERIOD!

Though I agree with you on the probation, can we please stop blogging about her. I've had enough.

You can read the most accurate information on the subject of Anthony on my hometown newspaper, the Orlando Sentinel.

Go here for the link if you must - http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-probation-decision-20110805,0,4130840.story

The judge from the murder trial now has jurisdiction as Strickland has reclused himself. Damn good thing too as he has demonstrated his bias on Nasty Grace.

Strickland will likely not be a judge after he goes for election next time unless the state gets to him first. He has violated several judicial rules and needs to be repriminded.

Judge Perry has not made a decision on the probation issue so look for more media bullshit to come next week.

Hope the bitch stays in Ohio or goes somewhere hiding into oblivion and we never hear about her again.

 

 

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU.

The issue is not Casey. The issue is the public's reaction to the verdict, which was ONE ISSUE. But this probation issue also disturbs me. AGAIN, you could stick anyone's name into this story and my objections would be the same. This has everything to do with what kind of system we should want to live under and VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH CASEY.

OK HERE ANOTHER EXAMPLE,

Lex Luthor kills Superman. A jury of his peers finds him not guilty. The public demands blood because they don't like Lex Luthor. GET IT!

Now, again, I DO find it fucked up that ANYONE would be allowed to serve probation in prison. But if that is what their lawyer manages to get and the state signs it. THAT'S IT.

FUCK CASEY ANTHONY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT HER other that in this case, she is the name involved, NOTHING MORE.

Please stop accusing me of things that are not in my head.

 

 

 

Touchy. I don't see where I accused you of anything Brian.  All I said was can we stop blogging about her. That's all. I just want the daily Anthony hater drones to get off my TV and off my news sites.

And the inept DOC and judges in Orlando have once more shown their colors. I agree that she's done her probation, it's not the first time this has happened here, read the link.

I also agree the public has been enflamed to a lynch mob frenzy. The best thing for people to do is to get on with their lives and let this drop into the past. Those that are so upset over Anthony need to do some volunteer work for abused children or something else constructive. I know that is not you Brian.

Please read what I did say and stop accusing me of something I did not say.

Thanks and have a good day Brian, or a beer or 2.

Later.

 

Here is your attitude.

I am sick of talking about Hitler, he was a monster. I am sick of talking about slavery, I had nothing to do with it

You are stuck on her, not me. I am only using her name because this is a case that involves attitude of public and mistakes made by the court.

WHY the case is important is the issue, not the people involved in the case. Just like you have to mention Hitler to explain why humanity should not want to go down that road. Just like you have to talk about slavery even though you don't blame people today for it.

STOP MAKING THIS ABOUT CASEY!

The issue is the public's vigilante reaction to the verdict, and the court trying to save face by trying to undo paperwork they signed. THE NAMES INVOLVED are not important. THE actions of humans and what we should seek to avoid are important. So to we provide examples in discussing such things in history we use names and events as examples.

You are so short sighted. I am pointing at the moon and you keep staring at my fingertip.

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

OK Brian, it is not often that we agree and even now, not fully. But still, it is pretty clear here that there are people who want to get her in jail for anything all.

 

As far as the whole harping on this case thing goes, I can see how that might seem to be the case but I can also see another way to look at this. You are picking current events to talk about and this just happens to be one that should have been done with a few weeks ago, yet somehow is not.

 

We could get to the same point in another way. Remember when OJ was finally jailed? I seem to recall that many people were talking about how he finally got some justice put into him.

 

Well, technically yes but not for the murders. He got justice for what he was on trial for, which as far as I know was breaking and entering, theft and a few other things. The justice for the murders was in the fact that the investigation was so fucked up that despite having buckets of blood in and on his car a few miles away, nothing could be proved.

 

What about the Rodney King beat down? We have the whole video but it got sliced up into the worst bits for the evening news, so people formed an opinion on what they saw and not on the whole thing. The jury saw the whole thing and came to the conclusion that the cops had remained in the law the whole time.

 

Want to go for some history?

 

Fatty Arbuckle was tried three times for one death but in the end, the coroner could not prove that he was not just too damned fat to get on top.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

OK Brian, it is not often that we agree and even now, not fully. But still, it is pretty clear here that there are people who want to get her in jail for anything all.

 

As far as the whole harping on this case thing goes, I can see how that might seem to be the case but I can also see another way to look at this. You are picking current events to talk about and this just happens to be one that should have been done with a few weeks ago, yet somehow is not.

 

We could get to the same point in another way. Remember when OJ was finally jailed? I seem to recall that many people were talking about how he finally got some justice put into him.

 

Well, technically yes but not for the murders. He got justice for what he was on trial for, which as far as I know was breaking and entering, theft and a few other things. The justice for the murders was in the fact that the investigation was so fucked up that despite having buckets of blood in and on his car a few miles away, nothing could be proved.

 

What about the Rodney King beat down? We have the whole video but it got sliced up into the worst bits for the evening news, so people formed an opinion on what they saw and not on the whole thing. The jury saw the whole thing and came to the conclusion that the cops had remained in the law the whole time.

 

Want to go for some history?

 

Fatty Arbuckle was tried three times for one death but in the end, the coroner could not prove that he was not just too damned fat to get on top.

 

I have speculated with Bob Spence in Skype that Casey will fuck up again just like OJ did. But even if she doesn't it isn't like she has 24 hour security. Since she was accused of killing a child, she would be better off in prison where her lawyers could ask for segregation. As it stands now, she has to fend for herself and watch her back. So when people bitch about her going free, it is not like it will be all peaches and cream for her.

Of course media and news conflates reality. But it still should not allow us to become zealous jackals out for blood every time someone is accused.

Now, if I were to agree with the Rodney King issue, which I don't regarding your assesment. Then the best I can say if I were siding with the cops is that they were a victim of climate and training. I don't buy that. I saw the same video you did as did everyone else. I don't care how hyped up an unarmed person may be, it doesn't take billions of cops to take one man down.

I understand that hyped up people can be more aggressive, but considering the distance between the tazers in that video and the cops beating him with the batons, it came across to me as vengeful, not reactive, not an act of containment. Rodney's actions leading to that video do not excuse the excessive force I saw.

Now I fear that this thread will split into unrelated cases.

My point is unless we are willing to hold law and courts to accountability  we might as well not have law or courts in the first place.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

OK Brian, I brought up those cases to get off the point of this being about one case. If the thread splits, then we will go from there.

 

However, we have now have a few cases which are comparable. All of them ended with “This shall be the verdict of the Jury”.

 

So if that is your point, then run with it.

 

Personally, I think that OJ did it and the guys in the Rodney King video should have got worse.

 

The problem being that I was not on the jury either time.

 

I was called to the pool for the Michael Skakel trial. I got out of that on a random computer choice but I can tell you a bit about that. I did not see what the jury did but I did see what played out in the news.

 

Based on what saw in my local news, it was a gross violation for him to even be charged with a crime. No admissible evidence was ever presented. He was not even convicted for murder. He was convicted for breaking a law which was not passed until several years after the statute of limitations on what he might have done had expired.

 

Do you want to talk about justice?

 

Free Skakel.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


pauljohntheskeptic
atheistSilver Member
pauljohntheskeptic's picture
Posts: 2484
Joined: 2008-02-26
User is offlineOffline
Done with this

Brian37 wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

A judge ordered Casey back to FLA to serve probation. Problem is that the corrections department already made her serve the probation while she was in jail.

The judge claims that his orders were not followed and that her probation was supposed to be served AFTER she got out of jail.

MY POINT,

What does it matter if the judge made the mistake in not making it clear, or the corrections department made the mistake by not following the order.

SHE STILL SERVED THE PROBATION

This is a no brainer to me and this waste of money I am seeing on tv right now in the state trying to get her to serve a sentence she already served is absurd.

This stems from a check fraud case independent from the murder trial.

If the system works the judge hearing the probation case should rightfully throw out the state's mistake and uphold the probation she served.

I get a fucking lip twitch in any case when the state wants do-overs. It is not the fault of the founders or the constitution or even society in general that the original judge on the check fraud probation didn't make it clear, nor is it the fault of the constitution or society that the correction department didn't follow the judges orders.

SHE ALREADY SERVED THE PROBATION. PERIOD!

Though I agree with you on the probation, can we please stop blogging about her. I've had enough.

You can read the most accurate information on the subject of Anthony on my hometown newspaper, the Orlando Sentinel.

Go here for the link if you must - http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-probation-decision-20110805,0,4130840.story

The judge from the murder trial now has jurisdiction as Strickland has reclused himself. Damn good thing too as he has demonstrated his bias on Nasty Grace.

Strickland will likely not be a judge after he goes for election next time unless the state gets to him first. He has violated several judicial rules and needs to be repriminded.

Judge Perry has not made a decision on the probation issue so look for more media bullshit to come next week.

Hope the bitch stays in Ohio or goes somewhere hiding into oblivion and we never hear about her again.

 

 

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU.

The issue is not Casey. The issue is the public's reaction to the verdict, which was ONE ISSUE. But this probation issue also disturbs me. AGAIN, you could stick anyone's name into this story and my objections would be the same. This has everything to do with what kind of system we should want to live under and VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH CASEY.

OK HERE ANOTHER EXAMPLE,

Lex Luthor kills Superman. A jury of his peers finds him not guilty. The public demands blood because they don't like Lex Luthor. GET IT!

Now, again, I DO find it fucked up that ANYONE would be allowed to serve probation in prison. But if that is what their lawyer manages to get and the state signs it. THAT'S IT.

FUCK CASEY ANTHONY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT HER other that in this case, she is the name involved, NOTHING MORE.

Please stop accusing me of things that are not in my head.

 

 

 

Touchy. I don't see where I accused you of anything Brian.  All I said was can we stop blogging about her. That's all. I just want the daily Anthony hater drones to get off my TV and off my news sites.

And the inept DOC and judges in Orlando have once more shown their colors. I agree that she's done her probation, it's not the first time this has happened here, read the link.

I also agree the public has been enflamed to a lynch mob frenzy. The best thing for people to do is to get on with their lives and let this drop into the past. Those that are so upset over Anthony need to do some volunteer work for abused children or something else constructive. I know that is not you Brian.

Please read what I did say and stop accusing me of something I did not say.

Thanks and have a good day Brian, or a beer or 2.

Later.

 

Here is your attitude.

 

Quote:

 I am sick of talking about Hitler, he was a monster. I am sick of talking about slavery, I had nothing to do with it.

You are stuck on her, not me. I am only using her name because this is a case that involves attitude of public and mistakes made by the court.

WHY the case is important is the issue, not the people involved in the case. Just like you have to mention Hitler to explain why humanity should not want to go down that road. Just like you have to talk about slavery even though you don't blame people today for it.

STOP MAKING THIS ABOUT CASEY!

The issue is the public's vigilante reaction to the verdict, and the court trying to save face by trying to undo paperwork they signed. THE NAMES INVOLVED are not important. THE actions of humans and what we should seek to avoid are important. So to we provide examples in discussing such things in history we use names and events as examples.

You are so short sighted. I am pointing at the moon and you keep staring at my fingertip.

 

 

Brian,

I told you I agree on the reaction people have not respecting the verdict. They don't have to like it, but it is what it is.  I told you I agree that she served her probation and it's done.

I don't see what your problem is.

In Orlando for the last 3 years the TVs have had on all local channels scrolling news in regard to this case.

ALL THE TIME.

You don't live here and don't get the crap we have put up with over this..

Demonstrators, from all over.

News whores like Nasty Grace.

24/7 News covering this case.

FOR 3 YEARS.

DAILY.

ALL THE TIME

.

I'm done with this.

Nothing more to say.

 

No more from me on this subject.

 

____________________________________________________________
"I guess it's time to ask if you live under high voltage power transmission lines which have been shown to cause stimulation of the fantasy centers of the brain due to electromagnetic waves?" - Me

"God is omnipotent, omniscient, omnibenevolent, - it says so right here on the label. If you have a mind capable of believing all three of these divine attributes simultaneously, I have a wonderful bargain for you. No checks please. Cash and in small bills." - Robert A Heinlein.


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
pauljohntheskeptic

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

pauljohntheskeptic wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

A judge ordered Casey back to FLA to serve probation. Problem is that the corrections department already made her serve the probation while she was in jail.

The judge claims that his orders were not followed and that her probation was supposed to be served AFTER she got out of jail.

MY POINT,

What does it matter if the judge made the mistake in not making it clear, or the corrections department made the mistake by not following the order.

SHE STILL SERVED THE PROBATION

This is a no brainer to me and this waste of money I am seeing on tv right now in the state trying to get her to serve a sentence she already served is absurd.

This stems from a check fraud case independent from the murder trial.

If the system works the judge hearing the probation case should rightfully throw out the state's mistake and uphold the probation she served.

I get a fucking lip twitch in any case when the state wants do-overs. It is not the fault of the founders or the constitution or even society in general that the original judge on the check fraud probation didn't make it clear, nor is it the fault of the constitution or society that the correction department didn't follow the judges orders.

SHE ALREADY SERVED THE PROBATION. PERIOD!

Though I agree with you on the probation, can we please stop blogging about her. I've had enough.

You can read the most accurate information on the subject of Anthony on my hometown newspaper, the Orlando Sentinel.

Go here for the link if you must - http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/caylee-anthony/os-casey-anthony-probation-decision-20110805,0,4130840.story

The judge from the murder trial now has jurisdiction as Strickland has reclused himself. Damn good thing too as he has demonstrated his bias on Nasty Grace.

Strickland will likely not be a judge after he goes for election next time unless the state gets to him first. He has violated several judicial rules and needs to be repriminded.

Judge Perry has not made a decision on the probation issue so look for more media bullshit to come next week.

Hope the bitch stays in Ohio or goes somewhere hiding into oblivion and we never hear about her again.

 

 

HOW MANY TIMES DO I HAVE TO TELL YOU.

The issue is not Casey. The issue is the public's reaction to the verdict, which was ONE ISSUE. But this probation issue also disturbs me. AGAIN, you could stick anyone's name into this story and my objections would be the same. This has everything to do with what kind of system we should want to live under and VERY LITTLE TO DO WITH CASEY.

OK HERE ANOTHER EXAMPLE,

Lex Luthor kills Superman. A jury of his peers finds him not guilty. The public demands blood because they don't like Lex Luthor. GET IT!

Now, again, I DO find it fucked up that ANYONE would be allowed to serve probation in prison. But if that is what their lawyer manages to get and the state signs it. THAT'S IT.

FUCK CASEY ANTHONY, THIS IS NOT ABOUT HER other that in this case, she is the name involved, NOTHING MORE.

Please stop accusing me of things that are not in my head.

 

 

 

Touchy. I don't see where I accused you of anything Brian.  All I said was can we stop blogging about her. That's all. I just want the daily Anthony hater drones to get off my TV and off my news sites.

And the inept DOC and judges in Orlando have once more shown their colors. I agree that she's done her probation, it's not the first time this has happened here, read the link.

I also agree the public has been enflamed to a lynch mob frenzy. The best thing for people to do is to get on with their lives and let this drop into the past. Those that are so upset over Anthony need to do some volunteer work for abused children or something else constructive. I know that is not you Brian.

Please read what I did say and stop accusing me of something I did not say.

Thanks and have a good day Brian, or a beer or 2.

Later.

 

Here is your attitude.

 

Quote:

 I am sick of talking about Hitler, he was a monster. I am sick of talking about slavery, I had nothing to do with it.

You are stuck on her, not me. I am only using her name because this is a case that involves attitude of public and mistakes made by the court.

WHY the case is important is the issue, not the people involved in the case. Just like you have to mention Hitler to explain why humanity should not want to go down that road. Just like you have to talk about slavery even though you don't blame people today for it.

STOP MAKING THIS ABOUT CASEY!

The issue is the public's vigilante reaction to the verdict, and the court trying to save face by trying to undo paperwork they signed. THE NAMES INVOLVED are not important. THE actions of humans and what we should seek to avoid are important. So to we provide examples in discussing such things in history we use names and events as examples.

You are so short sighted. I am pointing at the moon and you keep staring at my fingertip.

 

 

Brian,

I told you I agree on the reaction people have not respecting the verdict. They don't have to like it, but it is what it is.  I told you I agree that she served her probation and it's done.

I don't see what your problem is.

In Orlando for the last 3 years the TVs have had on all local channels scrolling news in regard to this case.

ALL THE TIME.

You don't live here and don't get the crap we have put up with over this..

Demonstrators, from all over.

News whores like Nasty Grace.

24/7 News covering this case.

FOR 3 YEARS.

DAILY.

ALL THE TIME

.

I'm done with this.

Nothing more to say.

 

No more from me on this subject.

 

We agree, so why do YOU keep responding? It still doesn't mean that the climate of society isn't important. I agree the subject, especially in Orlando has been saturated. But it is still important to remind people that they should not be vigilantes and the system should be held accountable.

Cases like this and the reaction of the public to cases like this are WHY it is important to discuss it.

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:A judge

Brian37 wrote:

A judge ordered Casey back to FLA to serve probation. Problem is that the corrections department already made her serve the probation while she was in jail.

The judge claims that his orders were not followed and that her probation was supposed to be served AFTER she got out of jail.

MY POINT,

What does it matter if the judge made the mistake in not making it clear, or the corrections department made the mistake by not following the order.

SHE STILL SERVED THE PROBATION

This is a no brainer to me and this waste of money I am seeing on tv right now in the state trying to get her to serve a sentence she already served is absurd.

This stems from a check fraud case independent from the murder trial.

If the system works the judge hearing the probation case should rightfully throw out the state's mistake and uphold the probation she served.

I get a fucking lip twitch in any case when the state wants do-overs. It is not the fault of the founders or the constitution or even society in general that the original judge on the check fraud probation didn't make it clear, nor is it the fault of the constitution or society that the correction department didn't follow the judges orders.

SHE ALREADY SERVED THE PROBATION. PERIOD!

How's this a do-over? The probation has nothing to do with her murder case.

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 A woman gets sentenced to

 A woman gets sentenced to probation and goes to jail for something unrelated then still has to serve her probation when she is released and that's the issue you think is important for the US constitution and the nation. 

Who in their right mind would give two shits and a squirt of piss about that?

There are twists of time and space, of vision and reality, which only a dreamer can divine
H.P. Lovecraft


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Gauche wrote: A woman gets

Gauche wrote:

 A woman gets sentenced to probation and goes to jail for something unrelated then still has to serve her probation when she is released and that's the issue you think is important for the US constitution and the nation. 

Who in their right mind would give two shits and a squirt of piss about that?

Wow, really?

If someone has already made a deal, and the paper work has been signed by lawyers and the court, the court cannot renig on it after the punishment has been carried out, WHICH IN THIS CASE IT WAS. SHE ALREADY SERVED HER PROBATION. The court cannot make her do it again.

IT IS CALLED DOUBLE JEOPARDY, GO LOOK IT UP!

I am not asking anyone to give a shit about one person. I am reminding people with this example why they should give a shit. The Constitution was written for a reason, and not just for Casey.

Seriously, if you don't think your own rights are important and why this example is important, then I give up on trying to explain it to you. Keep your head in the sand if you wish.

I'm asking people to care about the system and the constitution, not one person.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Gauche
atheist
Gauche's picture
Posts: 1565
Joined: 2007-01-18
User is offlineOffline
 Had someone actually been

 Had someone actually been punished twice I might give a fuck.


Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Gauche

Brian37 wrote:

Gauche wrote:

 A woman gets sentenced to probation and goes to jail for something unrelated then still has to serve her probation when she is released and that's the issue you think is important for the US constitution and the nation. 

Who in their right mind would give two shits and a squirt of piss about that?

Wow, really?

If someone has already made a deal, and the paper work has been signed by lawyers and the court, the court cannot renig on it after the punishment has been carried out, WHICH IN THIS CASE IT WAS. SHE ALREADY SERVED HER PROBATION. The court cannot make her do it again.

IT IS CALLED DOUBLE JEOPARDY, GO LOOK IT UP!

I am not asking anyone to give a shit about one person. I am reminding people with this example why they should give a shit. The Constitution was written for a reason, and not just for Casey.

Seriously, if you don't think your own rights are important and why this example is important, then I give up on trying to explain it to you. Keep your head in the sand if you wish.

I'm asking people to care about the system and the constitution, not one person.

 

 

Well if you're going to go slippery slope, then assuming we don't force her to serve her probation - this might lead to mass child murders all throughout the US by mothers who know they can get away with killing their kids. So we have to force her to serve her probation in order to prevent the systematic extermination of all of our nation's children.

Plus if your view on the Constitution was absolute fact, rather than an interpretation, then there would be no debate on it. If there is a debate on it, then your view is no more valid than those who want her to serve probation.

Finally, the Constitution is overrated and I don't consider it any more special than any other national law like Magna Carta - it's more of just an idol to be worshiped than anything else.

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Recovering fundamentalist

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Gauche wrote:

 A woman gets sentenced to probation and goes to jail for something unrelated then still has to serve her probation when she is released and that's the issue you think is important for the US constitution and the nation. 

Who in their right mind would give two shits and a squirt of piss about that?

Wow, really?

If someone has already made a deal, and the paper work has been signed by lawyers and the court, the court cannot renig on it after the punishment has been carried out, WHICH IN THIS CASE IT WAS. SHE ALREADY SERVED HER PROBATION. The court cannot make her do it again.

IT IS CALLED DOUBLE JEOPARDY, GO LOOK IT UP!

I am not asking anyone to give a shit about one person. I am reminding people with this example why they should give a shit. The Constitution was written for a reason, and not just for Casey.

Seriously, if you don't think your own rights are important and why this example is important, then I give up on trying to explain it to you. Keep your head in the sand if you wish.

I'm asking people to care about the system and the constitution, not one person.

 

 

Well if you're going to go slippery slope, then assuming we don't force her to serve her probation - this might lead to mass child murders all throughout the US by mothers who know they can get away with killing their kids. So we have to force her to serve her probation in order to prevent the systematic extermination of all of our nation's children.

Plus if your view on the Constitution was absolute fact, rather than an interpretation, then there would be no debate on it. If there is a debate on it, then your view is no more valid than those who want her to serve probation.

Finally, the Constitution is overrated and I don't consider it any more special than any other national law like Magna Carta - it's more of just an idol to be worshiped than anything else.

Who is saying the Constitution is not open to interpretation?

But I am glad you had no hand in writing it.

Of course it is not a science textbook and I would not dare suggest anyone treat ANYTHING as a god or idol.

But the context of this case is important, again, some people seem to be stuck on one case in one moment in time. I am pointing out that sure, if this one person is forced to serve her probation that she already served, ONE PERSON does not amount to a hill of beans.

Beyond any establishing document law of any country, the west tends to value the accountability of those put into power.

The constitution reflects much of western society and similar laws exist in other countries as well.

THE POINT BEING, no matter what part of the world you live in, at least in the west and in pluralistic societies, we demand that our governments be held accountable.

IN THIS CASE, the government fucked up. If this person is forced to redo probation the COURT already signed off on, you are sending the message that it is ok to fuck up. It is not ok. Otherwise why have a system at all? The state signed of on the probation in prison, too fucking bad. The deal was done, end of story.

One person and one case is not my issue. Long term and what the founders AND western society strives for is government accountability. Without it all you have is people in power doing whatever the fuck they want.

So while I agree that the Constitution like any non scientific writing is open to interpretation, the IDEAS the Constitution reflects are that the government has to be held accountable and that they cannot come after you indefinitely.

That is why it is important not to make her redo probation the state already agreed to and she already served. NOT BECAUSE OF HER or this case. But because YOU should not want to live under a government that can do whatever it wants to you.

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Recovering fund...
atheistSuperfan
Recovering fundamentalist's picture
Posts: 196
Joined: 2011-03-14
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Recovering

Brian37 wrote:

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:

Brian37 wrote:

Gauche wrote:

 A woman gets sentenced to probation and goes to jail for something unrelated then still has to serve her probation when she is released and that's the issue you think is important for the US constitution and the nation. 

Who in their right mind would give two shits and a squirt of piss about that?

Wow, really?

If someone has already made a deal, and the paper work has been signed by lawyers and the court, the court cannot renig on it after the punishment has been carried out, WHICH IN THIS CASE IT WAS. SHE ALREADY SERVED HER PROBATION. The court cannot make her do it again.

IT IS CALLED DOUBLE JEOPARDY, GO LOOK IT UP!

I am not asking anyone to give a shit about one person. I am reminding people with this example why they should give a shit. The Constitution was written for a reason, and not just for Casey.

Seriously, if you don't think your own rights are important and why this example is important, then I give up on trying to explain it to you. Keep your head in the sand if you wish.

I'm asking people to care about the system and the constitution, not one person.

 

 

Well if you're going to go slippery slope, then assuming we don't force her to serve her probation - this might lead to mass child murders all throughout the US by mothers who know they can get away with killing their kids. So we have to force her to serve her probation in order to prevent the systematic extermination of all of our nation's children.

Plus if your view on the Constitution was absolute fact, rather than an interpretation, then there would be no debate on it. If there is a debate on it, then your view is no more valid than those who want her to serve probation.

Finally, the Constitution is overrated and I don't consider it any more special than any other national law like Magna Carta - it's more of just an idol to be worshiped than anything else.

Who is saying the Constitution is not open to interpretation?

But I am glad you had no hand in writing it.

Of course it is not a science textbook and I would not dare suggest anyone treat ANYTHING as a god or idol.

But the context of this case is important, again, some people seem to be stuck on one case in one moment in time. I am pointing out that sure, if this one person is forced to serve her probation that she already served, ONE PERSON does not amount to a hill of beans.

Beyond any establishing document law of any country, the west tends to value the accountability of those put into power.

The constitution reflects much of western society and similar laws exist in other countries as well.

THE POINT BEING, no matter what part of the world you live in, at least in the west and in pluralistic societies, we demand that our governments be held accountable.

IN THIS CASE, the government fucked up. If this person is forced to redo probation the COURT already signed off on, you are sending the message that it is ok to fuck up. It is not ok. Otherwise why have a system at all? The state signed of on the probation in prison, too fucking bad. The deal was done, end of story.

One person and one case is not my issue. Long term and what the founders AND western society strives for is government accountability. Without it all you have is people in power doing whatever the fuck they want.

So while I agree that the Constitution like any non scientific writing is open to interpretation, the IDEAS the Constitution reflects are that the government has to be held accountable and that they cannot come after you indefinitely.

That is why it is important not to make her redo probation the state already agreed to and she already served. NOT BECAUSE OF HER or this case. But because YOU should not want to live under a government that can do whatever it wants to you.

 

 

I'm forced to agree with you on the murder issue as much as I think she did it. But probation? Really? You're trying to make a constitutional issue out someone being forced to serve probation?

Optimism is reality, pessimism is the fantasy that you know enough to be cynical


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
I'm going to eat my words later on, BUT

Gauche wrote:

 I know you don't want to hear this but I did a term search and you commented on every thread that mentions the person. First you were angry that everyone was speculating. Then you were upset that others didn't like the verdict. Then you were outraged she might have federal charges brought against her. Now you don't want her to serve probation. 

 I never even heard about it until I read about the verdict on this website because I don't follow tabloid news. I know people get all moist over real human tragedy but give it a rest, it's unhealthy.

 

perhaps he posts in Anthony threads because he knows it will get the attention of everyone else who frequents these threads about her, and he can gather something of an audience for the social issues that are important to him. I can say with a modicum of certainty that this would not be an unusual 'soapbox' tactic for him. I believe him when he says he couldn't care less about Casey and her legal troubles, though I can't absolutely rule out that he is obsessively focused on the case.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
I'm going to eat my words later on, BUT

dp

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
STOP SHOUTING

Brian37 wrote:
IT IS CALLED DOUBLE JEOPARDY, GO LOOK IT UP!

I SUPPOSE NOW IT IS A MATTER OF WHETHER PROBATION COUNTS AS PUNISHMENT OR NOT (yes, the law can be fickle like that at times.)

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Kapkao wrote:Brian37

Kapkao wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
IT IS CALLED DOUBLE JEOPARDY, GO LOOK IT UP!

I SUPPOSE NOW IT IS A MATTER OF WHETHER PROBATION COUNTS AS PUNISHMENT OR NOT (yes, the law can be fickle like that at times.)

Any time a court puts a piece of paper in front of you demanding your actions be monitored or restricted as a result of a criminal act is a punishment. PERIOD. I don't give a shit if the probation was 5 minutes or 5 years. Once the court and the lawyers sign off on it it is a done deal.

AGAIN otherwise IN ANY CASE, not just this case, why have a system?

"We didn't mean to do that" is not a fucking excuse. Next time the court and the state should be more careful.

The problem is long term, not one person, not one case. It is about oversight and accountability. Without it the government can do whatever the fuck they want to you.

Some here are falsely equating this to a "slippery slope" and my point is to be nit picky so it doesn't lead to a slippery slope. Keeping accountability within the climate of society, long term, is what I am advocating.

I see no way around this for the state and they should NOT get away with making her do probation over AFTER the paperwork was signed and after she was signed off of probation.

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:
I'm forced to agree with you on the murder issue as much as I think she did it. But probation? Really? You're trying to make a constitutional issue out someone being forced to serve probation?

 

Well, there are two issues at hand here. One is getting mixed in where it should not but I will get to that shortly.

 

Double jeopardy is a constitutional provision that says that the government does not get to perform “do over” trials when they fail to convict a person the first time. That is really all that it says but it does set a tone which is relevant here.

 

>>>>

 

Casey served her sentence in full, including her probation. Sure, she was in jail at the time but how does that actually work? What I would like to know is if this was a seriously irregular thing where the FL corrections dept was a total fuck up or is this a normal thing that is done for lots of people?

 

If this is a normal thing, then WTF is this judge on about in the first place? If it was a fuck up, then that still changes very little. The government still does not get to punish people twice for the same crime on any grounds. Tough shit judgie boy...

 

>>>>

 

The second issue arises from the murder trial. There are no do overs in the law.*

 

This raises the question of why is the probation even an issue? If the first point turns out to be a routine matter for FL corrections, then it becomes clear that the judge is doing this entirely to see that she is punished for something, anything. If it was a fuckup, then the matter gets mixed.

 

Here the case could be that the judge is trying to punish her a second time for one crime or it could be that he is trying to punish her for the failed murder trial. Either is a serious problem. I don't know if either case reaches to a matter of constitutional proportion but there is just no way that this is not a serious problem.

 

>>>>

 

*Actually, do over laws get passed every so often. SCOTUS generally takes a dim view of them and tosses the legislative cookies. For a recent one that might apply, consider Meagan's law. It provides lifetime punishment after a sentence is served.

 

Even if a case turned on some issue so minor that it did not matter to anyone at all, if the judge were to rule “time served”, the accused would be bound under the law for the rest of his/her life.

 

In order for SCOTUS to get a relevant case, someone is going to have to be willing to admit that they are a perv and get dragged through a few levels of the court system. Publicly so as they would be challenging the “holy law” that all “right thinking people” support.

 

I suppose that it could happen. If you look at SCOTUS case law, there is no loss for scoundrels and fuck ups who just ended up in a bad situation. I am not willing to lay odds on this one though.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Brian37
atheistSuperfan
Brian37's picture
Posts: 13545
Joined: 2006-02-14
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

Recovering fundamentalist wrote:
I'm forced to agree with you on the murder issue as much as I think she did it. But probation? Really? You're trying to make a constitutional issue out someone being forced to serve probation?

 

Well, there are two issues at hand here. One is getting mixed in where it should not but I will get to that shortly.

 

Double jeopardy is a constitutional provision that says that the government does not get to perform “do over” trials when they fail to convict a person the first time. That is really all that it says but it does set a tone which is relevant here.

 

>>>>

 

Casey served her sentence in full, including her probation. Sure, she was in jail at the time but how does that actually work? What I would like to know is if this was a seriously irregular thing where the FL corrections dept was a total fuck up or is this a normal thing that is done for lots of people?

 

If this is a normal thing, then WTF is this judge on about in the first place? If it was a fuck up, then that still changes very little. The government still does not get to punish people twice for the same crime on any grounds. Tough shit judgie boy...

 

>>>>

 

The second issue arises from the murder trial. There are no do overs in the law.*

 

This raises the question of why is the probation even an issue? If the first point turns out to be a routine matter for FL corrections, then it becomes clear that the judge is doing this entirely to see that she is punished for something, anything. If it was a fuckup, then the matter gets mixed.

 

Here the case could be that the judge is trying to punish her a second time for one crime or it could be that he is trying to punish her for the failed murder trial. Either is a serious problem. I don't know if either case reaches to a matter of constitutional proportion but there is just no way that this is not a serious problem.

 

>>>>

 

*Actually, do over laws get passed every so often. SCOTUS generally takes a dim view of them and tosses the legislative cookies. For a recent one that might apply, consider Meagan's law. It provides lifetime punishment after a sentence is served.

 

Even if a case turned on some issue so minor that it did not matter to anyone at all, if the judge were to rule “time served”, the accused would be bound under the law for the rest of his/her life.

 

In order for SCOTUS to get a relevant case, someone is going to have to be willing to admit that they are a perv and get dragged through a few levels of the court system. Publicly so as they would be challenging the “holy law” that all “right thinking people” support.

 

I suppose that it could happen. If you look at SCOTUS case law, there is no loss for scoundrels and fuck ups who just ended up in a bad situation. I am not willing to lay odds on this one though.

 

I agree the idea of serving probation in jail is absurd. But there obviously no laws on the books preventing such so what was signed off on was legal. I think this problem could be solved by state lawmakers. But changing the rules in the middle of the game is unacceptable. The paperwork was signed off on. To try to undo that is absurd and from a long term perspective, a dangerous attitude in ANY case.

 

I was discussing with my co-workers a couple of cases they personally knew about. One was about a guy who shot someone by mistake while having a fight with someone else in the house. He shoots someone and does virtually no time. But then two old ladies selling prescription pain pills illegally out of their house get far more jail time. Go figure.  My point is it seems absurd, but the law needs to be changed, not changed on the spot during the case. To me that would be like a baseball team asking for an extra out during the game.

You can try to work to change the law and appeal to law makers. What no court should do is change the rules during the case itself.

Even outside the issue of crime. I get pissed at idiots who get a speeding ticket who go "I was just going the same speed as everyone else".  So the fuck what? If the speed limit is 55 and you are doing 65 then you deserve the ticket. If you don't like the speed limit appeal to city council to have it changed.

Its even the same with people smoking pot. "It should be legal", YES IT SHOULD BE, but until it is by law, you are breaking the law.

I am not saying all laws make sense. But if we cant demand courts keep their word and are allowed to change the rules in the middle of the game, there is no point in having a system at all. You change the laws through the law makers, and you challenge laws through the courts. You do not change the laws during the individual case.

 

 

 

 

"We are a nation of Christians and Muslims, Jews and Hindus -- and nonbelievers."Obama
Check out my poetry here on Rational Responders Like my poetry thread on Facebook under BrianJames Rational Poet also on twitter under Brianrrs37


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Brian37 wrote:Kapkao

Brian37 wrote:

Kapkao wrote:

Brian37 wrote:
IT IS CALLED DOUBLE JEOPARDY, GO LOOK IT UP!

I SUPPOSE NOW IT IS A MATTER OF WHETHER PROBATION COUNTS AS PUNISHMENT OR NOT (yes, the law can be fickle like that at times.)

Any time a court puts a piece of paper in front of you demanding your actions be monitored or restricted as a result of a criminal act is a punishment. PERIOD.


Punishment in terms of language definition or legal definition? The difference is rather important, y'know.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)


Answers in Gene...
High Level Donor
Answers in Gene Simmons's picture
Posts: 4214
Joined: 2008-11-11
User is offlineOffline
p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

OK, so to those who think that she should be punished for something/anything, do you also believe that you have an absolute first amendment right to have no religion?

 

Seriously, are your rights predicated by what the law is (and what the Constitution actually says) or by who has the biggest pair of nuts?

 

We are a nation of laws, not men. The law is clear on this matter. She walks free. Advocating for any other position is thinking with the smaller head.

NoMoreCrazyPeople wrote:
Never ever did I say enything about free, I said "free."

=


Kapkao
atheistSuperfanBronze Member
Kapkao's picture
Posts: 4121
Joined: 2010-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Answers in Gene Simmons

Answers in Gene Simmons wrote:

p { margin-bottom: 0.08in; }

OK, so to those who think that she should be punished for something/anything, do you also believe that you have an absolute first amendment right to have no religion?

 

Seriously, are your rights predicated by what the law is (and what the Constitution actually says) or by who has the biggest pair of nuts?

Apparently not, if we were to judge by the mites currently in office.

“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)