Page 4 of 5 First 12345 Last
  1. #31
    Diesel_tke's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Pensacola, FL
    Posts
    4,005
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by mike321 View Post
    Not young or naive, just curious if we have an idiotic system or idiotic judges.
    Neither, we have really smart lawyers.
    Combatives training log.

    Gezere: paraphrase from Bas Rutten, Never escalate the level of violence in fight you are losing. :D

    Drum thread

    Pavel Tsatsouline: kettlebell workouts give you “cardio without the dishonour of aerobics”.

  2. #32
    jnp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    8,344
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Quote Originally Posted by mike321 View Post
    Not young or naive, just curious if we have an idiotic system or idiotic judges.
    What do you think the odds are that every judge out there is an idiot? What do you think the odds are that every aspect of the U.S.A. legal system is free of idiocy, or any other legal system for that matter?

    Jones will be able to afford really good lawyers. He'll be fine.
    Shut the hell up and train.

  3. #33

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,577
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Jnp,

    I know very little about legal procedure. just what I learned on jury duty. They sent us out of the courtroom plenty of times. Do judges have a mechanism to block outrageous defense claims? Just curious.

  4. #34

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    196
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Mike, the judge does have latitude in most things to tell the defense (or the prosecution) to knock their **** off. However, in this specific case, the bad guy placed a foreign substance on his mouth that could potentially affect the outcome of the test. It's the same thing in science experiments. All the conditions must be right. Now, do I feel that it is underhanded and shitty? Absolutely. It is a bastardization of the American justice system, in general.

    Juries are instructed to take the entire case and base their decision on the term "beyond a reasonable doubt." In the totality of everything, we had a strong case. We were able to place asshole behind the wheel at the time of the crash. We were able to show that he was impaired. We even had circumstantial evidence. However, the lawyer was able to hammer home the invalidation of the breath test and exclude it. The jury just never saw the other things and simply focused on that test.

  5. #35

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,577
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Ouch!

    Thanks for the explanation. I was on a deadlocked jury but it was mostly due to a foreman who was an executive at his work. His style was very quick and authoritative and some jurors rebelled at the end of deliberation. They felt they just hadn't an opportunity to discuss the case with the other jurors.

  6. #36

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,577
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Ouch!

    Thanks for the explanation. I was on a deadlocked jury but it was mostly due to a foreman who was an executive at his work. His style was very quick and authoritative and some jurors rebelled at the end of deliberation. They felt they just hadn't an opportunity to discuss the case with the other jurors.

  7. #37

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,577
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Ouch!

    Thanks for the explanation. I was on a deadlocked jury but it was mostly due to a foreman who was an executive at his work. His style was very quick and authoritative and some jurors rebelled at the end of deliberation. They felt they just hadn't an opportunity to discuss the case with the other jurors.

  8. #38

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,577
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Ouch!

    Thanks for the explanation. I was on a deadlocked jury but it was mostly due to a foreman who was an executive at his work. His style was very quick and authoritative and some jurors rebelled at the end of deliberation. They felt they just hadn't an opportunity to discuss the case with the other jurors.

  9. #39

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,577
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Ouch! Thanks for the explanation.

  10. #40

    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    California
    Posts
    1,577
    --
    Hell yeah! Hell no!
    Sorry for repeats! Tapatalk glitch

Page 4 of 5 First 12345 Last

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Log in

Log in
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO