User Tag List

+ Reply to Thread
Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 71314151617
Results 161 to 166 of 166

Thread: All 3 found guilty in Arburry trial

  1. #161
    Points: 9,767, Level: 23
    Level completed: 65%, Points required for next Level: 283
    Overall activity: 6.0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Omar's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    3386
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    3,586
    Points
    9,767
    Level
    23
    Thanks Given
    2,251
    Thanked 3,377x in 1,990 Posts
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    This case reminds me of something I find annoying about our justice system. It really has nothing to do with this particular case exactly, I didn't pay attention to the trial but it at least sounds like the verdict was correct. Having said that:

    What annoys me is that when someone commits a crime, they don't just get prosecuted for that crime. It seems like they stack as many charges as they can on them. In other words, they want to make sure they screw them over as hard as they can. Instead of being guilty of just one crime, they commit one crime and end up being guilty of five different charges. Doesn't quite seem fair. Seems like if you steal something, you should pay the price for stealing something, without a bunch of BS ratcheting up the punishment. Just make the punishment harsher if that's what you want to do.

    Guess they have to keep the lawyers employed.

  2. #162
    Points: 151,229, Level: 93
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 2,821
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    866022
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    60,032
    Points
    151,229
    Level
    93
    Thanks Given
    8,370
    Thanked 8,284x in 5,657 Posts
    Mentioned
    168 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Omar View Post
    This case reminds me of something I find annoying about our justice system. It really has nothing to do with this particular case exactly, I didn't pay attention to the trial but it at least sounds like the verdict was correct. Having said that:

    What annoys me is that when someone commits a crime, they don't just get prosecuted for that crime. It seems like they stack as many charges as they can on them. In other words, they want to make sure they screw them over as hard as they can. Instead of being guilty of just one crime, they commit one crime and end up being guilty of five different charges. Doesn't quite seem fair. Seems like if you steal something, you should pay the price for stealing something, without a bunch of BS ratcheting up the punishment. Just make the punishment harsher if that's what you want to do.

    Guess they have to keep the lawyers employed.
    Typically, they serve the sentences concurrently, so really it's just the length of the sentence for the most serious charge, unless the defendant is incorrigible or the crime so heinous that they are sentenced to serve the sentences consecutively. I think it's to ensure that they don't skate entirely if they can't get a guilty verdict on the most serious charge, they have lesser charges that the jury can possibly support beyond a reasonable doubt.
    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

  3. #163
    Points: 9,767, Level: 23
    Level completed: 65%, Points required for next Level: 283
    Overall activity: 6.0%
    Achievements:
    5000 Experience Points1 year registered
    Omar's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    3386
    Join Date
    Jun 2020
    Posts
    3,586
    Points
    9,767
    Level
    23
    Thanks Given
    2,251
    Thanked 3,377x in 1,990 Posts
    Mentioned
    8 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Dr. Who View Post
    Typically, they serve the sentences concurrently, so really it's just the length of the sentence for the most serious charge, unless the defendant is incorrigible or the crime so heinous that they are sentenced to serve the sentences consecutively. I think it's to ensure that they don't skate entirely if they can't get a guilty verdict on the most serious charge, they have lesser charges that the jury can possibly support beyond a reasonable doubt.
    They're served concurrently? That seems bizarre, but I guess it's better.
    I can see offering a jury a choice of "what kind of homicide is this"?

  4. #164
    Points: 151,229, Level: 93
    Level completed: 26%, Points required for next Level: 2,821
    Overall activity: 24.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialVeteranTagger First Class50000 Experience Points
    Dr. Who's Avatar Advisor
    Karma
    866022
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    Gallifrey
    Posts
    60,032
    Points
    151,229
    Level
    93
    Thanks Given
    8,370
    Thanked 8,284x in 5,657 Posts
    Mentioned
    168 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Omar View Post
    They're served concurrently? That seems bizarre, but I guess it's better.
    I can see offering a jury a choice of "what kind of homicide is this"?
    A jury is not empowered to legally determine charges, only to assess whether the facts adduced at trial would support a finding of guilty under any of the charges, beyond a reasonable doubt.
    "The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
    Mahatma Gandhi

  5. #165
    Points: 68,208, Level: 63
    Level completed: 76%, Points required for next Level: 542
    Overall activity: 31.0%
    Achievements:
    50000 Experience PointsSocialVeteran
    FindersKeepers's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    165539
    Join Date
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    20,316
    Points
    68,208
    Level
    63
    Thanks Given
    13,893
    Thanked 18,174x in 10,635 Posts
    Mentioned
    194 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)
    Quote Originally Posted by Omar View Post
    This case reminds me of something I find annoying about our justice system. It really has nothing to do with this particular case exactly, I didn't pay attention to the trial but it at least sounds like the verdict was correct. Having said that:

    What annoys me is that when someone commits a crime, they don't just get prosecuted for that crime. It seems like they stack as many charges as they can on them. In other words, they want to make sure they screw them over as hard as they can. Instead of being guilty of just one crime, they commit one crime and end up being guilty of five different charges. Doesn't quite seem fair. Seems like if you steal something, you should pay the price for stealing something, without a bunch of BS ratcheting up the punishment. Just make the punishment harsher if that's what you want to do.

    Guess they have to keep the lawyers employed.
    I agree with this.

    It's annoying to see taxpayer monies wasted trying criminals, such as murderers who will never get out of prison, on additional charges when they're already incarcerated.

    What's worse is the trumped-up, or unrelated, charges they have them plead guilty to in order to keep a case from going to court. The defendants do it as part of a plea bargain, but it has nothing to do with truth, honest, and fact.

    Case in point -- Michael Cohen who pled guilty to a number of charges the state could never have convicted him on, such as violating campaign finance rules, just to keep from getting a harder sentence for tax evasion. That was a political plea bargain intended to hurt Trump.

    It's all fun and games and the players with the most money get the best hands.
    "What happens is of little significance compared with the stories we tell ourselves about what happens. Events matter little, only stories of events
    affect us.”

    ~Rabih Alameddin


  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FindersKeepers For This Useful Post:

    Omar (11-28-2021),stjames1_53 (11-28-2021)

  7. #166
    Points: 561,509, Level: 100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 48.0%
    Achievements:
    SocialRecommendation Second ClassYour first GroupOverdrive50000 Experience PointsTagger First ClassVeteran
    Awards:
    Discussion Ender
    Chris's Avatar Senior Member
    Karma
    414663
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    171,754
    Points
    561,509
    Level
    100
    Thanks Given
    22,323
    Thanked 62,238x in 43,585 Posts
    Mentioned
    1880 Post(s)
    Tagged
    2 Thread(s)
    I think multiple throw-spaghetti-at-the-wall-and-hope-it-stocks charges happen mainly in high-profile cases driven by Woke social justice.
    Experience should teach us to be most on our guard to protect liberty when the government's purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.
    Louis Brandeis,Dissenting, Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 479 (1928)

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to Chris For This Useful Post:

    stjames1_53 (11-28-2021)

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

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