Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
29-01-2016, 02:54 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 02:31 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  Of course most war criminals tried to weasel out at Nürnberg.

If they genuinely believed then I was following orders defense could not be considered trying to weasel out but rather statement of the fact I would say.

Problem lie elsewhere - allowing for such defense to be successful would mean that every order is to be obeyed without question. More importantly there was no sanction - as in death for disobeying - for refusing to kill Jews, so following orders wasn't about difference between life and death. It was infraction, not offense resulting in death sentence. State had enough willing executioners to not kill those unwilling.

(29-01-2016 02:31 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  One should look at what they had to say when they were in power and didnt have to fear consequences of what they said, not at Nürnberg, where they were aware of teh consequences. Moral thugs dont have to be stupid.

I wouldn't call them moral. Convinced of being moral seems more fitting. And yes it was deeds that mattered.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-01-2016, 07:43 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 02:42 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  You're dodging my point, which is that criminals -- be they violent or nonviolent -- ought not get freebies. I know how it generally works. That is exactly what is happening here -- they are getting charged with everything.

You're complaining about it, because those charges add up to a couple of decades.

No, I'm not dodging your point and you are missing mine. I know they are getting charged with everything. That is always what happens. They always get charged with everything. That's not how it plays out, though. The charges may add up to a couple of decades but they won't get a couple of decades.

And, 2 points on the "they are getting charged with everything" comment.

First, you only get one bite at the apple. You bring all charges at once because any you don't bring can't be brought up once you get through a trial. You can add or delete charges during the process but once there is an adjudication, that's it. You can never go back. So, you always throw in everything you can think of and thin the herd of charges later.

Second, prosecutors hate to try cases. Trials have the element of uncertainty to them. And, they are a lot of work and cost a lot of money. So, you threaten a defendant with a ridiculous amount of prison time to get him to plead out. An overwhelming number of criminal complaints are settled this way. I don't know the current numbers but it's into the 90% mark, and probably higher. And, it's a bit of a problem

This is going off topic (but what the fuck as we are completely off the rails from my original point anyway) but it's gotten to a point where innocent people are being pressured by judges and defense lawyers, and not just prosecutors, to accept guilty verdicts for things they didn't do to keep the wheels moving. There have been a number of researched articles and books on the phenomenon. There was an entire study, maybe 10 years ago, on the court system in Chicago and how they process people through - innocent and guilty. It's a fucked up system.

But, my point is, you are focusing on the headline. The reality is they are not getting multiple decades in jail, no matter what you or I may think about it.

(29-01-2016 02:42 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  In what jurisdiction?

All of them.

(29-01-2016 02:42 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  With which prosecutor?

All of them.

(29-01-2016 02:42 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  These folks are being indicted under Texas law. If you're not happy with it, move down here, register to vote, and change things.

I personally am happy that people who have lied to the government and the public, set up fictitious corporations and injured the ability of women to exercise their right to privacy in personal medical care are having their feet held to the fire for each and every law they've broken.

Your mileage clearly varies. Maybe you should get a tune-up ... ?

I think you're in for a pretty big disappointment if you expect the ultimate reality to meet the current headline, Texas law or not. And, given it is Texas - and I suspect they have a lot of sympathy for what they did - I don't think getting a conviction for any of the charges is a slam dunk. This is just an indictment. It's not a conviction. There has to be a trial. And, as I said before, anything can happen in a trial.

Anyway, I still think you are going off on a point I never really intended to make. My only point, for like the 10th time, is that 20 years for a first time offender who commits a non-violent crime is lunacy. It's unreasonable, although I'm willing to accept exceptions based on scale (I'm not really bothered that Bernie Madoff will be in for a long time, although I thought 150 years was a bit much). You can disagree with that comment, of course. It's an opinion, not a fact. But, just to be clear, my opinion of that exists independently of this case, whereas as, if I'm understanding you correctly, you are focused on this set of facts. The law doesn't work on independent scenarios though. It can't. A society can't function that way.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BnW's post
29-01-2016, 07:56 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 07:43 AM)BnW Wrote:  
(29-01-2016 02:42 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  You're dodging my point, which is that criminals -- be they violent or nonviolent -- ought not get freebies. I know how it generally works. That is exactly what is happening here -- they are getting charged with everything.

You're complaining about it, because those charges add up to a couple of decades.

No, I'm not dodging your point and you are missing mine. I know they are getting charged with everything. That is always what happens. They always get charged with everything. That's not how it plays out, though. The charges may add up to a couple of decades but they won't get a couple of decades.

And, 2 points on the "they are getting charged with everything" comment.

First, you only get one bite at the apple. You bring all charges at once because any you don't bring can't be brought up once you get through a trial. You can add or delete charges during the process but once there is an adjudication, that's it. You can never go back. So, you always throw in everything you can think of and thin the herd of charges later.

Second, prosecutors hate to try cases. Trials have the element of uncertainty to them. And, they are a lot of work and cost a lot of money. So, you threaten a defendant with a ridiculous amount of prison time to get him to plead out. An overwhelming number of criminal complaints are settled this way. I don't know the current numbers but it's into the 90% mark, and probably higher. And, it's a bit of a problem

This is going off topic (but what the fuck as we are completely off the rails from my original point anyway) but it's gotten to a point where innocent people are being pressured by judges and defense lawyers, and not just prosecutors, to accept guilty verdicts for things they didn't do to keep the wheels moving. There have been a number of researched articles and books on the phenomenon. There was an entire study, maybe 10 years ago, on the court system in Chicago and how they process people through - innocent and guilty. It's a fucked up system.

But, my point is, you are focusing on the headline. The reality is they are not getting multiple decades in jail, no matter what you or I may think about it.

(29-01-2016 02:42 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  In what jurisdiction?

All of them.

(29-01-2016 02:42 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  With which prosecutor?

All of them.

(29-01-2016 02:42 AM)Thumpalumpacus Wrote:  These folks are being indicted under Texas law. If you're not happy with it, move down here, register to vote, and change things.

I personally am happy that people who have lied to the government and the public, set up fictitious corporations and injured the ability of women to exercise their right to privacy in personal medical care are having their feet held to the fire for each and every law they've broken.

Your mileage clearly varies. Maybe you should get a tune-up ... ?

I think you're in for a pretty big disappointment if you expect the ultimate reality to meet the current headline, Texas law or not. And, given it is Texas - and I suspect they have a lot of sympathy for what they did - I don't think getting a conviction for any of the charges is a slam dunk. This is just an indictment. It's not a conviction. There has to be a trial. And, as I said before, anything can happen in a trial.

Anyway, I still think you are going off on a point I never really intended to make. My only point, for like the 10th time, is that 20 years for a first time offender who commits a non-violent crime is lunacy. It's unreasonable, although I'm willing to accept exceptions based on scale (I'm not really bothered that Bernie Madoff will be in for a long time, although I thought 150 years was a bit much). You can disagree with that comment, of course. It's an opinion, not a fact. But, just to be clear, my opinion of that exists independently of this case, whereas as, if I'm understanding you correctly, you are focused on this set of facts. The law doesn't work on independent scenarios though. It can't. A society can't function that way.

I think it's fair to say that we agree to disagree. I don't think he'll get the 20, I do want them to try for it. If he gets 8, I'll be happy. If he get 20, I won't cry about it.

Smile

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-01-2016, 07:59 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 02:31 AM)Deesse23 Wrote:  
Quote:Except the Nazis tried at Nuremberg or in the subsequent trials for those caught later did not make that argument. None of them argued "but it was my moral conviction to be involved with mass murder." Soooo .... no. If you want to equate my comments to the Nazis, at least take a few minutes to learn what the fuck you are talking about first.

I present Exhibit "A"

He never commited any violent crime, dint defame jews for personal gain or wealth, but out of moral conviction.
Of course, once he stood at the trial, he started to weasel out, like all the *proud followers of the moral truth* (insert your favourite [im]moral) truth, by telling "i dint know" etc..

Do you think he deserved less than hanging for his non-violent crimes?
One could argue he just used the freedom of speech. How harmless do you think his crimes were?

I am not saying the perpetrators in this case deserve hanging. But stating that violent crimes and crimes for personal gain are worse than no-violent crimes and crimes made out of moral conviction is an oversimplification of the problems at hand.

Of course most war criminals tried to weasel out at Nürnberg. One should look at what they had to say when they were in power and didnt have to fear consequences of what they said, not at Nürnberg, where they were aware of teh consequences. Moral thugs dont have to be stupid.

Sorry, but I can't move off this topic without responding to this particular stupidity first.

Sorry, but your "Exhibit A" doesn't back up your assertion at all. I am very familiar with the Nuremberg Trials and with Julius Streicher. At no point did he argue "but I thought it was a moral thing to do" or anything close to that in his defense. On the contrary, he was the one defendant who spewed hatred and venom through to the end. At least he wasn't a coward in the face of death and owned up to it. A lot has been written about how the other defendants were equally appalled by him, but I've read accounts that speculate they just didn't want to be associated with him because he was clearly going down.

But, equating anything I said with the acts of the Nazis or the likes of Julius Streicher is beyond absurd. It has no bearing or relevance. I can't tell if you're intellectually dishonest or just a fucking idiot. Lucky me; I don't care.

Oh, and to head off what I'm sure is the next moronic argument: Yes, I'm aware that Streicher didn't actually kill anyone, steal anything, etc. He was, however, a knowing cog in the Nazi propaganda machine and acted deliberately to further the war effort and genocide of the Jews. He was a knowing and willing participant in the unlawful deaths of 30,000,000 people. But, given all that, I do think there can be a reasonable debate as to whether or not he should have been hanged vs. imprisoned. I'm of the opinion that if he hadn't been such a hateful fucktwit and pretended he was sorry like his fellow defendants (except Goering) he may have ended up in Spandou Prison for life. Personally, I'm ok with the fact that they hung the scumbag and I'm not the least bit sorry it went badly and he suffered at the end. Screw him.

Regarding Otto Ohlendorf - while it's true he did try that stupid "guilt of a nation" argument, which made no sense considering Germany had already been found guilty of starting the war illegally, he didn't make the argument that my dumb friend here originally said the Nazis made. I guess he did come closest to it, but still doesn't reach the point of stupidity she implied.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like BnW's post
29-01-2016, 08:00 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 07:56 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  
(29-01-2016 07:43 AM)BnW Wrote:  No, I'm not dodging your point and you are missing mine. I know they are getting charged with everything. That is always what happens. They always get charged with everything. That's not how it plays out, though. The charges may add up to a couple of decades but they won't get a couple of decades.

And, 2 points on the "they are getting charged with everything" comment.

First, you only get one bite at the apple. You bring all charges at once because any you don't bring can't be brought up once you get through a trial. You can add or delete charges during the process but once there is an adjudication, that's it. You can never go back. So, you always throw in everything you can think of and thin the herd of charges later.

Second, prosecutors hate to try cases. Trials have the element of uncertainty to them. And, they are a lot of work and cost a lot of money. So, you threaten a defendant with a ridiculous amount of prison time to get him to plead out. An overwhelming number of criminal complaints are settled this way. I don't know the current numbers but it's into the 90% mark, and probably higher. And, it's a bit of a problem

This is going off topic (but what the fuck as we are completely off the rails from my original point anyway) but it's gotten to a point where innocent people are being pressured by judges and defense lawyers, and not just prosecutors, to accept guilty verdicts for things they didn't do to keep the wheels moving. There have been a number of researched articles and books on the phenomenon. There was an entire study, maybe 10 years ago, on the court system in Chicago and how they process people through - innocent and guilty. It's a fucked up system.

But, my point is, you are focusing on the headline. The reality is they are not getting multiple decades in jail, no matter what you or I may think about it.


All of them.


All of them.


I think you're in for a pretty big disappointment if you expect the ultimate reality to meet the current headline, Texas law or not. And, given it is Texas - and I suspect they have a lot of sympathy for what they did - I don't think getting a conviction for any of the charges is a slam dunk. This is just an indictment. It's not a conviction. There has to be a trial. And, as I said before, anything can happen in a trial.

Anyway, I still think you are going off on a point I never really intended to make. My only point, for like the 10th time, is that 20 years for a first time offender who commits a non-violent crime is lunacy. It's unreasonable, although I'm willing to accept exceptions based on scale (I'm not really bothered that Bernie Madoff will be in for a long time, although I thought 150 years was a bit much). You can disagree with that comment, of course. It's an opinion, not a fact. But, just to be clear, my opinion of that exists independently of this case, whereas as, if I'm understanding you correctly, you are focused on this set of facts. The law doesn't work on independent scenarios though. It can't. A society can't function that way.

I think it's fair to say that we agree to disagree. I don't think he'll get the 20, I do want them to try for it. If he gets 8, I'll be happy. If he get 20, I won't cry about it.

Smile


Fair enough.

And, although I believe in law and justice, I'm also a human being who thinks these people are major assholes and I won't shed a tear if they get 20 years either.

In all honesty, I just hope they go to jail at all. I think getting a conviction in Texas will be tough. It only takes one juror to hang the jury.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes BnW's post
29-01-2016, 08:28 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 08:00 AM)BnW Wrote:  
(29-01-2016 07:56 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  I think it's fair to say that we agree to disagree. I don't think he'll get the 20, I do want them to try for it. If he gets 8, I'll be happy. If he get 20, I won't cry about it.

Smile


Fair enough.

And, although I believe in law and justice, I'm also a human being who thinks these people are major assholes and I won't shed a tear if they get 20 years either.

In all honesty, I just hope they go to jail at all. I think getting a conviction in Texas will be tough. It only takes one juror to hang the jury.

That's true enough. We know everything's bigger in Texas, even the ignorance. Sad

[Image: dnw9krH.jpg?4]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-01-2016, 08:31 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 08:28 AM)Heatheness Wrote:  
(29-01-2016 08:00 AM)BnW Wrote:  Fair enough.

And, although I believe in law and justice, I'm also a human being who thinks these people are major assholes and I won't shed a tear if they get 20 years either.

In all honesty, I just hope they go to jail at all. I think getting a conviction in Texas will be tough. It only takes one juror to hang the jury.

That's true enough. We know everything's bigger in Texas, even the ignorance. Sad

Not the textbooks though.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
29-01-2016, 08:50 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 07:59 AM)BnW Wrote:  Regarding Otto Ohlendorf - while it's true he did try that stupid "guilt of a nation" argument, which made no sense considering Germany had already been found guilty of starting the war illegally, he didn't make the argument that my dumb friend here originally said the Nazis made. I guess he did come closest to it, but still doesn't reach the point of stupidity she implied.

Agreed. But I would say that he tried to make a "moral stand", however absurd it could look to observers.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-01-2016, 09:02 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
I don't think it was a moral argument. I think it was more along the lines of "an entire nation was involved so how can you just blame me?". Sort of a product of his environment argument.

Shackle their minds when they're bent on the cross
When ignorance reigns, life is lost
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
29-01-2016, 09:18 AM
RE: Tx Grand Jury Clears Planned Parenthood, indicts its accusers
(29-01-2016 09:02 AM)BnW Wrote:  I don't think it was a moral argument. I think it was more along the lines of "an entire nation was involved so how can you just blame me?". Sort of a product of his environment argument.

I'm now reading his speech and I would say that there was element of "moral stand":

Quote:...[accused] joined to their units convinced that they have support, pushed by authentic and real moral strength. They thought that their work was required, even when they done it against own inclinations and interests, cause existence of their nation was in danger[...] Never they done something criminal nor they had such ideas.

Translation is mine own.

There are also others fragment pertaining to morality. Though indeed entirety of speech is more about inability of individual to not bow before the forces of history I would say than about making a moral stand. Having said that I still think he tried, partly at lest to use a moral card.

The first revolt is against the supreme tyranny of theology, of the phantom of God. As long as we have a master in heaven, we will be slaves on earth.

Mikhail Bakunin.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: