HansGruber
Ronin
Of course you are.
Vigilante justice. Are we reaching that point?
- Thread starter Onewolf426
- Start date
powerboatr
Professional
when i first HEARD it ..i thought sean connery died back in 21... what the fluckeder
but yes this kind of justice is not who we are yet.
i understand the thought that got the guy to do this, but still its not how we are operate
that being said
if my grand daughter was accosted and the person was set free or released on no bail and i knew he did it, or court decided he was innocent.
it would take an awful lot to not help him along his path of life towards the light.
not saying i would, but not saying i wouldnt.
2 wrongs are not correct, but i firmly agree if we as a country of laws dont get back to protecting victims and stop slapping wrists of criminals we may very well fall back to some semblance of the wild west
people need to be enlightened that nov is a serious time for our nation.
i know i dont have conversations with a guy that been dead nearly 20 years, two days ago.
but yes this kind of justice is not who we are yet.
i understand the thought that got the guy to do this, but still its not how we are operate
that being said
if my grand daughter was accosted and the person was set free or released on no bail and i knew he did it, or court decided he was innocent.
it would take an awful lot to not help him along his path of life towards the light.
not saying i would, but not saying i wouldnt.
2 wrongs are not correct, but i firmly agree if we as a country of laws dont get back to protecting victims and stop slapping wrists of criminals we may very well fall back to some semblance of the wild west
people need to be enlightened that nov is a serious time for our nation.
i know i dont have conversations with a guy that been dead nearly 20 years, two days ago.
Best not to say what you might do. I doubt there's anyone on this forum who is incapable of doing the unimaginable if a loved one is victimized by a thug, then victimized again by the Criminal Justice System. Your sense of powerlessness can overwhelm your morals and conscience. Even thinking could get you into trouble, like praying to yourself alone on a public sidewalk, in front of an abortion clinic.
These are my observations of our Criminal Justice System:
Police and prosecutors don't get to pick their victims. Police and prosecutors don't get to pick their witnesses. They have to deal with the evidence available to them and hope a jury comes to the right conclusion based on that evidence, not the character of a victim, a witness or the defendant. Some victims and witnesses are just as despicable as the defendant.
Judges generally don't allow anything to be introduced which could "prejudice the jury" against a defendant. But that's inferring that the Criminal Justice System doesn't trust that a jury can be fair and impartial with the excluded evidence. Excluding all available evidence from the jury is dishonest. But jurys are humans with biases and are unpredictable. Maybe AI is in our future Criminal Justice System.
It's been noted that 'scientific evidence' on tv crime programs has lead jurys to expect there is always fingerprints, trace evidence, DNA and amazing machines to solve cases. That's not realistic.
Prosecutors follow the rule "a prosecutor should not charge a defendant unless it is likely that the admissible evidence is sufficient to obtain a conviction and that the conviction will be upheld on appeal." They don't have unlimited budgets to prosecute every case. A grand jury might be used to test the strength of a case. Plea agreements are to often made to defendants when a jury should have considered the evidence. In some cases, a plea bargan is better than no prosecution. Victims frequently have no imput.
These are my observations of our Criminal Justice System:
Police and prosecutors don't get to pick their victims. Police and prosecutors don't get to pick their witnesses. They have to deal with the evidence available to them and hope a jury comes to the right conclusion based on that evidence, not the character of a victim, a witness or the defendant. Some victims and witnesses are just as despicable as the defendant.
Judges generally don't allow anything to be introduced which could "prejudice the jury" against a defendant. But that's inferring that the Criminal Justice System doesn't trust that a jury can be fair and impartial with the excluded evidence. Excluding all available evidence from the jury is dishonest. But jurys are humans with biases and are unpredictable. Maybe AI is in our future Criminal Justice System.
It's been noted that 'scientific evidence' on tv crime programs has lead jurys to expect there is always fingerprints, trace evidence, DNA and amazing machines to solve cases. That's not realistic.
Prosecutors follow the rule "a prosecutor should not charge a defendant unless it is likely that the admissible evidence is sufficient to obtain a conviction and that the conviction will be upheld on appeal." They don't have unlimited budgets to prosecute every case. A grand jury might be used to test the strength of a case. Plea agreements are to often made to defendants when a jury should have considered the evidence. In some cases, a plea bargan is better than no prosecution. Victims frequently have no imput.
Talyn
SAINT
Well, we know that's not happening anymore in certain notable cases.
bc22wm
Custom
Oh just lovely. let em eat bugs Gates, and Suckerburg get to "adjust" our justice system. What could go wrong?
