The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading The Political Forum I guess we will know soon . . .Go | New | Find | Notify | Tools | Reply | |
| One of Us |
lol.... -Every damn thing is your own fault if you are any good. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Guilty on all counts. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I guess maybe it was "iron clad".....  -Every damn thing is your own fault if you are any good. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Naw, the DNC set up offshore accounts for each juror. President Biden came into the jury room, and in his feebleness signed for the foreman. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Don't give Lane any ideas.  -Every damn thing is your own fault if you are any good. | |||
|
| one of us |
ok how many Trumpsters heads are going to explode now?  | |||
|
| One of Us |
The usual suspects will show up, ignore the fact that trump screwed a porn star and paid her off to keep it quiet so it wouldn't hurt him in the polls and is a convicted felon and then tell us how he should be the leader of the most powerful nation on earth. -Every damn thing is your own fault if you are any good. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I hope no one has lied on their taxes. Texas may encourage tax fraud. | |||
|
One of Us |
Lane let me understand this then 1. Was Trump's tryst with Stormy Daniels ethical? It was legal. 2. Was Trump paying Story Daniels for a NDA ethical? It was legal in its own limited context. 3. Was Trump falsifying the records to say that the payment was "legal fees" ethical? It was ILLEGAL. A felony 4. Was Trump's instruction to his various minions to cover up the story, cover up the payment and the rest ethical? It was also a felony when linked to the other crimes. You cannot have the cake and eat it too. You cannot lose the legal argument and claim an ethical win. You have lost the ethical argument as well but are trying to deflect. You know that the MAGA movement is a racist, bigoted and unethical one and yet you claim moral high ground.
"When the wind stops....start rowing. When the wind starts, get the sail up quick." | |||
|
| One of Us |
As usual, Dr. Easter our resident expert on Christian ethics has refused to answer direct questions. | |||
|
| One of Us |
When he does reply to a question, it's more of an emotional response than a reasoned answer. | |||
|
One of Us |
Ethical — Being in accordance with the accepted principles of right and wrong that govern the conduct of a profession
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J. Lane Easter, DVM A born Texan has instilled in his system a mind-set of no retreat or no surrender. I wish everyone the world over had the dominating spirit that motivates Texans.– Billy Clayton, Speaker of the Texas House No state commands such fierce pride and loyalty. Lesser mortals are pitied for their misfortune in not being born in Texas.— Queen Elizabeth II on her visit to Texas in May, 1991. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Funny but the jury did not seem to find Trump's actions legally debatable, a quick and unanimous decision from the 12 people who were instructed on the law and heard the evidence. It appears the only real debate about this case is among those of you still embracing "alternative facts". | |||
|
One of Us |
Almost six weeks of testimony, represented by the best lawyers his supporters' money could buy and it took a jury of twelve people to unanimously find him guilty on all 34 counts in less than two days of deliberations . . . seems like the jurors must have found the law and the evidence pretty damn compelling. When you are riding for the brand and you find out the brand is actually a criminal gang, one would think a rider with any sense whatsoever would recant. Maybe it turns out that they like riding with the gang. Mike | |||
|
One of Us |
Interesting quote below: So tell us THE specific crime precedent that Trump committed and all 12 jurors believed beyond a reasonable doubt Trump committed. You can’t because the judge instructed that a unanimous verdict wasn’t necessary. So all this certainty of what was proved is not well founded. It’s pure speculation and that can’t be fixed by wishing it so. The leap of faith upon which your opinion is based threatens all due process and unanimity formerly required in the American criminal system. Can you tell me with any certainly that the entire jury believed unanimously trump had criminal intent when he signed the check (or if he even signed it). Nope. Can you tell me with any certainly the jury was convinced beyond a reasonable doubt that the jury believed the intent was to have an effect on the election. Nope. Tell me how you know that the jury didnt split 4+4+4, and no crime precedent was never proved. You can’t. None of my above is arguing that Trump didn’t have criminal intent, but our system, for which you stand, is jeopardized by watering down the states burden of proof. JMHO.
JudgeG ... just counting time 'til I am again finding balm in Gilead chilled out somewhere in the Selous. | |||
|
| One of Us |
12 jurors each responded guilty to all 34 counts, more obfuscation from the MAGA crowd. Trump is nothing more than an amoral criminal, and yet he remains the Orange Jesus to his cult of followers. Truly amazing times we are living in, and not in a good way. The presumptive GOP nominee for POTUS and his list of faults is getting too long recite. Liar, cheat, fraud, philanderer, convicted in civil court of sexual assault, convicted felon(34 times), seditionist, the man behind the "perfect phone call" to Rafensperger asking him to "find" only 11,780 votes.....and yet the MAGA crowd is still right there to support him. Utterly shocking..... | |||
|
| One of Us |
I don’t think you understand my point that burden of proof was compromised.
JudgeG ... just counting time 'til I am again finding balm in Gilead chilled out somewhere in the Selous. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I understand perfectly, you are using the tried and true technique of obfuscation in an attempt to cloud the issue. The jury verdict was unanimous and the evidence overwhelming. Your boy is a criminal, and his conduct finally has caught up to him. The GOP claims to be the party of law and order....except when the criminal in question is also the party's presumptive nominee for POTUS, then you back the criminal instead of the rule of law. It could not be much more simple.....win at all costs. | |||
|
| One of Us |
The Court used a model instruction to instruct on the correct burden of proof. There was no compromised burden of proof. You have gone too far. I can cat fur certainty what the jury believed. Guilty on all 34 counts. Stated on the jury verdict form and individually when polled. They all were unanimous. You are mischaracterizing the instruction. They, individually, had to believe beyond a red doubt a lawful purpose the my law required. The jurors were free to pick which theory of unlawful means. The appellate courts will tell us, but I’ll take the position the judge properly instructed. Even if the Judge had not, the defense has to object w specific legal grounds, and proffer an opposing instruction to preserve an appeal based on an instruction. | |||
|
| One of Us |
There is no doubt that Trump was personally involved in falsifying documents submitted to state government officials. That is a low grade crime. There is also no doubt that Trump committed that crime to cover up several other crimes. He was illegally avoiding taxes. He was illegally interfering in elections, etc. The evidence is concrete and beyond reasonable doubt. Whether all jurors agree on the same crime is irrelevant as they agreed on all 34 charges. It is humanly impossible to get 12 people to arrive at identical positions. LOCK HIM UP.
"When the wind stops....start rowing. When the wind starts, get the sail up quick." | |||
|
| One of Us |
"Utterly shocking....." Not any more. Standard GOP party politics for quite some time now. | |||
|
| One of Us |
It would be interesting to know how jury selection is conducted. Are the names, of people from all walks of life, randomly picked out of a hat by a computer maybe? | |||
|
| One of Us |
This post is bullshit. See the separate thread I started about jury instructions. Our learned judge obviously is not, and never was, a real judge. | |||
|
| One of Us |
I can tell you how it works in Alaska, and I think most states are the same or similar. The jury pool is indeed selected by computer from databases like driver's licenses, voter registration, even hunting and fishing licenses. Notices are sent. The people in the jury pool have to call in on Sunday night to see if they must report to the jury clerk's office on Monday morning. In court, twelve prospective jurors are seated in the jury box (again, randomly) and questioned by the lawyers. Their purpose is to ferret out bias, and they will challenge the juror for cause if they think the bias is adverse to their side. The judge rules on the challenge. If upheld, the prospective juror is dismissed and a new juror is selected randomly to fill the vacant seat. Each party then gets preemptory challenges, which may be arbitrary, just because they don't like the jurors' looks. In civil trials, each side get three preemptory challenges. In criminal cases, the prosecution gets three and the defendant gets six. | |||
|
| One of Us |
Yes, jurors from the jurisdiction are randomly selected by a computer by the Clerk of the Court. There is actually three random selections. 1 One selection to jury duty. 2) Selection pool/panel as District, Circuit, or Grand Jury. 3) The final random selection are those of a panel being selected to a specific jury for a trial. This does not include the Grand Jury. Here the Chief Circuit Judge for the jurisdiction tells the Clerk how many people to have selected for jury service. In my home county, that number is anywhere from 200 to 500 hundred people. Louisville will have a much higher pool. From this number the jury panel is selected again by random draw to make a panel of 11 or 6 depending on the case. This panel is then quested, voir dire, to adreesss prejudices of the jury. See Rolland above. The final 6 or 12 (depending on case) is called the petite jury. They hear the case. When the entire jury pool is selected, the juries have to feel out questionnaires at orientation that starts the pools service. The questionnaires give name, dob, education. Length of residency, place of birth, employment history, and criminal record of any. Another thing that may be permitted is instead of “Voir Diring” the panel and pool at the same time, is Voir Dire of individual hours as they are selected (by random draw) to the panel. This takes forever meaning a better part of a month. I have only seen it permitted in Capital offense where such practice is mandated by law when a defendant ask for it. They always ask, and I would too. In theory, individual voir dire can granted in other cases, but 1) I have never seen it done, and 2) a judge has never been overruled for not allowing the practice as an abuse of discretion. | |||
|
| Powered by Social Strata | Page 1 2 |
 | Please Wait. Your request is being processed... |
|
The Accurate Reloading Forums THE ACCURATE RELOADING.COM FORUMS Guns, Politics, Gunsmithing & Reloading The Political Forum I guess we will know soon . . .
Visit our on-line store for AR Memorabilia
Since January 8 1998 you are visitor #: