njlauren
Posts: 1577
Joined: 10/1/2011
Status: offline
|
The whole "thought police" nonsense has been spouted ad infinitum, usually for ulterior motives. You hear right wing types arguing that hate crimes laws are 'thought crimes', that some fundy dipshit yelling that gays are evil will be put in jail for that, and that is hogwash. Some countries have such laws, Canada does, but the US does not. I have heard fellow middle class white people telling me those laws are unfair, because if someone kills a black person they will get an extended sentence, while if a white person was killed by a black person, it would be simply murder...which is bullshit, because both of those would be hate crimes if race was a motivation. If you kill someone who is gay to steal their wallet, it isn't a hate crime, if you kill them because they are gay, it is a crime.
Why am I bringing that up? Because it has something in common with conspiracy, it isn't easy, despite what darkfeather says, and it is quite obviously that he has never researched this, because if he did, he would see something, that there is a huge burden of proof on both of these. If a black guy kills a white guy, they have to show proof race was the motive, and that motive can be shown by the person's speech (if he said "I hate white fucks, they all should died", or had black panther literature around his apartment, or people testified he said he was going to go out and get some motherfucking white bastard"), then yes, they could get a conviction, but there needs to be a chain of evidence, and it isn't all that easy.
If you are going to charge someone with conspiracy, you have to show that they actively were involved in it. If I post a message online that says "I want to kill my boss" that is not conspiracy; on the other hand, if I post a message online that says "I want to kill my boss", then I go out and buy a gun, surveillance tapes capture the fact that I have been hanging out near the bosses house, I have researched the best way to shoot and kill someone, there is a pattern of evidence that has to be there to prove I had real intent to commit the crime.
I saw something like this once when I was on a jury in the Bronx when I lived there. Got onto a 5 dollar buy and bust case (undercover cop bought a 5$ dial vial of crack from the defendant), pretty vanilla, cop bought the vial from the guy, id'ed himself as undercover cop, guy ran off, through some stuff over the railing of the front stoop of a nearby building, was arrested by back up cops. I couldn't believe this even got to trial, chances are if convicted the guy would get off with time served...
Well, anyway, we go to deliberate, and it was like holy shit, all these perry mason types wondering why the cop wasn't carrying a wire, why they chose this particular person to buy from, what the motives were, could they have planted it on him........ if this guy had been some major drug kingpin, maybe, but a street buy and bust for a 5 dollar buy? Really, they are going to use wires and elaborate backup schemes and surveillance? And the cops, assuming they wanted to set this guy up, would do it for 5 bucks worth of crack? If they were going to frame him, they would plant coke in his apartment and nail him on major charges, 5 bucks worth of crack would get you time served back then (this was late 80's/early 90's, when the murder rate in NYC was 2500 a year). It is the same idea, that the cops were just out to get this guy, set up an elaborate entrapment , just to see him potentially get released with time served *shaking head*. It is much the same mentality here, where Dark Feather is basically accusing the cops, the da's office, all these government agencies, of busting someone for planning something when they should have gone further and 'caught him in the act'..it is like the people on the jury I am on, wondering why the cops didn't have a wire on the undercover guy and video surveillance and such as proof it was fishy.
In a sense, Dark feather wants it to be both ways. He complains (probably rightfully) about a lazy cop who harassed him because some people claimed he was suspicious for being a black guy near an expensive car, but then in effect he is saying the cops took all the time to gather the e-mail evidence, sift through his online records, texts, tracked his activity, all of which took a lot of time and effort and money, something the cop in his case didn't do, yet projects on them the same thing, when in the case of the cannibal cop, they did a lot of work
The other thing he is leaving out is that the cops didn't make the decision, that it took a whole chain, from the initial cops who took the wife's complaint, to the detectives who checked it out, to the da's investigators who checked into it, to the ADA and DA that made the decision to prosecute him, and saying they are lazy is kind of stupid, one stupid cop harrassing someone because they are lazy, sure, a whole department being lazy like that, when DA's routinely turn away cases they think are untriable, doesn't make sense.
It kind of reminds me of the anti government types, who cause me a big case of cognitive dissonance, because from the same person you will hear how stupid the government is, how inefficient, how they buy 5000 dollar hammers and so forth, spend money researching body odor of prairie dogs, spent 500k on security for the miss hog festival in Meridien, Miss, and ha ha how stupid they are, then the same person will turn around and feed you this whole cock and bull about the government with the black helicopters and the elaborate schemes to spy on ordinary citizens and the like......so which is it, is the government a bumbling bunch of idiots who can't do anything right or a bunch of savvy fascists successfully conspiring to turn sovereignty of the US over to the UN?
The real answer is that the DA's office aren't lazy, and they have such a workload that they won't try a conspiracy case unless the think they have iron clad evidence it is real, pure and simple. The calendar is just too crowded, they plea bargain some ridiculous percentage of cases, just to keep their head above water, so why would they go through the bother of trying someone like this clown for conspiracy if they didn't think they had enough evidence to make it stick? Why add another load to the docket they don't need to? If they are really that lazy, then they wouldn't prosecute the guy, they would simply say there isn't enough evidence and not even bring it in front of the grand jury, that would be one less case they would have to deal with. I don't know where you live, Darkfeather, but the DA's offices in NYC, all 5 boroughs, are some of the heaviest case loads in the world, and I a speaking from experience. Two relatives of mine were ADA's, and another friend was an investigator for the Manhattan DA's office.
|
RE: At what point does deviant sexual mental fantasy be... - 
Profile
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread