RE: Strange that this never hit the forum....

RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 9:15:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why bother with a trial? Cleary that was in reference to those found guilty of crimes like this. It wasnt clear. Not only was it not clear, you felt the need to state just how clear it was to back pedal your way out of your own mistakes. You werent discussing those found guilty, you were discussing these two specifically.

BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 9:36:58 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why bother with a trial? Cleary that was in reference to those found guilty of crimes like this. It wasnt clear. Not only was it not clear, you felt the need to state just how clear it was to back pedal your way out of your own mistakes. You werent discussing those found guilty, you were discussing these two specifically. Again when did you think you started reading minds. You are not only putting words in my mouth, but thoughts in my head.

BamaD -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 9:38:40 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl Why bother with a trial? Cleary that was in reference to those found guilty of crimes like this. It wasnt clear. Not only was it not clear, you felt the need to state just how clear it was to back pedal your way out of your own mistakes. You werent discussing those found guilty, you were discussing these two specifically. I felt the need to state how clear it was because you didn't understand.

tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 9:48:37 AM)
~FR Back on topic.... One of the teenagers arrested in the brutal beating death of 88-year-old Delbert “Shorty” Belton says he initially approached the World War II veteran to buy crack, then the exchange turned violent. That bit of information came to light in court on Monday when prosecutors said police discovered a letter one of the suspects, Kenan Adams-Kinard, 16, wrote to his mother. Kenan reportedly wrote that he and his friend beat Mr. Belton because he didn’t give them the crack cocaine they had paid him for, The Blaze reported. http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/aug/28/delbert-beltons-accused-killer-claims-veteran-88-s/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS#ixzz2dHcIMY3U I dont buy it.. neither does the man's family. But this part bothers me.... The attorney for his suspected accomplice, Demetrius Glenn, 16, doesn’t buy the crack defense, either, telling NBC that “it doesn’t seem plausible to me. I wouldn’t put any stock in it at this point." That just doesnt sit right with me.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 9:50:44 AM)
So they're allegedly not just killers but crack heads too.

tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 9:51:55 AM)
lol.. apparently so I was speaking more about the actions of the lawyer. Isnt it his job to provide the best defense possible? Yet here he is, stating that a possible defense isnt "plausible"?

DaddySatyr -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 9:54:22 AM)
Here we go! Now it's time for one of the lunatic left's favorite sports: BLAME THE VICTIM Fucking laughable. Who cares if it was a drug deal gone wrong (I ain't buying it. It sounds like C.Y.O.A. to me)? A person lost their life; just like St. Trayvon's motives didn't matter when he was killed. Right? Not for the PPLs on the left, of course; with their moveable goalposts of morality.

tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 9:57:40 AM)
Oh get over yourself... no one here is blaming the victim. I posted that because of the actions of the lawyer... as I clearly stated.. no one is buying the excuse.

hlen5 -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 10:11:59 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl lol.. apparently so I was speaking more about the actions of the lawyer. Isnt it his job to provide the best defense possible? Yet here he is, stating that a possible defense isnt "plausible"? I agree. If you are his DEFENSE lawyer, defend him.

Hillwilliam -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 10:35:15 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Here we go! Now it's time for one of the lunatic left's favorite sports: BLAME THE VICTIM Fucking laughable. Who cares if it was a drug deal gone wrong (I ain't buying it. It sounds like C.Y.O.A. to me)? A person lost their life; just like St. Trayvon's motives didn't matter when he was killed. Right? Not for the PPLs on the left, of course; with their moveable goalposts of morality. I don't see anyone blaming the victim except the little ALLEGED murderer/crackhead. Even his defense attorney seems to feel it's BS.

Lucylastic -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 10:40:06 AM)
seething paranoia drools un-bidden without fact

DesideriScuri -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:12:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl lol.. apparently so I was speaking more about the actions of the lawyer. Isnt it his job to provide the best defense possible? Yet here he is, stating that a possible defense isnt "plausible"? Is a defense lawyer not bound to tell the truth, or are defense lawyers allowed to lie? If the defense lawyer for Kid#2 thinks the "story" given by Kid#1 (it looks like he's not the lawyer for Kid#1) isn't plausible, wouldn't it not be a possible defense?

DesideriScuri -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:13:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Here we go! Now it's time for one of the lunatic left's favorite sports: BLAME THE VICTIM Fucking laughable. Who cares if it was a drug deal gone wrong (I ain't buying it. It sounds like C.Y.O.A. to me)? A person lost their life; just like St. Trayvon's motives didn't matter when he was killed. Right? Not for the PPLs on the left, of course; with their moveable goalposts of morality. I don't see anyone blaming the victim except the little ALLEGED murderer/crackhead. Even his defense attorney seems to feel it's BS. And the police chief, which has already been linked to...

tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:21:36 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl lol.. apparently so I was speaking more about the actions of the lawyer. Isnt it his job to provide the best defense possible? Yet here he is, stating that a possible defense isnt "plausible"? Is a defense lawyer not bound to tell the truth, or are defense lawyers allowed to lie? If the defense lawyer for Kid#2 thinks the "story" given by Kid#1 (it looks like he's not the lawyer for Kid#1) isn't plausible, wouldn't it not be a possible defense? No, they arent bound to tell the truth. Ever see one take an oath? The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct states that a lawyer “shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact.” - The question should be asked... are lawyers required to know what the truth is? Again, the answer is no.

DesideriScuri -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:25:18 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl lol.. apparently so I was speaking more about the actions of the lawyer. Isnt it his job to provide the best defense possible? Yet here he is, stating that a possible defense isnt "plausible"? Is a defense lawyer not bound to tell the truth, or are defense lawyers allowed to lie? If the defense lawyer for Kid#2 thinks the "story" given by Kid#1 (it looks like he's not the lawyer for Kid#1) isn't plausible, wouldn't it not be a possible defense? No, they arent bound to tell the truth. Ever see one take an oath? The American Bar Association’s Model Rules of Professional Conduct states that a lawyer “shall not knowingly make a false statement of material fact.” - The question should be asked... are lawyers required to know what the truth is? Again, the answer is no. So, a defense is put forward, a defense lawyer doesn't think it's plausible, he/she can't say so? If it's implausible, how could it be part of the best defense possible?

Lucylastic -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:28:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Here we go! Now it's time for one of the lunatic left's favorite sports: BLAME THE VICTIM Fucking laughable. Who cares if it was a drug deal gone wrong (I ain't buying it. It sounds like C.Y.O.A. to me)? A person lost their life; just like St. Trayvon's motives didn't matter when he was killed. Right? Not for the PPLs on the left, of course; with their moveable goalposts of morality. I don't see anyone blaming the victim except the little ALLEGED murderer/crackhead. Even his defense attorney seems to feel it's BS. And the police chief, which has already been linked to... hmmmmm so the police chief is now the lunatic left? its a veiled attack to the left leaning posters here and nothing more

DaddySatyr -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:32:53 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri So, a defense is put forward, a defense lawyer doesn't think it's plausible, he/she can't say so? If it's implausible, how could it be part of the best defense possible? A defense lawyer is only bound to not lie in that if they *know* that a defense is false, they cannot present it. They have to know it for a fact. It's one of the reasons defense lawyers almost never ask a client if they're innocent or guilty. They don't want to know. A simple example would be: A lady that you know claims that you are the father of her child. You hire a lawyer and go and get a DNA test done. The test confirms that there is a 99.99999999997% probability that you *are* the father. Forgetting that her attorney could find out through recipricol discovery, your attorney is compelled NOT to argue that the child isn't yours. Conversely; the defense can put forth a theory that isn't absolutely untrue ie; each of these attornies can argue that the other defendants (not their particular client) were the actual murderer because nothing has been proven, yet. They're not violating the code of ethics. Regards, F. Lee Bailey

DesideriScuri -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:33:16 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Here we go! Now it's time for one of the lunatic left's favorite sports: BLAME THE VICTIM Fucking laughable. Who cares if it was a drug deal gone wrong (I ain't buying it. It sounds like C.Y.O.A. to me)? A person lost their life; just like St. Trayvon's motives didn't matter when he was killed. Right? Not for the PPLs on the left, of course; with their moveable goalposts of morality. I don't see anyone blaming the victim except the little ALLEGED murderer/crackhead. Even his defense attorney seems to feel it's BS. And the police chief, which has already been linked to... hmmmmm so the police chief is now the lunatic left? its a veiled attack to the left leaning posters here and nothing more I really hope this wasn't in response to me. My post of the story given by the chief was before the "lunatic left" comment. Not only that, but my response was to Hill who stated that he hasn't seen anyone blaming the victim other than one of the kids. If your post wasn't in response to mine, well, nothing to see here... move along.. lol [:D]

Lucylastic -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:40:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Lucylastic quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: Hillwilliam quote: ORIGINAL: DaddySatyr Here we go! Now it's time for one of the lunatic left's favorite sports: BLAME THE VICTIM Fucking laughable. Who cares if it was a drug deal gone wrong (I ain't buying it. It sounds like C.Y.O.A. to me)? A person lost their life; just like St. Trayvon's motives didn't matter when he was killed. Right? Not for the PPLs on the left, of course; with their moveable goalposts of morality. I don't see anyone blaming the victim except the little ALLEGED murderer/crackhead. Even his defense attorney seems to feel it's BS. And the police chief, which has already been linked to... hmmmmm so the police chief is now the lunatic left? its a veiled attack to the left leaning posters here and nothing more I really hope this wasn't in response to me. My post of the story given by the chief was before the "lunatic left" comment. Not only that, but my response was to Hill who stated that he hasn't seen anyone blaming the victim other than one of the kids. If your post wasn't in response to mine, well, nothing to see here... move along.. lol [:D] not aimed at you .... yeah I know shocking isnt it:) grins

tazzygirl -> RE: Strange that this never hit the forum.... (8/28/2013 11:41:16 AM)
quote: So, a defense is put forward, a defense lawyer doesn't think it's plausible, he/she can't say so? If it's implausible, how could it be part of the best defense possible? Because saying its implausible without knowing factually isnt in his client's best interests. All avenues of defense should be explored.

Page: << < prev 3 4 [5] 6 7 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875