d2jsp
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > Justice For Brianna Taylor
1238Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Skinned
#1 Oct 24 2020 06:50am
Group: Member
Posts: 54,440
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 6,300.00
https://apnews.com/article/breonna-taylor-louisville-shootings-kentucky-4936db1c4c4c3844dba1197c89833242

This case of jury tampering by the state AG is about to explode.

Tl:dr Kentucky attorney general told jury not to consider charges on most of the officers then announced later to the public the jury didn't see fit to consider charges on other officers when jurors did but were instructed not to by same AG.

What an ethical failure. I do not think it would be a double jeopardy if the jurors were instructed to be part of a cover up?

This post was edited by Skinned on Oct 24 2020 06:52am
ofthevoid
#2 Oct 24 2020 07:28am
Group: Member
Posts: 8,983
Joined: Aug 11 2013
Gold: 1.22
Jurors instructed to be part of a cover up. :rolleyes: ok

You realize how tinfoily that sounds? Pretty sure anyone trying to do this would immediately be dissuaded from doing so because the blow back would be extremely significant.
Skinned
#3 Oct 24 2020 07:32am
Group: Member
Posts: 54,440
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 6,300.00
Quote (ofthevoid @ Oct 24 2020 09:28am)
Jurors instructed to be part of a cover up. :rolleyes: ok

You realize how tinfoily that sounds? Pretty sure anyone trying to do this would immediately be dissuaded from doing so because the blow back would be extremely significant.


Way to not read the article.

This guy believes in widespread voter fraud but thinks jury tampering isn't realistic :bonk:

If I said some famous Democrat was a pedophile you would be salivating like that last thread.

It's pretty direct from the jurors themselves how they were manipulated to exonerate the police in the public eye. They won the right to speak out about this from a judge as these things are usially confidential.

It's hilarious that you've been jousting windmills so long you can't identify a real scandal when you see it.

This post was edited by Skinned on Oct 24 2020 07:36am
ofthevoid
#4 Oct 24 2020 07:47am
Group: Member
Posts: 8,983
Joined: Aug 11 2013
Gold: 1.22
Quote (Skinned @ Oct 24 2020 09:32am)
Way to not read the article.

This guy believes in widespread voter fraud but thinks jury tampering isn't realistic :bonk:

If I said some famous Democrat was a pedophile you would be salivating like that last thread.

It's pretty direct from the jurors themselves how they were manipulated to exonerate the police in the public eye. They won the right to speak out about this from a judge as these things are usially confidential.

It's hilarious that you've been jousting windmills so long you can't identify a real scandal when you see it.


I'm specifically responding to your last sentence. Don't go on a tirade with a bunch of no u! irrelevant shit.

One or two jurors unhappy they couldn't charge the officers with whatever they wanted? Okay...what the fuck? Jurors don't bring up charges, the prosecutor does. The jurors job is to find the defendent(s) guilty or not, not to question the prosecutor and tell them what appropriate charges are or should be because this is a highly publicized case and they feel the pressure of the world in how they decide.

The prosecutor not bringing murder charges also happened for quite obvious reasons and there's no grand conspiracy here. I don't understand why the people screeching about this case can't be bothered to educate themselves on laws and how and when murder charges are appropriate.

We get it you and many like you want mob rule to overrule the law of the land but that's not how our justice system works.

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Oct 24 2020 07:51am
Djunior
#5 Oct 24 2020 07:52am
Group: Member
Posts: 5,680
Joined: Jun 27 2010
Gold: 104.50
Quote (Skinned @ Oct 24 2020 03:32pm)
Way to not read the article.

This guy believes in widespread voter fraud but thinks jury tampering isn't realistic :bonk:

If I said some famous Democrat was a pedophile you would be salivating like that last thread.

It's pretty direct from the jurors themselves how they were manipulated to exonerate the police in the public eye. They won the right to speak out about this from a judge as these things are usially confidential.

It's hilarious that you've been jousting windmills so long you can't identify a real scandal when you see it.


You believe vote by mail is safe, cannot be manipulated, and a jury working on such a case is corrupt and simply does everything this attorney tells them to do?

You'd be the person to be chanting joe biden's name while he's being sentenced for major corruption together with his crooked son hunter


Skinned
#6 Oct 24 2020 07:58am
Group: Member
Posts: 54,440
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 6,300.00
Quote (ofthevoid @ Oct 24 2020 09:47am)
I'm specifically responding to your last sentence. Don't go on a tirade with a bunch of no u! irrelevant shit.

One or two jurors unhappy they couldn't charge the officers with whatever they wanted? Okay...what the fuck? Jurors don't bring up charges, the prosecutor does. The jurors job is to find the defendent(s) guilty or not, not to question the prosecutor and tell them what appropriate charges are or should be because this is a highly publicized case and they feel the pressure of the world in how they decide.

The prosecutor not bringing murder charges also happened for quite obvious reasons and there's no grand conspiracy here. I don't understand why the people screeching about this case can't be bothered to educate themselves on laws and how and when murder charges are appropriate.

We get it you and many like you want mob rule to overrule the law of the land but that's not how our justice system works.


If you don't like hyperbolic then gtfo out of PaRD.


Quote (Djunior @ Oct 24 2020 09:52am)
You believe vote by mail is safe, cannot be manipulated, and a jury working on such a case is corrupt and simply does everything this attorney tells them to do?

You'd be the person to be chanting joe biden's name while he's being sentenced for major corruption together with his crooked son hunter


I'll chant Joe Biden's name while i teabag your decrepit mom later lol.

This is how much effort you two get.

Also, we do banking by mail and atm, voting is easier. We have the technology.

Quote (ofthevoid @ Oct 24 2020 09:47am)
I'm specifically responding to your last sentence. Don't go on a tirade with a bunch of no u! irrelevant shit.

One or two jurors unhappy they couldn't charge the officers with whatever they wanted? Okay...what the fuck? Jurors don't bring up charges, the prosecutor does. The jurors job is to find the defendent(s) guilty or not, not to question the prosecutor and tell them what appropriate charges are or should be because this is a highly publicized case and they feel the pressure of the world in how they decide.

The prosecutor not bringing murder charges also happened for quite obvious reasons and there's no grand conspiracy here. I don't understand why the people screeching about this case can't be bothered to educate themselves on laws and how and when murder charges are appropriate.

We get it you and many like you want mob rule to overrule the law of the land but that's not how our justice system works.


The prosecutor actually lied to the public about the due process surrounding death of a person and you're ok with it, on the record.

We have your value statement. You're one of the least intellectual among us (you're all pathos pathos pathos, no offense), and I would like to hear the answer from more rational users like Bogie, etc.


Quote (Djunior @ Oct 24 2020 09:52am)
You believe vote by mail is safe, cannot be manipulated, and a jury working on such a case is corrupt and simply does everything this attorney tells them to do?

You'd be the person to be chanting joe biden's name while he's being sentenced for major corruption together with his crooked son hunter


Undermining your complete argument, your president cast his ballot today: https://video.foxnews.com/v/6204376630001#sp=show-clips

This post was edited by Skinned on Oct 24 2020 08:16am
excellence
#7 Oct 24 2020 08:28am
Group: Member
Posts: 48,086
Joined: Sep 2 2004
Gold: 2,383.81
skinned blaming the black male again, just like a typical biden supporter does, shocker :rolleyes:
Skinned
#8 Oct 24 2020 08:43am
Group: Member
Posts: 54,440
Joined: Dec 3 2008
Gold: 6,300.00
Quote (excellence @ Oct 24 2020 10:28am)
skinned blaming the black male again, just like a typical biden supporter does, shocker :rolleyes:


How would you know if he is black? How are you going to assume that man voted for Joe Biden?
Surfpunk
#9 Oct 24 2020 09:10am
Group: Member
Posts: 28,292
Joined: Dec 29 2009
Gold: 1,739.26
Quote (ofthevoid @ Oct 24 2020 08:47am)
I'm specifically responding to your last sentence. Don't go on a tirade with a bunch of no u! irrelevant shit.

One or two jurors unhappy they couldn't charge the officers with whatever they wanted? Okay...what the fuck? Jurors don't bring up charges, the prosecutor does. The jurors job is to find the defendent(s) guilty or not, not to question the prosecutor and tell them what appropriate charges are or should be because this is a highly publicized case and they feel the pressure of the world in how they decide.

The prosecutor not bringing murder charges also happened for quite obvious reasons and there's no grand conspiracy here. I don't understand why the people screeching about this case can't be bothered to educate themselves on laws and how and when murder charges are appropriate.

We get it you and many like you want mob rule to overrule the law of the land but that's not how our justice system works.


A grand jury brings indictments, if it determines that the evidence presented to them in proceedings is sufficient. Grand jurors do not determine guilt. An attorney for the state (in this case, the Attorney General) attempting to dissuade charges being brought is straight up jury tampering.

https://kycourts.gov/juryduty/pages/faqs.aspx#:~:text=Grand%20jurors%20do%20not%20decide,the%20accused%20to%20stand%20trial.&text=After%20all%20evidence%20has%20been,whether%20to%20return%20an%20indictment.
ofthevoid
#10 Oct 24 2020 09:10am
Group: Member
Posts: 8,983
Joined: Aug 11 2013
Gold: 1.22
Quote (Skinned @ Oct 24 2020 09:58am)
The prosecutor actually lied to the public about the due process surrounding death of a person and you're ok with it, on the record.

We have your value statement. You're one of the least intellectual among us (you're all pathos pathos pathos, no offense), and I would like to hear the answer from more rational users like Bogie, etc.



[/URL]


Dude read your own article. You're making a molehill out of nothing. 1-2 wanting to bring higher charges while vast majority agreed to bring charges that are actually applicable =/= grand conspiracy by prosecutor to let cops of the hook.


Quote (Surfpunk @ Oct 24 2020 11:10am)
A grand jury brings indictments, if it determines that the evidence presented to them in proceedings is sufficient. Grand jurors do not determine guilt. An attorney for the state (in this case, the Attorney General) attempting to dissuade charges being brought is straight up jury tampering.

https://kycourts.gov/juryduty/pages/faqs.aspx#:~:text=Grand%20jurors%20do%20not%20decide,the%20accused%20to%20stand%20trial.&text=After%20all%20evidence%20has%20been,whether%20to%20return%20an%20indictment.


A grand jury needs a super majority to bring charges. 1 or 2 dissenters saying we want more while the rest agreeing that murder charges are not applicable is essentially agreeing with the prosecutor. If a prosecutor says 'there's not much here to bring murder charges' and most agree to you that's jury tampering?

What exactly is the jury tampering here, be specific?

This post was edited by ofthevoid on Oct 24 2020 09:17am
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
1238Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll