WTH IS GOING ON?
Registered User
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 65,827
Likes: 2
From: FCUK
Originally Posted by KenS2K,Mar 12 2005, 10:49 AM
They tried him once and couldn't get a conviction. They were going for it again violating his constitutional rights. I don't blame the dude. When you have nothing left to loose you fight.
Our justice system is currupt and in serious need of an enema.
Our justice system is currupt and in serious need of an enema.
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 51,814
Likes: 5
From: par•a•dox
Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Judge and crew are guilty. Brian justly convicted them. The prosecutor was obviously lucky she hadn't entered the courtroom yet.
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the Militia, when in actual service in time of War or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Judge and crew are guilty. Brian justly convicted them. The prosecutor was obviously lucky she hadn't entered the courtroom yet.
Joined: May 2001
Posts: 93,305
Likes: 820
From: Nowhere
I read some quotes from the jurors... a few said "it was fairly obvious he was guilty, but the prosecution did such a poor job of proving it, we couldn't fairly convict him"
Doesn't justify opening fire though...
Doesn't justify opening fire though...
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 28,136
Likes: 8
From: Seattle, Washington
I'm running on the theory that since there was no disposition from the first trial, the guy is not protected by the 5th. if the thread is still around and kicking tomorrow I'll have an answer from some people that know a bit more about law than my dad and I.
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 51,814
Likes: 5
From: par•a•dox
Disposition or not everyone has 5th amendment rights. A disposition requires the judges ruling. When the judge is in on the corruption the defendant needs no such disposition. The defendant was already subjected to trial for the offense. The prosecution was unable to get a jury to convict him during the trial. Subjecting the defendant to a 2nd trial for the same offense is simply a violation of his rights. End of story.
The 'entire text' of the 5th is in my above post for anyone 'lawyer or layman' to read. Law expert or common man alike. Any additional interpretation to what "is = is" would be simply diaprax. Diaprax is the biggest tool our lawyers and activist judges are using to usurp the foundations of law and our freedom.
Pardon my passion.
"When the government fears the people, you have liberty; when the people fear the government, you have tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson
The 'entire text' of the 5th is in my above post for anyone 'lawyer or layman' to read. Law expert or common man alike. Any additional interpretation to what "is = is" would be simply diaprax. Diaprax is the biggest tool our lawyers and activist judges are using to usurp the foundations of law and our freedom.
Pardon my passion.
"When the government fears the people, you have liberty; when the people fear the government, you have tyranny." -- Thomas Jefferson