Any chance of convincing you two not to continue beating that dead horse all the way into the next thread?
Bryant Charged IV
Fri, 2009-09-04 00:32
#102
Lard Tunderin Jeezus
Fri, 2009-09-04 00:34
#103
Cueball
Probably not. Is there bandwidth restrictions or something? You are saying the nature of the charge is off-topic and irrelavant?
Fri, 2009-09-04 00:37
#104
Cueball
Really? Let me referesh your memory:
What was this, immediatly after you broached the topic of your first straw lecture:
I don't think so. Criminal negligence is a form of a manslaughter charge, but it is different that a manslaughter charge with intent, even if such intent is mitigated by other factors.
Does it sound like I am arguing that there is only one form of manslaughter conviction, as you repeated ad infinitum over and over again? No. You made that up.
I have also said, in one form or another the following:
Actually you just charge him with all of them at once, then remove those that don't seem likely to stick. That is what he would do if he were handling the case. You do it to sweat the suspect, and get them to plead quickly to the lesser charge. He's not pleading, of course, because he thinks he can get off on the lesser charge.
The logic has been consistent throughout. It is just that you were arguing about something else that I was not saying.
Fri, 2009-09-04 00:43
#105
Really? Let me referesh your memory:
What was this, immediatly after you broached the topic of your first straw lecture:
I don't think so. Criminal negligence is a form of a manslaughter charge, but it is different that a manslaughter charge with intent, even if such intent is mitigated by other factors.Does it sound like I am arguing that there is only one form of manslaughter conviction, as you repeated ad infinitum over and over again? No. You made that up.
No, it doesn't. It sounds like you are just talking nonsense. Manslaughter with intent?? WTF is that? Intent to do what exactly? The whole point of manslaughter is that there is no intent to kill. All along, you have been talking about a case of MURDER that is knocked down to manslaughter because of an extremely narrow (and problematic and hard to establish BTW) excuse: provocation. And it is all for naught anyway - the idea that this case even remotely approaches a case of provocation is truly, really, FAR OUT.
I would take out quite a large bet that when you first mused that Bryant ought to have been charged with manslaughter you were NOT thinking about the very peculiar, relatively rare manslaughter conviction that results if the accused was provoked. You searched the Code, and came upon that section, and have totally misread what it means, especially in terms of how the Crown lays charges in homicide cases. I am pretty sure you simply thought that manslaughter was somehow a more serious offence than criminal negligence.
Fri, 2009-09-04 01:06
#106
Cueball
Really? People have been arguing provocation in one form or another up and down these threads.
ETA, in response to your edit, since you have decided to get personal about it, I would take a very large bet that this whole little game of prevaricate the square is about the fact that you are miffed because you evidenced such an astounding lack of practical knowledge of how class operates to bias the "justice" system when you asserted that "bail wasnt punishment", and you were called on it. I get the sense that bail certainly would not be a punishment for you, it would be a mere formality, like it was for Bryant, whatever "unspecified conditions" were applied.
Unspecified condition in this case likely being: "This guy is has too much to lose to be a flight risk because he is too rich."
Fri, 2009-09-04 01:11
#107
ETA, in response to your edit, since you have decided to get personal about it, I would take a very large bet that this whole little game of prevaricate the square is about the fact that you are miffed because you evidenced such an astounding lack of practical knowledge of how class operates to bias the "justice" system when you asserted that "bail wasnt punishment", and you were called on it. I get the sense that bail certainly would not be a punishment for you, it would be a mere formality, like it was for Bryant, whatever "unspecified conditions" were applied.
Unspecified condition in this case likely being: "This guy is has too much to lose to be a flight risk because he is too rich."
Good grief. I read this site every day Cueball - I knew perfectly well what the reaction to my bail comment would be. I was neither offended nor miffed. It has had nothing to do with this other discussion, which I am content to end here, I'm sure to the relief of many.
Good night.
Fri, 2009-09-04 01:13
#108
Cueball
Good night. 
Fri, 2009-09-04 07:58
#109
A good place to close the long thread. I'm sure there will be more!
Pages
- « first
- ‹ previous
- 1
- 2
- 3