As a conservative attorney, I will admit that whites have it better in court than blacks or Hispanic

[Blackrook]

Many businesses have the same policy. An attempt to stop a shoplifter could lead to violence. It is easier just to write off the loss.

And what's wrong with violence?

They should hire some big, strong guy to beat the shit out of the thief.

I'd be for that.

That used to be what happened. But any incident of violence increases the chance that the business will be sued for excessive force. Insurance companies don't like to pay out claims, so they might be telling businesses not to interfere with shoplifters, as a condition of keeping their policy.

I once represented a night club. Four bouncers got a disruptive customer in a corner and beat the living shit out of him. The victim sued. I don't know how that case ended up, but most cases settle.

 

[Anathema]

Anathema, if you refused to help your own defense, I would have a psychologist meet with you, and he would write a report declaring that you are not competent to stand trial. If that happened, they would send you to a mental hospital, and you would stay there until you were "cured."

Guess I'd end up there permanently as I have no use for mental health professionals either.

 

[Blackrook]

Why would you refuse to cooperate in your defense? That doesn't even make sense.

My intent, should I ever be arrested is to inform the officer of the location of my wallet, the disposition of any weapons on my person and to invoke my Right to Remain Silent (permanently until released from custody) as I do not recognize the validity of the US Legal System.

Well, perhaps you should move to Idaho, find a log cabin and make it a fortress, stockpile on weapons, food and water, and declare yourself an independent nation, not subject to US law.

 

[Anathema]

Well, perhaps you should move to Idaho, find a log cabin and make it a fortress, stockpile on weapons, food and water, and declare yourself an independent nation, not subject to US law.

If money were available I'd be doing something very similar though in a warmer part of the country.

 

[PredFan]

Oh boo hoo! Try not doing the fucking crime moron.

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

 

[danielpalos]

why does the establishment prefer the moral turpitude of wilful appeal to ignorance of a federal doctrine and State laws regarding the concept of employment at will and unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in any at-will employment State?

 

[candycorn]

yea, this reeks of some bullshit.

whites can hire lawyers - the fuck we all can
most whites know lawyers - complete and utter nonsense

blacks go to court and just get fucked - learn how to act in court, show some respect and they won't.


took a buddy to court for a ticket, there was a black kid, whos PD was going to get him off, completely off his dope dealing charge. The judge didn't like it, but he agreed as long as he did community service. They bring the kid out, he's got his hat on sideways, won't stand up straight, slurs when he speaks and shows no respect. Judge sends him to jail, his PD has nothing that he can say b/c the kid was a dick.

So you admit the main point of what I said?

A young black man is prosecuted for shoplifting, he goes to prison and gets a felony conviction that will remain with him for the rest of his life.

A young white man caught for shoplifting. His parents will be called to pick him up at the station, after a stern warning.

No.

A young black man is prosecuted for shoplifting, acts the fool b/c he won't show any respect, he goes to prison and gets a felony conviction that will remain with him for the rest of his life.

A young white man caught for shoplifting. His parents will be called to pick him up at the station, after a stern warning. B/c he acted with respect and wasn't trying to get any street creds.



so the difference? blacks want street cred, whites want to go home
blacks demand to be respected, whites show respect

get it?

show up to court all pimped out or show up in a suit and tie?

one will help you get to jail the other will help you get off

see the point?


I know I'm going to be told I'm wrong, but people have to lie
I'm gunna get called a racist b/c people hate the truth.

So the truth is that your conviction and sentence have nothing to do with the crime and everything to do with your demeanor?

This is the real world and I understand what you're saying. If you took someone who looks and acts like Denzel Washington or Cuba Gooding and put them in front of a judge and someone who looks like Little Wayne or Snoop Dogg under identical circumstances, Denzel and Cuba will get likely probation and Little Wayne/Snoop Dogg will get detained.

You're stating the way it is. I get it. But the way it is remains unjust. The world of jurisprudence should never be based on "the way it is". It should always be a punishment that fit the crime regardless of whether the defendant is wearing a thousand dollar dress or pants with the waistband down to his ankles.

The cost of your cloths has no meaning.

I'll be willing to bet you knew what I meant. A person dressed nicely in conventionally acceptable garb will be looked upon more favorably than someone who dresses in a way that is outside of convention. Is that better?

Showing your ass, literally does. It means you don't care that you did the crime and will put forth no effort to correct yourself.

No, it means you are showing your ass. If the Judge or jury reads into that fact that the accused (they haven't been found guilty so they are as innocent as you or I) is showing their ass and they make assumptions as to the facts of the case or, if they go harsher in terms of sentencing; they are violating their oaths as jurists. Its that simple.

Its really remarkable that if a principal or teacher flunked a kid for wearing baggy pants or dressing outside of conventional standards but still within the rules; the public would be outraged. Yet if an adult does it, some here are ready to cheer if an over zealous judge or jury throws the book at them.

Lest you be the one that is on the receiving end of the book...

you act or dress a certain way, people, properly, will make assumptions about you. That is the way of the world.

Assumptions are fine. Assume all you want. You take an oath as a juror or as a judge and assumptions are not in the equation in discharging your duties.

 

[candycorn]

Oh boo hoo! Try not doing the fucking crime moron.

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

 

[PredFan]

Oh boo hoo! Try not doing the fucking crime moron.

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

 

[candycorn]

Oh boo hoo! Try not doing the fucking crime moron.

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

 

[PredFan]

Oh boo hoo! Try not doing the fucking crime moron.

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

Learn to read. I said no such thing. I have consistently called for scientific analysis under controlled conditions. I pointed out the glaring flaws in his claim and again in yours.

 

[candycorn]

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

Learn to read. I said no such thing. I have consistently called for scientific analysis under controlled conditions. I pointed out the glaring flaws in his claim and again in yours.

So 700 felony cases from 2 counties in one state over 10 years conducted by Duke University is a "flawed" study?

And you wonder why people dismiss you so easily and quickly. Simply put; you believe one thing and no amount of contrary evidence will ever convince you otherwise. Am I right? Come on, at least be man enough to admit that.

 

[Correll]

Oh boo hoo! Try not doing the fucking crime moron.

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

He could be right. Some blacks might be refusing to convict their "brothers" and that might be offsetting the higher real guilty rate that is found with all white juries.

Or the difference in juries might reflect differences in locations, that result in differences in the people arrested.

Or something else.

 

[candycorn]

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

He could be right. Some blacks might be refusing to convict their "brothers" and that might be offsetting the higher real guilty rate that is found with all white juries.

Or the difference in juries might reflect differences in locations, that result in differences in the people arrested.

Or something else.

Well, the test was over 10 years in 2 counties in Florida so I don't location is a factor. As for not willing to convict their "brothers", even with blacks (at least one black) in the jury pool, seven out of ten who were tried over those 10 years in those 2 counties were still convicted. Wouldn't the same be true for white men who didn't want to convict fellow whites--there were still over 70% for them as well?

 

[PredFan]

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

Learn to read. I said no such thing. I have consistently called for scientific analysis under controlled conditions. I pointed out the glaring flaws in his claim and again in yours.

So 700 felony cases from 2 counties in one state over 10 years conducted by Duke University is a "flawed" study?

And you wonder why people dismiss you so easily and quickly. Simply put; you believe one thing and no amount of contrary evidence will ever convince you otherwise. Am I right? Come on, at least be man enough to admit that.

Yes it has many flaws in fact. It shouldn't be difficult to understand that too many thing weren't taken into concideration. There were too few controls basically. If they didn't compare cases that were identical in key ways, it's invalid. For example: if a black man and a white man are charged with the same crime, the only way it would be a valid comparison would be if all things were taken into account: was the amount of evidence the same? Were the number of witnesses the same. Was it the first offense for both? Did they both have their own attorneys? Did they both have court appointed attorneys? This list of variables is too great.

In the end, as I have consistently stated, you did the crime, you cannot bitch about the penalty. You are NOT the victim.

 

[PredFan]

That's not the issue. I saw a black man put on trial for stealiing two armfuls of hair conditioner. A white man or woman who did the same thing would be let off with a warning.

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

He could be right. Some blacks might be refusing to convict their "brothers" and that might be offsetting the higher real guilty rate that is found with all white juries.

Or the difference in juries might reflect differences in locations, that result in differences in the people arrested.

Or something else.

There are far too many variables to make those statistics have any validity.

 

[PredFan]

Yeah that is the issue. You could compare any two cases, you will always find differences in judges decisions. Unless you have data that shows multiple cases of the same crime where consistently there is a disparity, you have no issue at all. I could cherry pick cases and find where one black thief got a lighter sentence for the same crime than another black person.

Therefor the real issue is stop committing crimes or shut the fuck up and accept your punishment.

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

He could be right. Some blacks might be refusing to convict their "brothers" and that might be offsetting the higher real guilty rate that is found with all white juries.

Or the difference in juries might reflect differences in locations, that result in differences in the people arrested.

Or something else.

Well, the test was over 10 years in 2 counties in Florida so I don't location is a factor. As for not willing to convict their "brothers", even with blacks (at least one black) in the jury pool, seven out of ten who were tried over those 10 years in those 2 counties were still convicted. Wouldn't the same be true for white men who didn't want to convict fellow whites--there were still over 70% for them as well?

No, it wouldn't be that same because whites don't base their decisions on skin color. To us a thug is a thug no matter what color he is. Still, as I have said, it's foolish to make ANY deductions from those stats.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I was sitting in court one day with some people from the Public Defender's office. I has asked them if I could volunteer.

While I was sitting there, a black man was the defendant at a preliminary hearing to determine if there was probable cause to prosecute him for shoplifting.

What this guy did was he grabbed two armfuls of hair conditioner and walk out of the store. An elderly security guard tried to get in his way, so the defendant pushed past him.

After the testimony of the security guard, the judge ordered that this black man be prosecuted for shoplifting, assault and battery committed against an elderly person.

The defense attorneys did nothing to help this black man. They just sat there and watched it happen.

They told me that some stores deliberately hire elderly security guards so they can get that enhancement of the assault charge.

Had this man been white, the story would have a much different ending. If he was a first offender, he would hae the charges dismissed in return for community service. He would not have a public defender, he would have an expensive private attorney representing him. His family would have put up the money to pay the attorney, borrowing if they had to, or putting a mortgage on their home.

And my guess is the assault and battery charge would have dismissed, because all he did is brush by him.

I am not a liberal, but I'm willing to admit this. People in the criminal system consider all blacks and Hispanics to be potential criminals, so they might as well get them in prison as soon as possible.

You're right,it would have turned out differently.
A white guy wouldnt have stolen hair care products in the first place.

 

[candycorn]

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

Learn to read. I said no such thing. I have consistently called for scientific analysis under controlled conditions. I pointed out the glaring flaws in his claim and again in yours.

So 700 felony cases from 2 counties in one state over 10 years conducted by Duke University is a "flawed" study?

And you wonder why people dismiss you so easily and quickly. Simply put; you believe one thing and no amount of contrary evidence will ever convince you otherwise. Am I right? Come on, at least be man enough to admit that.

Yes it has many flaws in fact. It shouldn't be difficult to understand that too many thing weren't taken into concideration. There were too few controls basically. If they didn't compare cases that were identical in key ways, it's invalid. For example: if a black man and a white man are charged with the same crime, the only way it would be a valid comparison would be if all things were taken into account: was the amount of evidence the same? Were the number of witnesses the same. Was it the first offense for both? Did they both have their own attorneys? Did they both have court appointed attorneys? This list of variables is too great.

In the end, as I have consistently stated, you did the crime, you cannot bitch about the penalty. You are NOT the victim.

At that point in the process, nobody has been found guilty so you cannot state that "they did the crime". Unless you're a bigot.
So, for you to believe that blacks may not get a fair shake, their entire trial has to be a mirror image of the other one involving a white accused?

I'm curious; would the phases of the moon or temperature in the court room have to be the same too?

 

[candycorn]

Clearly showing that blacks often decide by skin color.

These kind of stats are what people mean by "lying with statistics". Too much is left out of these cases. The only way to find out if it's true would be to have a scientific study, with controls and strict criteria. That is raw data which is meaningless.

Still, they have no legitimate complaint. You did the crime, it's totally on you. You are NOT the victim.

You said there was too small a sample sized and asked for multiple cases to be examined. I show you a study of 700 cases and boom; there go the goalposts. Lift with your knees; not your back. You asked for similar cases; the 700 in the study are all felonies. Boom, once again, the goalposts get moved by you. Then you attack the results saying that "blacks decide by skin color". Obvious and purposeful mis-representation of the truth. The data from the study shows that when you have a black in the jury pool, the conviction rates are nearly identical.

He could be right. Some blacks might be refusing to convict their "brothers" and that might be offsetting the higher real guilty rate that is found with all white juries.

Or the difference in juries might reflect differences in locations, that result in differences in the people arrested.

Or something else.

Well, the test was over 10 years in 2 counties in Florida so I don't location is a factor. As for not willing to convict their "brothers", even with blacks (at least one black) in the jury pool, seven out of ten who were tried over those 10 years in those 2 counties were still convicted. Wouldn't the same be true for white men who didn't want to convict fellow whites--there were still over 70% for them as well?

No, it wouldn't be that same because whites don't base their decisions on skin color. To us a thug is a thug no matter what color he is. Still, as I have said, it's foolish to make ANY deductions from those stats.

"No, it wouldn't be that same because whites don't base their decisions on skin color."


Thanks for that chuckle.