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

[Correll]

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?

Limiting it to two counties was a good thing, still are all the juries with NO black people in one country? 90%?

Yes, it COULD be true that "white men who didn't want to convict fellow whites", except that White guys don't go around calling each other brother, and have a meme of Evul White Cops keeping them down or To Many Blacks in Prison, or ect. ect. ect.

 

[Correll]

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.

That's true.

Plenty of white libs reflexively look for an excuse to give the black criminal a pass, especially if the victim is white.

 

[PredFan]

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?

Obviously, I was talking about after they were convicted. We ARE talking about convictions here.

Yes we HAVE to compare apples to apples or else the results are meaningless.

As for your last, don't be an idiot

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm sure this old, retired German wanted to do that. He was a very nasty person. But the cops would refuse to write a police report.

Then I would be filing a formal complaint against tbe officers.

Cops have wide discretion in their decision of who to arrest and who not to arrest. Your complaint would go nowhere.

Who in god's name would arrest someone for running over a mailbox? The police are going to give whoever did it the chance to make it right and then go on about their business and I don't think it would matter one iota what color anyone was who was involved! The complaint would go nowhere because if the person who caused the damage promised to make restitution then it SHOULDN'T go anywhere!

 

[Anathema]

Who in god's name would arrest someone for running over a mailbox? The police are going to give whoever did it the chance to make it right and then go on about their business and I don't think it would matter one iota what color anyone was who was involved! The complaint would go nowhere because if the person who caused the damage promised to make restitution then it SHOULDN'T go anywhere!

I would have no interest in restitution but I would get my pound of FLESH from them for certain.

 

[Asclepias]

I'm sure this old, retired German wanted to do that. He was a very nasty person. But the cops would refuse to write a police report.

Then I would be filing a formal complaint against tbe officers.

Cops have wide discretion in their decision of who to arrest and who not to arrest. Your complaint would go nowhere.

Who in god's name would arrest someone for running over a mailbox? The police are going to give whoever did it the chance to make it right and then go on about their business and I don't think it would matter one iota what color anyone was who was involved! The complaint would go nowhere because if the person who caused the damage promised to make restitution then it SHOULDN'T go anywhere!

Racists cops will arrest you for looking at them wrong. You will suddenly fit the description and find drugs planted on your person.

 

[Manonthestreet]

Not to mention

Why would I care?

A number of things in your post don't pass the smell test and frankly, I'm tired of people with agendas trying to put Me down for something I had no hand in.

Everyone is trying to get it better for themselves. That is why progressives lie like they do. They want it better for them, and they won't care if it is unfair to others.

So I don't care. If I get a break because I"m white, even though I didn't ask for it, good for Me and screw the rest of you.

Why do you equate acknowledging that biases exist in the system with trying to put you down?

Is it just part of the whole victim complex thing, or is it something else?

Simple. The attempts to define the bias are in fact, bias' themselves.

It is done by people who have an anti-white agenda, or some kind of guilt complex.

If they simply said, "The courts are being unfair in this situation" they may have a point.....but it never goes that way. It is a blame game.

The blacks have it bad in the court system because the whites don't! As if getting a break because your white is somehow a conspiracy.

As I said. I no longer care.

Do you know how you don't get screwed in the justice system?

Stay out of troubled with the law.

Not to mention author lists several ways blacks shoot themselves in the foot, disrespect.....outright hate......... but still blames whitey, BTW 75% of Americans are living paycheck to paycheck...so much for most whites have money for an attny

 

[Oldstyle]

My last two stints doing jury duty were down here in Florida and I was struck by how the jury pool seemed to be made up of the same types. It's really NOT representative of society. You've got a lot of retired people. (because they aren't having to take time away from work or family) You've got a lot of people who work government jobs (because they get paid their government wage not the pittance the rest of us get for being on a jury) Everyone else is either ignoring the summons they got...or coming up with an excuse they know will get them excused. That right there eliminates a wide swath of the population...and totally changes the makeup of juries.

 

[Oldstyle]

I'm sure this old, retired German wanted to do that. He was a very nasty person. But the cops would refuse to write a police report.

Then I would be filing a formal complaint against tbe officers.

Cops have wide discretion in their decision of who to arrest and who not to arrest. Your complaint would go nowhere.

Who in god's name would arrest someone for running over a mailbox? The police are going to give whoever did it the chance to make it right and then go on about their business and I don't think it would matter one iota what color anyone was who was involved! The complaint would go nowhere because if the person who caused the damage promised to make restitution then it SHOULDN'T go anywhere!

Racists cops will arrest you for looking at them wrong. You will suddenly fit the description and find drugs planted on your person.

The "myth" of the racist cop that plants drugs on innocent people is so over done as to be laughable, Milkweed! It's not like cops have any problems finding guilty people who have drugs in their possession! Whole neighborhoods are FILLED with them! Why would the police need to frame innocent people who "look at them wrong" when they're up to their eyeballs with people who aren't innocent?

 

[Asclepias]

I'm sure this old, retired German wanted to do that. He was a very nasty person. But the cops would refuse to write a police report.

Then I would be filing a formal complaint against tbe officers.

Cops have wide discretion in their decision of who to arrest and who not to arrest. Your complaint would go nowhere.

Who in god's name would arrest someone for running over a mailbox? The police are going to give whoever did it the chance to make it right and then go on about their business and I don't think it would matter one iota what color anyone was who was involved! The complaint would go nowhere because if the person who caused the damage promised to make restitution then it SHOULDN'T go anywhere!

Racists cops will arrest you for looking at them wrong. You will suddenly fit the description and find drugs planted on your person.

The "myth" of the racist cop that plants drugs on innocent people is so over done as to be laughable, Milkweed! It's not like cops have any problems finding guilty people who have drugs in their possession! Whole neighborhoods are FILLED with them! Why would the police need to frame innocent people who "look at them wrong" when they're up to their eyeballs with people who aren't innocent?

If you arent Black your opinion is the only thing laughable.

 

[mudwhistle]

 

[danielpalos]

My last two stints doing jury duty were down here in Florida and I was struck by how the jury pool seemed to be made up of the same types. It's really NOT representative of society. You've got a lot of retired people. (because they aren't having to take time away from work or family) You've got a lot of people who work government jobs (because they get paid their government wage not the pittance the rest of us get for being on a jury) Everyone else is either ignoring the summons they got...or coming up with an excuse they know will get them excused. That right there eliminates a wide swath of the population...and totally changes the makeup of juries.

I believe this social dilemma could be solved by solving another iniquity, a lack of unemployment compensation simply for being unemployed on an at-will basis in our at-will employment States.

 

[RKMBrown]

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.

So basically you're a racist. So while watching this proceeding you made up a bunch of racist shit in your head pretending what would have happened if the criminal was white. How long have you been a racist piece of shit?

 

[danielpalos]

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.

So basically you're a racist. So while watching this proceeding you made up a bunch of racist shit in your head pretending what would have happened if the criminal was white. How long have you been a racist piece of shit?

dude, it was hypothetical and in the alternative get with the legal program

 

[Oldstyle]

Who in god's name would arrest someone for running over a mailbox? The police are going to give whoever did it the chance to make it right and then go on about their business and I don't think it would matter one iota what color anyone was who was involved! The complaint would go nowhere because if the person who caused the damage promised to make restitution then it SHOULDN'T go anywhere!

I would have no interest in restitution but I would get my pound of FLESH from them for certain.

So instead of having the person buy you a new mailbox...you'd rather see them get arrested, put in jail, brought to court...where the judge would most likely simply have them buy you a new mailbox? Yeah, that's an intelligent approach to the situation!

 

[Oldstyle]

Then I would be filing a formal complaint against tbe officers.

Cops have wide discretion in their decision of who to arrest and who not to arrest. Your complaint would go nowhere.

Who in god's name would arrest someone for running over a mailbox? The police are going to give whoever did it the chance to make it right and then go on about their business and I don't think it would matter one iota what color anyone was who was involved! The complaint would go nowhere because if the person who caused the damage promised to make restitution then it SHOULDN'T go anywhere!

Racists cops will arrest you for looking at them wrong. You will suddenly fit the description and find drugs planted on your person.

The "myth" of the racist cop that plants drugs on innocent people is so over done as to be laughable, Milkweed! It's not like cops have any problems finding guilty people who have drugs in their possession! Whole neighborhoods are FILLED with them! Why would the police need to frame innocent people who "look at them wrong" when they're up to their eyeballs with people who aren't innocent?

If you arent Black your opinion is the only thing laughable.

So you can't refute my opinion but you will ignore it because I'm not the right color? You know what, Milkweed...you're your own worst enemy. You're Don Quixote wasting your time tilting at imaginary racist windmills.

 

[Anathema]

So instead of having the person buy you a new mailbox...you'd rather see them get arrested, put in jail, brought to court...where the judge would most likely simply have them buy you a new mailbox? Yeah, that's an intelligent approach to the situation!

No. If not properly punished i would get my pound of FLESH. I mean it literally.

 

[Oldstyle]

So instead of having the person buy you a new mailbox...you'd rather see them get arrested, put in jail, brought to court...where the judge would most likely simply have them buy you a new mailbox? Yeah, that's an intelligent approach to the situation!

No. If not properly punished i would get my pound of FLESH. I mean it literally.

Can you trade that pound of flesh in for a new mailbox at the Home Depot? Just saying...

 

[Anathema]

Can you trade that pound of flesh in for a new mailbox at the Home Depot? Just saying...

No. But it earns them a nice new pine box.

 

[Oldstyle]

Can you trade that pound of flesh in for a new mailbox at the Home Depot? Just saying...

No. But it earns them a nice new pine box.

You'd shoot someone over a mailbox? Don't you think that's a bit crazy? Like lock you up in a padded room and shoot you full of Thorazine crazy?