Do Prosecuting Attorneys Have Morals?

[BigPapaKain]

(11-20-2021, 11:21 PM)Sled21 Wrote: They sure have big families and lots of friends as they rioted in Portland and Chicago last night. AFWIW, I doubt the child molestor had all that many friends.

So you're moving the goal posts and ignoring the question I asked. Cool.

[GMDino]

(11-21-2021, 06:43 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: So you're moving the goal posts and ignoring the question I asked. Cool.

See for some it's okay that a person got shot because he was a bad guy before that.  And if you say people shouldn't get shot you get told you're defending bad guys.

Past history of people shot only matters when you support the guy doing the shooting...and it doesn't matter about the shooter if you like him.

[BigPapaKain]

(11-21-2021, 07:06 PM)GMDino Wrote: See for some it's okay that a person got shot because he was a bad guy before that.  And if you say people shouldn't get shot you get told you're defending bad guys.

Past history of people shot only matters when you support the guy doing the shooting...and it doesn't matter about the shooter if you like him.

The saddest part is I'm not even upset about Lester the Child Molester getting offed - I'm of the belief that if you're found guilty of it they need to take you out back and put a bullet in your brain. I'm just trying to play Devil's Advocate here and I still can't get a straight answer.

[GMDino]

(11-21-2021, 07:24 PM)BigPapaKain Wrote: The saddest part is I'm not even upset about Lester the Child Molester getting offed - I'm of the belief that if you're found guilty of it they need to take you out back and put a bullet in your brain. I'm just trying to play Devil's Advocate here and I still can't get a straight answer.

I mean without know "all the facts" I'd generally say put 'em in a room with each other and let them sort it out (not a fan of the death penalty myself) but I get your gist.

I'm just going with the talking point that it's not enough that Rittenhouse legally defended himself they also have to make a case that anyone who didn't like him shooting people must be defending everything the people who got killed ever did in their life that was bad.

[BigPapaKain]

(11-21-2021, 08:13 PM)GMDino Wrote: I mean without know "all the facts" I'd generally say put 'em in a room with each other and let them sort it out (not a fan of the death penalty myself) but I get your gist.

I'm just going with the talking point that it's not enough that Rittenhouse legally defended himself they also have to make a case that anyone who didn't like him shooting people must be defending everything the people who got killed ever did in their life that was bad.

Eh, I have family that's been victimized by a pedophile. So while I'm generally against the death penalty, I am not when it comes to that. At the very least, physical castration. But whatever.

They did the same damn thing with George Floyd. Like the fact that he robbed someone before (and repaid his debt to society mind you) somehow justified him being choked to death by a cop  who should've been shit canned years before for excessive force (and - if I recall correctly - who also had a rap sheet, but that doesn't fit the narrative) for passing a fake bill.

[Sled21]

(11-21-2021, 07:06 PM)GMDino Wrote:
See for some it's okay that a person got shot because he was a bad guy before that.  And if you say people shouldn't get shot you get told you're defending bad guys.

Past history of people shot only matters when you support the guy doing the shooting...and it doesn't matter about the shooter if you like him.

I didn't say that. It IS ok that he got shot for chasing a 19 year old kid all over the block trying to assault him and take his gun. The fact he was a 5 time child molester is just icing on the cake. 

[CJD]

The criminal justice system in general is pretty ******, morally. Both prosecutors and defense attorneys are more incentivized to win rather than to find the truth. In some cases, their careers may depend on strictly conviction percentage numbers rather than a just outcome.

And then there's the whole problem with disparate sentencing for the same crimes between different races and socioeconomic groups.

It's just a mess all around.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

[GMDino]

(11-21-2021, 09:25 PM)Sled21 Wrote: I didn't say that. It IS ok that he got shot for chasing a 19 year old kid all over the block trying to assault him and take his gun. The fact he was a 5 time child molester is just icing on the cake. 

You said it and you just doubled down on it.  Not only was it okay he shot him but it was even better because he had a criminal record.

That's wrong, to me, morally but you do you.

[GMDino]

(11-21-2021, 11:56 PM)Crazyjdawg Wrote: The criminal justice system in general is pretty ******, morally. Both prosecutors and defense attorneys are more incentivized to win rather than to find the truth. In some cases, their careers may depend on strictly conviction percentage numbers rather than a just outcome.

And then there's the whole problem with disparate sentencing for the same crimes between different races and socioeconomic groups.

It's just a mess all around.

Sent from my SM-G986U using Tapatalk

That why I shared the link to the podcast that went through some of the courts in Cleveland.  We only talk about it when we see it and we don't see the vast majority of it.

[Sled21]

(11-22-2021, 03:03 PM)GMDino Wrote: You said it and you just doubled down on it.  Not only was it okay he shot him but it was even better because he had a criminal record.

That's wrong, to me, morally but you do you.

Heck yeah, I'll own it. I think it was perfectly ok for Rittenhouse to defend himself against attack. And the fact that Rosenbaum is no longer with us raping children makes the world a better place. What part of that is disturbing to you? Would you rather the child rapist still be out there raping children? He wasn't killed for his, as you put it, criminal record. He was killed because he chose to assault someone. Shouldn't do that, now should you. Rittenhouses AR is probably all that stood between him and being beaten and sodomized by a child molester.

[GMDino]

(11-22-2021, 04:24 PM)Sled21 Wrote: Heck yeah, I'll own it. I think it was perfectly ok for Rittenhouse to defend himself against attack. And the fact that Rosenbaum is no longer with us raping children makes the world a better place. What part of that is disturbing to you? Would you rather the child rapist still be out there raping children? He wasn't killed for his, as you put it, criminal record. He was killed because he chose to assault someone. Shouldn't do that, now should you. Rittenhouses AR is probably all that stood between him and being beaten and sodomized by a child molester.

You seem to have an active fantasy life that I choose to not be part of.

[BengalYankee]

Hmm, the pedophile of 5 boys ranging age of 9- 11 years was shouting out "Shoot me N-word", "Shoot me N-word".

Well, he got shot...





And the rest of the crew ...

[BengalYankee]

Kyle was asking for it he should have never went to the riots on the 3rd night, help put out fires and help guard a car dealership.
Just like a girl should never jog in a park in the evening wearing shorts. She was asking for it. Kyle was asking for it.

[GMDino]

(11-28-2021, 05:10 AM)BengalYankee Wrote: Hmm, the pedophile of 5 boys ranging age of 9- 11 years was shouting out "Shoot me N-word", "Shoot me N-word".

Well, he got shot...





And the rest of the crew ...

If Rittenhouse had just walked up and shot them, not self-defense, would you still feel like they deserved it because of their past criminal history?

Because...

(11-28-2021, 05:34 AM)BengalYankee Wrote: Kyle was asking for it he should have never went to the riots on the 3rd night, help put out fires and help guard a car dealership.
Just like a girl should never jog in a park in the evening wearing shorts. She was asking for it. Kyle was asking for it.

...this would imply you understand that people are responsible for their own actions.

A woman dressed in any way does not give someone the right to sexually assault her.  A boy with a gun does not give anyone else a reason to attack him.

However if you walk down a dangerous street with money hanging out of your pocket yelling "Boy I hope no one tries to rob me tonight!" and you get robbed you were "asking for it".  Like your video example above.

Most people believe and agree Rittenhouse was ill-equipped and in over his head when he went to the riot.  That doesn't excuse anyone who attacked him but it does go towards saying a smarter person would have avoided a situation they knew could be dangerous (he armed himself and knew he would have to "protect" things) vs just being out someone open carrying and getting attacked.

[BengalYankee]

(11-28-2021, 10:50 AM)GMDino Wrote: If Rittenhouse had just walked up and shot them, not self-defense, would you still feel like they deserved it because of their past criminal history?

Because...


...this would imply you understand that people are responsible for their own actions.

A woman dressed in any way does not give someone the right to sexually assault her.  A boy with a gun does not give anyone else a reason to attack him.

However if you walk down a dangerous street with money hanging out of your pocket yelling "Boy I hope no one tries to rob me tonight!" and you get robbed you were "asking for it".  Like your video example above.

Most people believe and agree Rittenhouse was ill-equipped and in over his head when he went to the riot.  That doesn't excuse anyone who attacked him but it does go towards saying a smarter person would have avoided a situation they knew could be dangerous (he armed himself and knew he would have to "protect" things) vs just being out someone open carrying and getting attacked.

Kyle was very ill-equipped and in over his head when he went to the riot. Keep in mind his age at the time 17. At age 18 we have many servicemen and women who are equipped with more deadly weapons and are thrown in bad situations. We have police officers who are well trained and well over 17 years old and they have to make a split decision like a person trying to take the officer's gun, an officer on the ground being attacked with a weapon, or even another person pulling a firearm on the officer, sounds familiar.  


There is no law[statute] or case law that I can remember where the defeated party was "asking for it". "Asking for it" is not a legal defense.
Ergo, if a person was ...

1. Walking down a dangerous street with money hanging out of your pocket yelling "Boy I hope no one tries to rob me tonight!" and you get robbed you were "asking for it". 

2. A woman asks to leave your room in the middle of the night and you deny her the right to leave and have un consensual sex with her aka Mike Tyson. Is she "asking for it"? 
  
3. A man is walking down the crime-ridden street with expensive clothes and jewelry is he "asking for it" to get robbed?

I can go on and on. 

[GMDino]

(11-28-2021, 02:36 PM)BengalYankee Wrote: Kyle was very ill-equipped and in over his head when he went to the riot. Keep in mind his age at the time 17. At age 18 we have many servicemen and women who are equipped with more deadly weapons and are thrown in bad situations. We have police officers who are well trained and well over 17 years old and they have to make a split decision like a person trying to take the officer's gun, an officer on the ground being attacked with a weapon, or even another person pulling a firearm on the officer, sounds familiar.  


There is no law[statute] or case law that I can remember where the defeated party was "asking for it". "Asking for it" is not a legal defense.
Ergo, if a person was ...

1. Walking down a dangerous street with money hanging out of your pocket yelling "Boy I hope no one tries to rob me tonight!" and you get robbed you were "asking for it". 

2. A woman asks to leave your room in the middle of the night and you deny her the right to leave and have un consensual sex with her aka Mike Tyson. Is she "asking for it"? 
  
3. A man is walking down the crime-ridden street with expensive clothes and jewelry is he "asking for it" to get robbed?

I can go on and on. 

We train those 18 year olds in the military.  We train those police officers.  And they still make errors in judgement.  Now take a 17 ear old with very little/no training and you have a recipe for what happened.

Still self defense but in a situation that could have easily been avoided by both parties.

In the Rittenhouse situation a man walking down the street with a rifle is perfectly legal.  The other people on the street who react to him is normal given the volatile situation.  The police should have tried to send HIM home the same way they were trying to send the protestors and rioters home.

Instead we got the confrontation no one wanted and multiple deaths.  With the bonus of a subset of citizens who now believe he is a hero and they are free to do the same.  

He was not guilty of the charges against him.  I said that from the start.  But I will also talk about the moral and societal problems with the entire situation.

[GMDino]

Back to the topic at hand:

It seems some constitutional rights are granted more protections than others.

Florida's sentencing statutes do not actually allow judges to use "lack of remorse" as a justification for a higher sentence. The Florida Supreme Court just made up this new rule—it doesn't come from the legislature. https://t.co/rjB2YNLYzo

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) December 2, 2021

 

[GMDino]

And again.

Most of the system lacks moral in an effort to punish...whether the person is guilty or not.

To the parole board the DA wrote: “It is a threat that this person will be given a soapbox to preach his innocence and become part of the ever-growing movement to undermine the justice system. There is a lot of it going around these days.”

THIS IS TERRIFYING. https://t.co/nn6uMnp1lM

— Public Defendering, Esq. (@fodderyfodder) December 3, 2021

 

[BengalYankee]

(12-04-2021, 11:26 AM)GMDino Wrote: We train those 18 year olds in the military.  We train those police officers.  And they still make errors in judgement.  Now take a 17 ear old with very little/no training and you have a recipe for what happened.

Still self defense but in a situation that could have easily been avoided by both parties.

In the Rittenhouse situation a man walking down the street with a rifle is perfectly legal.  The other people on the street who react to him is normal given the volatile situation.  The police should have tried to send HIM home the same way they were trying to send the protestors and rioters home.

Instead we got the confrontation no one wanted and multiple deaths.  With the bonus of a subset of citizens who now believe he is a hero and they are free to do the same.  

He was not guilty of the charges against him.  I said that from the start.  But I will also talk about the moral and societal problems with the entire situation.

The police were not there, that was the problem. Here you need to blame the Governor[for not having the National Guard there] and the Mayor[for not having the police there] of the town.

Are you going to tell me if a store owner asks a person to protect his store from a "Smash and Grab" mob of thugs the person there with a weapon to deter the mob of thugs is the criminal??? How about the Major of the town or the DA???  You give a pass for the "Smash and Grab" thugs?? No different from the rioters destroying stores and car dealer lots. 

How do you know the 5 parent couples of the male boys aged 9-11 that Rosenbaum raped were not content with the killing of that bastard? 

If I was the parent of a girl/boy aged 9-11 and a bastard raped them and he was freed after only 10 years then Kyle would be a hero to me. 
My son/daughter, myself, my wife, and the whole family have to live through that tragedy for the rest of our lives. 

You barking up the wrong tree with me. I was a Military Police Officer in the Army and now in my civilian life I am a lawyer[not criminal] but I know and remember enough law school to know that what is going in the country is legally, morally, and society wrong.  

[hollodero]

(12-05-2021, 04:08 AM)BengalYankee Wrote: How do you know the 5 parent couples of the male boys aged 9-11 that Rosenbaum raped were not content with the killing of that bastard? 

If I was the parent of a girl/boy aged 9-11 and a bastard raped them and he was freed after only 10 years then Kyle would be a hero to me. 
My son/daughter, myself, my wife, and the whole family have to live through that tragedy for the rest of our lives. 

I'm not disagreeing as a whole, but I have an issue with this particular take. Imho, what kind of reprehensible people those that got shot (or the one who shot them) were should play no part in evaluating this situation.

Btw. I suppose Mr. Rittenhouse did not know about any of that. And even if he did, self justice is not encouraged.