Thanks BLM

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 03:12 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So being factually inaccurate doesn't matter?  

If you claimed a guy punched a baby 7 times but he proved he only punched the baby 6 times would you let him go free?






Does being factually inaccurate matter to you?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 03:15 AM)fredtoast Wrote: My mere presence is a deterrent to abuse of power by law enforcement officers and prosecuting attorneys.

Oh my, the ego.

(08-04-2016, 03:17 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The only clients I have that go free are the ones where the state does not have the evidence to convict.  

Or the one's you BS a jury into letting free.  When a client admits his guilt to you and refuses to plead guilty, do you still help him go free?  99% of the time I'm sure you do.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 03:19 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Does being factually inaccurate matter to you?

Of course it does, I'm not a defense attorney.

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 03:22 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Oh my, the ego.

Not my ego.  Just the reality recognized by everyone who doeres not live behind a blue wall.

You really need to educate yourself on this stuff.  Go read the decision in Gideon v Wainwright

[fredtoast]

(08-04-2016, 03:22 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Of course it does, I'm not a defense attorney.

So you let the baby puncher go free because you were "factually incorrect"?

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 03:30 AM)fredtoast Wrote: So you let the baby puncher go free because you were "factually incorrect"?

Of course not, I'm not a defense attorney.

[NATI BENGALS]

(08-04-2016, 01:43 AM)fredtoast Wrote: What about the lying cops that lead to the creation of BLM?

Don't they deserve any blame?

Of course they do. But two wrongs dont make a right.

There are radical muslims. Does that mean it is ok for me to make a hate group and teach children to hate all muslims?

The cops in this video really couldnt have been more courteous. And then this lady pulls this bat shit crazy stuff again at a later date only this time with a gun. And people are going on with their hatred for cops for taking her out because BLM is poisoning their minds.

They whine and moan about the people trying to make the streets safer and teach hatred for people trying to help. And then do nothing about the main killer of young black men. 

[JustWinBaby]

(08-04-2016, 03:13 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So what percentage of your clients that go free are criminals?  94%?

No disrespect...but I don't think Fred is nearly that good.

[GMDino]

(08-04-2016, 02:55 AM)wildcats forever Wrote: Even though this is the NSFW, calling someone stupid and a liar is NOT going to make anyone happy, or feel their POV is respected. So let's continue without making any more personal attacks, and see how much progress can be made in understanding the real points being made here ....

I often wonder if people talk to others in real life like they do on here and how that reflects on them.

It's easy to apply "personalities" to this faceless, nameless people on a message board.  

[GMDino]

(08-04-2016, 03:13 AM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: So what percentage of your clients that go free are criminals?  94%?

94% (cited) of plea bargains allow the criminal to go free?

That's a bit disingenuous of a reading of that stat.

Couldn't a plea bargain change the death penalty to life in prison too?

[*bfine32*]

(08-04-2016, 02:07 AM)fredtoast Wrote: People who live in glass houses should not throw stones.

It appears someone else cast the first stone

(08-04-2016, 01:43 AM)fredtoast Wrote: What about the lying cops that lead to the creation of BLM?

Don't they deserve any blame?

But as a service to the board this is how it should work:

Poster A: " Yes, I was mistaken when I stated 99%, the actual number is closer to 94%. WTS, I think we both would agree that the point is a great deal of cases are settled".

Pster B: "94% seems a bit more realistic than 99%. Your point is taken; however, here is my counter-point...."

Unfortunately, this is how it actually works:

Poster A: "it's 99%"

Poster B: "Prove it"

Poster A: "OK it's closer to 90%, but I'm still right"

Poster B: "Liar"

Poster A: "Stupid"

"You have a stupid job"

"Nope, I have a noble job, you have a stupid job"


It would be sad if it weren't so entertaining.

[Beaker]

(08-04-2016, 09:20 AM)GMDino Wrote: 94% (cited) of plea bargains allow the criminal to go free?

That's a bit disingenuous of a reading of that stat.

Couldn't a plea bargain change the death penalty to life in prison too?

To be fair the stat was that 94% of cases are settled with plea bargains. There can be a mix of both innocent and guilty individuals within those cases. Plus, as you said, a plea bargain does not always mean the individual is set free. It may involve something such as a reduced sentence in exchange for more info about the case.

To fred's original assertion that lying cops deserve some of the blame for BLM vs SSF's assertion that defense attorneys should share blame:

 Lying cops make up a very small percentage of all cops (I'm not daring to post an actual percentage...lol). So if you are going to distribute some of the blame to them, then the assertion that the small percentage of cases that actually go to trial (6%) and result in a criminal getting set free should also share some of the blame.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 10:48 AM)Beaker Wrote:  Lying cops make up a very small percentage of all cops (I'm not daring to post an actual percentage...lol). 

Dude, it's clearly 99% of them. 

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

(08-04-2016, 04:29 AM)JustWinBaby Wrote: No disrespect...but I don't think Fred is nearly that good.

Judging by the strength of his arguments on this board I'd say you're 99% correct.

[*wildcats forever*]

(08-04-2016, 10:13 AM)bfine32 Wrote: It appears someone else cast the first stone


But as a service to the board this is how it should work:

Poster A: " Yes, I was mistaken when I stated 99%, the actual number is closer to 94%. WTS, I think we both would agree that the point is a great deal of cases are settled".

Pster B: "94% seems a bit more realistic than 99%. Your point is taken; however, here is my counter-point...."

Unfortunately, this is how it actually works:

Poster A: "it's 99%"

Poster B: "Prove it"

Poster A: "OK it's closer to 90%, but I'm still right"

Poster B: "Liar"

Poster A: "Stupid"

"You have a stupid job"

"Nope, I have a noble job, you have a stupid job"


It would be sad if it weren't so entertaining.

It is sad because it is no longer entertaining. Too many years have passed with highly articulate individuals playing the baiting game only to fall prey to frustration, and devolve into playground name-calling. The PnR forum isn't everyone's first choice, but no member should be subjected to the kind of ridicule that has been exhibited here on a predictable basis. Sarcastic/snarky comments are entertaining a lot of the time, but when it leads to CoC violations by anyone, then it has gone too far. Increased participation in these forums would be a very good thing, but it won't happen if beating on the keyboard like a 12 year old continues.

[Sociopathicsteelerfan]

For those actually interested in this topic I thought I'd point something out. Plea bargains are initiated by both the prosecution and the defense and both sides have to agree to them, so Fred's assertion that the DA is solely responsible for their implementation is inane. Also, shockingly, Fred fails to point out why plea bargains are so pervasive. Jury trials are long, they're time intensive for both legal teams, they tie up the already impacted court calendar and both sides recognize that a jury can honestly go either way. The level of uncertainty inherent in a jury trial is why both sides prefer to hash the case out on the general merits of the case long before getting to that point. Lastly, the study Fred cites, that does not show 99% of cases end in plea bargains btw, does not include the juvenile justice system. I'm sure the inherent confidentiality of that system is one reason. However, the main reason is that plea bargains do not take place at anything resembling that pace in the juvenile system. Why you ask? There is no jury trial option, all cases are tried before a bench officer. Thus, the prosecution has far less incentive to plea bargain as they know the person who decides innocence or guilt (although they don't use those terms in juvenile court) actually knows what they're doing. This is exactly why almost every officer in the Gray case chose a bench trial, judges make decision based on the law, not emotion or other factors. They are far less susceptible to "if the glove don't fit".

[BengalHawk62]

I saw the Devil's Advocate once.   Its a good movie.  You all should watch it.  Its full of lawyer talk and boobies. 

[Rotobeast]

(08-04-2016, 03:08 PM)BengalHawk62 Wrote: I saw the Devil's Advocate once.   Its a good movie.  You all should watch it.  Its full of lawyer talk and boobies. 

Are you implying that Fred is Al Pachino ?


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

[*bfine32*]

(08-04-2016, 03:43 PM)Rotobeast Wrote: Are you implying that Fred is Al Pachino ?


Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

Pretty sure Fred is the boobie

[StoneTheCrow]

Raising your kids to fight cops. There's a strategy I'll keep in mind when I have kids.