Missouri governor pardons couple who aimed guns at BLM protesters

[Dill]

(08-11-2021, 02:19 PM)Sociopathicsteelerfan Wrote: Quote:So no one is arguing that "prosecutorial misconduct" wasn't "real." No need to. But you don't appear to understand why that is the case.

Looks like you cannot follow the legal argument I've presented, let alone refute it. And changing that perception would be too "boring."
  
No, you cannot follow the logic of how it taints the entire case.  Again, you do so because you have no argument other than the case does not fit the "usual criteria".  
I call you boring and smarmy, because you are indeed both those things.
Yes, anyone who has followed this "discussion" can see you've got nothing and you're projecting your failures onto me.  And with that, I'm done arguing in circles with you on this subject.  Feel free to win internet points to be redeemed later.  

Ha, ha--that the McCloskey case does not fit the USUAL CRITERIA is a pretty strong argument. 

After all, that is what pardon cases are SUPPOSED to do. 

And when they don't, that's when problems arise--as they do with Parson's politically motivated pardon. 

No one disputes that prosecutorial misconduct taints cases, or that it hasn't tainted this one. 

But it could taint this case all the way to hell, and it would still be over a MISDEMEANOR FINE,

while who knows how many dozens or hundreds of other worse tainted cases involving innocents serving decades in prison remain on the back burner.

If the McCloskey pardon doesn't fit the usual criteria--as you grant--then it's your task to explain why "tainted" should lever the McCloskey case to the head of the line, past all those other tainted cases involving prosecutorial misconduct and serious harm. 

If you cannot do that, then it's you who's "got nothing," not the person who explains why the McCloskey case doesn't fit the usual criteria.

PS arguments go in circles when one participant keeps repeating a claim without addressing refutations. That happens when people 
beg the question, expect people to accept claims without evidence, and/or find proof "boring."