Aces High Bulletin Board

General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: rpm on July 11, 2007, 06:21:59 AM

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: rpm on July 11, 2007, 06:21:59 AM

The Supreme Court heard 22 criminal cases during the just-ending term, ruling eight times for and 14 times against the defendant. Individually Justice Stevens voted 16 times for the defendant, more than any other Justice, followed by Justice Souter (15), Justice Ginsburg (14), Justice Breyer (12), Justice Kennedy (7), Justice Scalia (6), Justice Roberts (4), Justice Thomas (4) and Justice Alito (3).

"For and Against the Defendant" could be read as "For and Against Civil Rights."
Those Bush appointees didn't disappoint.:aok

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: DiabloTX on July 11, 2007, 06:29:12 AM

You really do have an axe to grind, don't you?

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: rpm on July 11, 2007, 06:33:30 AM

Just trying to support America.

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: DiabloTX on July 11, 2007, 06:44:51 AM

**** yeah!

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: rpm on July 11, 2007, 06:56:15 AM

Quote

Originally posted by DiabloTX
**** yeah!

:aok

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: Maverick on July 11, 2007, 10:28:39 AM

So in other words the merits of the cases has no bearing on your rant here and it's just another slam against bush. Wow that's just so so inane.

You started a thread just to do that???:huh

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: Toad on July 11, 2007, 10:43:35 AM

Yep, Mav, it's not a matter of constitutionality.

It's simply whether or not they voted for or against the defendant. No other factors need be considered.

Jebus...what we've become.

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: Gunthr on July 11, 2007, 11:23:31 AM

Quote

For and Against the Defendant
The Supreme Court heard 22 criminal cases during the just-ending term, ruling eight times for and 14 times against the defendant. Individually Justice Stevens voted 16 times for the defendant, more than any other Justice, followed by Justice Souter (15), Justice Ginsburg (14), Justice Breyer (12), Justice Kennedy (7), Justice Scalia (6), Justice Roberts (4), Justice Thomas (4) and Justice Alito (3).

"For and Against the Defendant" could be read as "For and Against Civil Rights."
Those Bush appointees didn't disappoint. - rpm

rpm, that is a stunning statement.  it shows just how deluded your system of attitudes and beliefs must actually be in order not for you to not be able to see the hypocracy, innaccuracy and bias of it.

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: rpm on July 11, 2007, 12:24:37 PM

Why does voting against a defendant normally equate a vote against civil rights? Because that's normally the only issue on appeal in some form or fashion.

Was a defendant illegally detained or searched in violation of the 4th Amendment (can you hold someone on the side of the road for an hour waiting for a drug dog to arrive based upon a "hunch")? Or was there a Due Process / Fair Trial violation (did the State adequately tell him what he was charged with? Did the jury receive the proper instructions on the law from the judge?) Or a 5th Amendment violation (was he the subject of "custodial interrogation" when the cops began to question him?) And the list goes on.

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: Toad on July 11, 2007, 01:55:30 PM

Why don't you point us to a synopsis of the 22 cases?

Then some consideration could be given to the merit of the case rather than ust discussing the lock-step reguritation of the party line you provided so far.

Title: For and Against the Defendant
Post by: Donzo on July 11, 2007, 01:57:30 PM

Quote

Originally posted by Toad
Why don't you point us to a synopsis of the 22 cases?

Then some consideration could be given to the merit of the case rather than ust discussing the lock-step reguritation of the party line you provided so far.

:aok