« previous next »
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: For and Against the Defendant  (Read 239 times)

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
For and Against the Defendant
« 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
Logged
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline DiabloTX

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9592
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #1 on: July 11, 2007, 06:29:12 AM »
You really do have an axe to grind, don't you?
Logged
"There ain't no revolution, only evolution, but every time I'm in Denmark I eat a danish for peace." - Diablo

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #2 on: July 11, 2007, 06:33:30 AM »
Just trying to support America.
Logged
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline DiabloTX

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 9592
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #3 on: July 11, 2007, 06:44:51 AM »
**** yeah!
Logged
"There ain't no revolution, only evolution, but every time I'm in Denmark I eat a danish for peace." - Diablo

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #4 on: July 11, 2007, 06:56:15 AM »
Quote
Originally posted by DiabloTX
**** yeah!

:aok
Logged
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline Maverick

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 13915
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #5 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
Logged
DEFINITION OF A VETERAN
A Veteran - whether active duty, retired, national guard or reserve - is someone who, at one point in their life, wrote a check made payable to "The United States of America", for an amount of "up to and including my life."
Author Unknown

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #6 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.
Logged
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Gunthr

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3043
      • http://www.dot.squat
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #7 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.
Logged
"When I speak I put on a mask. When I act, I am forced to take it off."  - Helvetius 18th Century

Offline rpm

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 15661
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #8 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.
Logged
My mind is a raging torrent, flooded with rivulets of thought cascading into a waterfall of creative alternatives.
Stay thirsty my friends.

Offline Toad

  • Plutonium Member
  • *******
  • Posts: 18415
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #9 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.
Logged
If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude than the animated contest of freedom, go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that you were our countrymen!

Offline Donzo

  • Gold Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2355
      • http://www.bops.us
For and Against the Defendant
« Reply #10 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
Logged
Pages: [1]   Go Up
« previous next »