|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
young_clinton
Joined: 09 Sep 2009
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:21 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
Can get him with the formal system then go and use the informal kangaroo system. Like a communist toilet.
Shit, why not fry him via opinion polls. We'll zap MSNBC into every single mind of the revolution and then have them vote on if he should be shot or hung. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 1:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Government/2013/07/14/Reid-Zimmerman-not-over
| Quote: |
| On Sunday, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV) asked for the Justice Department to prosecute George Zimmerman, who was acquitted Saturday night in the killing of Trayvon Martin. “I think the Justice Department is going to take a look at this,” Reid told NBC’s Meet the Press. “This isn’t over with and I think that’s good. That’s our system, it’s gotten better, not worse.” |
Now that we can prosecute someone who has been found innocent our system is better. It's useful to have kangaroo courts where we don't have to worry about evidence and process. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 4:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Why even consider facts in the first place when we can just tell stories.
| Quote: |
magine, if you will, that space aliens land in the United States and offer ''untold treasure'' in exchange for surrendering all black citizens to them. What does white America do? It votes to accept the deal by overwhelming margins. So says the law professor Derrick Bell, who poses the question in an allegorical tale he calls ''The Space Traders.''
There is opposition, however. Jews condemn the trade as genocidal and organize the Anne Frank Committee to try to stop it. Empathy from another group that has suffered oppression? Not according to Bell. Instead, Jews worry that ''in the absence of blacks, Jews could become the scapegoats.''
Such parables pass for legal scholarship these days. Or rather, for a certain form of legal scholarship that Daniel A. Farber and Suzanna Sherry, both law professors at the University of Minnesota, identify as ''radical multiculturalism,'' an amalgam of legal ideas including critical race theory, radical feminism and ''gaylegal'' theory. ''Beyond All Reason'' is the anguished cry of two traditional liberals who have been mugged, not by reality but by their radical colleagues in the ivory tower.
According to Farber and Sherry, the radical multiculturalists in the law schools have taken an ax to the foundations of traditional academic dialogue -- things like objectivity, truth, merit, fairness and polite discourse. For the radical legal thinkers, all these are tools that straight white males use to oppress those who are not. According to the critical race theorist Richard Delgado, merit standards are ''like white people's affirmative action . . . a way of keeping their own deficiencies neatly hidden while assuring only people like them get in.'' The feminist Catharine MacKinnon puts it more deftly: current standards reflect ''what white men value about themselves.''
Farber and Sherry patiently -- sometimes too patiently -- demonstrate how radical multiculturalism ultimately destroys the very values its proponents seek (or should seek) to promote. If truth does not exist, if merit is merely an expression of power, if there is no objective reality, then meaningful discourse is impossible and the hope of a just and equal society is a hoax. How, for example, can one respond to Prof. Patricia Williams's assertion that it doesn't matter whether Tawana Brawley was telling the truth or lying when she claimed she was kidnapped, raped, tortured and smeared with dog feces by white men? Either way, Williams says, Brawley was ''the victim of some unspeakable crime.''
...
Today's relentless attack on objective reality can similarly transform the legal profession. Lawyers have always had a hard time reconciling their responsibilities to their clients with their duty of candor to the court; after all, both sides are not equally served by the truth. But at least there has always been a shared assumption that such a thing as truth exists. Law students are now being taught -- at least by some of their professors -- that truth does not exist or, in any event, does not matter. What does matter is whose side you're on. There are strong indications that this message is being carried from the classroom into the courtroom in cases like the O. J. Simpson criminal trial. It may be only a matter of time before lawyers learn to tell juries quite routinely that they must choose not between guilt and innocence, truth and lies, lawfulness and unlawfulness, but between the defendant and the state.
... |
This is essentially what has been at work in the broader national discourse regarding this case: justice by storytelling. A narrative has been crafted, and that narrative damns "whites" (one drop rule goes both ways I guess) and vindicates blacks. The facts do not matter, and cannot matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 4:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't think that anyone who thinks they gain anything from prolonging this has really thought this through. If anything wait for a case where it's clear, and with hetter evidence, there has been misjustice. It's not like they would have to wait long. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| It's not like they would have to wait long. |
For what exactly? Another racial show trial? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Titus
Joined: 19 May 2012
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 6:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/07/obama-restarts-hate-crime-investigation.html
| Quote: |
Obama restarts hate crime investigation of Zimmerman
From the NYT:
Justice Department to Restart Hate Crime Investigation in Trayvon Martin’s Death
By ERIC LIPTON
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department said Sunday that it was restarting its investigation into the 2012 shooting death of Trayvon Martin to consider possible separate hate crime charges against George Zimmerman.
The federal inquiry, which was started shortly after the shooting last year but had been delayed while the state criminal trial in Florida was under way, was being restarted after civil rights leaders called on the Justice Department to re-examine the case. The leaders said Sunday that they remained convinced that the shooting had a racial element. Mr. Martin, 17, was black.
“There is a pattern of George Zimmerman making dozens of calls to 911 over several years, frequently about young men of color,” Benjamin T. Jealous, the president of the N.A.A.C.P., said in an interview on Sunday. . ...
Zimmerman is guilty of disparate impact in noticing things. Noticing things is a hate crime.
But the Obama administration’s Justice Department has been cautious in its use of the expanded law. In 2010, for example, it turned down calls by civil rights leaders to file charges in New York City in the 2006 death of Sean Bell, a 23-year-old black man who was fatally shot by police officers outside a Queens club just hours before he was to be married.
Yeah, but that's just the NYPD. The Zimmerman Menace is the main threat to civil rights.
Earlier, Newsday reported:
The U.S. Justice Department, which opened an investigation into the George Zimmerman case Sunday, could charge him with federal civil rights violations, local attorneys said.
While a Florida jury found neighorbood watch volunteer Zimmerman not guilty of second-degree murder, a federal probe would examine whether he violated Martin's civil rights when he fatally shot him Feb. 16, 2012, in Sanford, Fla.
To prove such violations requires a different standard of evidence and law than what was used in the state case against Zimmerman. So a federal prosecution would not be double jeopardy, they said.
Robert Valli, a Garden City-based civil rights attorney said if a probe proceeds, the local federal prosecutor would likely seek a grand jury indictment on charges that Zimmerman violated the federal Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
Valli said potential charges would be the government's "version of a homicide charge, coupled with the intention to do so because of the person's membership in a protected class."
Constitutionally speaking, wouldn't it just be simpler for Obama to order a drone strike on Zimmerman's condo? |
Civil rights has always been a slippery idea. Like the way leftists use the word justice or social justice. Civil rights in this case means the system worked when it wasn't supposed to and now we need to undo the outcome. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon
Joined: 31 May 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 6:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Titus wrote: |
http://isteve.blogspot.com/2013/07/obama-restarts-hate-crime-investigation.html
| Quote: |
Obama restarts hate crime investigation of Zimmerman
From the NYT:
Justice Department to Restart Hate Crime Investigation in Trayvon Martin’s Death
By ERIC LIPTON
WASHINGTON — The Justice Department said Sunday that it was restarting its investigation into the 2012 shooting death of Trayvon Martin to consider possible separate hate crime charges against George Zimmerman.
The federal inquiry, which was started shortly after the shooting last year but had been delayed while the state criminal trial in Florida was under way, was being restarted after civil rights leaders called on the Justice Department to re-examine the case. The leaders said Sunday that they remained convinced that the shooting had a racial element. Mr. Martin, 17, was black.
“There is a pattern of George Zimmerman making dozens of calls to 911 over several years, frequently about young men of color,” Benjamin T. Jealous, the president of the N.A.A.C.P., said in an interview on Sunday. . ...
Zimmerman is guilty of disparate impact in noticing things. Noticing things is a hate crime.
But the Obama administration’s Justice Department has been cautious in its use of the expanded law. In 2010, for example, it turned down calls by civil rights leaders to file charges in New York City in the 2006 death of Sean Bell, a 23-year-old black man who was fatally shot by police officers outside a Queens club just hours before he was to be married.
Yeah, but that's just the NYPD. The Zimmerman Menace is the main threat to civil rights.
Earlier, Newsday reported:
The U.S. Justice Department, which opened an investigation into the George Zimmerman case Sunday, could charge him with federal civil rights violations, local attorneys said.
While a Florida jury found neighorbood watch volunteer Zimmerman not guilty of second-degree murder, a federal probe would examine whether he violated Martin's civil rights when he fatally shot him Feb. 16, 2012, in Sanford, Fla.
To prove such violations requires a different standard of evidence and law than what was used in the state case against Zimmerman. So a federal prosecution would not be double jeopardy, they said.
Robert Valli, a Garden City-based civil rights attorney said if a probe proceeds, the local federal prosecutor would likely seek a grand jury indictment on charges that Zimmerman violated the federal Hate Crimes Prevention Act.
Valli said potential charges would be the government's "version of a homicide charge, coupled with the intention to do so because of the person's membership in a protected class."
Constitutionally speaking, wouldn't it just be simpler for Obama to order a drone strike on Zimmerman's condo? |
Civil rights has always been a slippery idea. Like the way leftists use the word justice or social justice. Civil rights in this case means the system worked when it wasn't supposed to and now we need to undo the outcome. |
This is an incredibly stupid thing for the federal government to get involved in, but it's preferable to talking about Edward Snowden or our civil rights violations in other countries. It is interesting to note that the blog post, even as much as I usually disagree with steve, mentions them deciding to not press further charges in cases involving the police, where there was actual evidence that an innocent was killed. Zimmerman was not part of the system, so an easy target for this sort of thing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 6:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| To prove such violations requires a different standard of evidence and law than what was used in the state case against Zimmerman. So a federal prosecution would not be double jeopardy, they said. |
Sounds like bullshit. Homicide is an element of hate crime homicide, is it not? And he was cleared of even manslaughter.
What does Sector7G say?
By the way, I hate Federal criminal statutes. Except for treason or other specially United States crimes, it tramples on a core state jurisdiction. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ttompatz
Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 7:36 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Just out of curiosity, don't the 5th and 7th amendments to the constitution apply? Isn't jeopardy attached precluding all but a civil action (he can be sued but not prosecuted (think OJ) )?
If they (the 5th and 7th) can be tossed out so easily, why do people defend the 2nd amendment with so much fervor?
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
actionjackson
Joined: 30 Dec 2007
Location: Any place I'm at
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 9:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ttompatz wrote: |
| If they (the 5th and 7th) can be tossed out so easily, why do people defend the 2nd amendment with so much fervor? |
Because Americans are ignorant to things that don't apply to them directly. Whatever happens to this guy has no direct effect on them. However, start talking about guns and that involves lots of people and you better believe people are going get all up in arms about it (no pun intended). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
sirius black
Joined: 04 Jun 2010
|
| Posted: Sun Jul 14, 2013 10:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I peronally wouldn't want a civil rights case but I can understand the sentiment. I would prefer to let it rest.
The original matter didn't 'smell' right. ANY parent would not have been satisfied with him not even being arrested originally, no matter the race. I am sure of that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
everything-is-everything
Joined: 06 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 1:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| sirius black wrote: |
I peronally wouldn't want a civil rights case but I can understand the sentiment. I would prefer to let it rest.
The original matter didn't 'smell' right. ANY parent would not have been satisfied with him not even being arrested originally, no matter the race. I am sure of that. |
Nothing much to add. This post I agree with. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
catman
Joined: 18 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 15, 2013 5:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
Agreed.
Nothing wrong with a civil lawsuit. OJ was found not guilty but he was taken to the cleaners by the Goldman family. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
