Courtroom Irony...

Welcome to the Leverguns.Com Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here ... politely.

Moderators: AmBraCol, Hobie

Forum rules
Welcome to the Leverguns.Com General Discussions Forum. This is a high-class place so act respectable. We discuss most anything here other than politics... politely.

Please post political post in the new Politics forum.
Post Reply
User avatar
AJMD429
Posting leader...
Posts: 31931
Joined: Sun Sep 09, 2007 10:03 am
Location: Hoosierland
Contact:

Courtroom Irony...

Post by AJMD429 »

.
If you get 'advanced firearms training'..... it can be used to portray you as a bad-guy if you shoot in self-defense....

...but if you have a prior criminal conviction, it is often not allowed to be mentioned in court...

https://youtu.be/7vXeUUEDpvM

SO WEIRD...!!!
Doctors for Sensible Gun Laws
"first do no harm" - gun control LAWS lead to far more deaths than 'easy access' ever could.


Want REAL change? . . . . . "Boortz/Nugent in 2012 . . . ! "
User avatar
wvfarrier
Senior Levergunner
Posts: 1440
Joined: Mon Oct 28, 2013 9:27 am
Location: West (by GOD) Virginia

Re: Courtroom Irony...

Post by wvfarrier »

The court system has been broken for quite a long time
A bondservant of our Lord, Christ Jesus
User avatar
Grizz
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 11808
Joined: Fri Aug 31, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: Courtroom Irony...

Post by Grizz »

time to bone up on jury nullification . . .
Jury nullification (US/UK), jury equity (UK), or a perverse verdict (UK) occurs when the jury in a criminal trial gives a not guilty verdict despite a defendant having clearly broken the law. The jury's reasons may include the belief that the law itself is unjust, that the prosecutor has misapplied the law in the defendant's case, that the punishment for breaking the law is too harsh, or general frustrations with the criminal justice system. Some juries have also refused to convict due to their own prejudices in favor of the defendant. Such verdicts are possible because a jury has an absolute and unqualified right to reach any verdict it chooses, although they are usually not told of this right in the process of a trial.
Wikipedia
I kept a guy out of jail in Alaska when he was framed by a sullen cop and a corrupt DA. I got to tell the da to his face why he lost. It was so cool, and so much fun to see the beet red faces of the ones who bought the state narrative. don't know why, but i never got invited back to jury duty . . .

User avatar
JimT
Shootist
Posts: 5468
Joined: Thu Sep 06, 2007 5:04 pm

Re: Courtroom Irony...

Post by JimT »

Grizz is correct. If you are called for jury duty, study jury nullification before you go. And DO NOT mention it out loud.
User avatar
jeepnik
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 6830
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:39 pm
Location: On the Beach

Re: Courtroom Irony...

Post by jeepnik »

How’s this for irony? The lawyers can say anything they like. They can flat out lie, the entire world can know they are lying and there is no punishment for lying.

Some how the right to a fair trial became the right to be as dishonest as necessary to get off.
Jeepnik AKA "Old Eyes"
"Go low, go slow and preferably in the dark" The old Sarge (he was maybe 24.
"Freedom is never more that a generation from extinction" Ronald Reagan
"Every man should have at least one good rifle and know how to use it" Dad
stretch
Advanced Levergunner
Posts: 2284
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2007 7:15 pm

Re: Courtroom Irony...

Post by stretch »

Grizz is correct. If you are called for jury duty, study jury nullification before you go. And DO NOT mention it out loud.
This!

(If the court/judge/DA gets wind of the fact that you know what it is, you'll be excused immediately if not sooner. And probably
escorted out of the courthouse post haste.)

Remember that the judge is in charge of the courtroom, courtroom procedures, has the final say in what
is allowed and what isn't allowed for evidence, etc..

The JURY decides the case. The JURY has the final authority over the verdict, and NO ONE can tell them how to vote.

If a jurist doesn't think the defendant should be found guilty, they don't have to find the defendant guilty, and they don't
have to explain themselves to anybody.

-Stretch
Post Reply