Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
People don't like defense attorneys on TV shows
98 views
Skip to first unread message
RichA
Jul 1, 2012, 8:25:13 PM7/1/12
to
Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
guilty.
Most of shows making out defense attorneys and their clients to be
saints die on the vine.
The only one I could stand was "Garrow's Law" because at least back in
the late 1700's defendants had a reason to cry foul.
fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
guilty.
Most of shows making out defense attorneys and their clients to be
saints die on the vine.
The only one I could stand was "Garrow's Law" because at least back in
the late 1700's defendants had a reason to cry foul.
JRStern
Jul 1, 2012, 11:04:29 PM7/1/12
to
On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 17:25:13 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:
>Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
>guilty.
>Most of shows making out defense attorneys and their clients to be
>saints die on the vine.
"The Practice" played around with this kind of thing very successfully
- "I know my client is scum, and he probably did it, but the state has
NOT shown any evidence, and this is the United States of America, ..."
And, "Do you know what's really terrifying in court, is when your
client actually is innocent!"
J.
wrote:
>Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
>guilty.
>Most of shows making out defense attorneys and their clients to be
>saints die on the vine.
- "I know my client is scum, and he probably did it, but the state has
NOT shown any evidence, and this is the United States of America, ..."
And, "Do you know what's really terrifying in court, is when your
client actually is innocent!"
J.
BTR1701
Jul 2, 2012, 1:37:30 AM7/2/12
to
In article
<ccf48961-b1b5-447e...@m8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
<ccf48961-b1b5-447e...@m8g2000yqo.googlegroups.com>,
RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
> off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
> guilty.
Statistically that's not just a belief. It's true.
> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
> off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
> guilty.
Mason Barge
Jul 2, 2012, 10:56:37 AM7/2/12
to
>Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>off.
And they're right.
>fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>off.
>They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
>guilty.
defense attorneys, though, the percentage would shrink fast.
number6
Jul 2, 2012, 11:12:22 AM7/2/12
to
On Jul 1, 8:25 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
> off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
> guilty.
A nephew of mine recently graduated and passed the bar and like many
> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
> off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
> guilty.
lawyers from other than the prestigious law schools he's hustling work
at the local courts defending the DWIs the drunk and disorderly the
doemestic violence shoplifting theft of service and the like ...
He tells me that they are all guilty and the evidence clearly shows
that ... yet because of the hot shot TV defense lawyers they feel they
should easily beat the rap ...
He has to spend a lot of time explaining to they why they will be
found guilty if the case goes to trial and the minor plead down he got
them is the best he could do ...
David Johnston
Jul 2, 2012, 11:51:21 AM7/2/12
to
On 7/2/2012 8:56 AM, Mason Barge wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 17:25:13 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>> off.
>
> And they're right.
Well sort of. Bear in mind that more cases are pled out than not,
> On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 17:25:13 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>> off.
>
> And they're right.
usually at the urging of the defense attorney.
David Johnston
Jul 2, 2012, 11:53:22 AM7/2/12
to
On 7/2/2012 9:12 AM, number6 wrote:
> On Jul 1, 8:25 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>> off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
>> guilty.
>
> A nephew of mine recently graduated and passed the bar and like many
> lawyers from other than the prestigious law schools he's hustling work
> at the local courts defending the DWIs the drunk and disorderly the
> doemestic violence shoplifting theft of service and the like ...
> He tells me that they are all guilty and the evidence clearly shows
> that ... yet because of the hot shot TV defense lawyers they feel they
> should easily beat the rap ...
<snort> I kind of think they'd think they should beat the rap even if
> On Jul 1, 8:25 pm, RichA <rander3...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>> off. They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
>> guilty.
>
> A nephew of mine recently graduated and passed the bar and like many
> lawyers from other than the prestigious law schools he's hustling work
> at the local courts defending the DWIs the drunk and disorderly the
> doemestic violence shoplifting theft of service and the like ...
> He tells me that they are all guilty and the evidence clearly shows
> that ... yet because of the hot shot TV defense lawyers they feel they
> should easily beat the rap ...
there had never been a lawyer show.
Dano
Jul 2, 2012, 12:53:56 PM7/2/12
to
"David Johnston" wrote in message news:jssg1h$bcu$1...@dont-email.me...
=========================================
You've got that right. It's the dirty little secret of our criminal justice
system. Something like 90% of all criminal cases are plea bargained. Poor
defendants who can't afford decent representation often "take a plea" for
fear of conviction that will lead to longer sentences. Public defenders are
notoriously overworked in most places...especially in urban courthouses.
While the rich and powerful can get terrific representation from highly
regarded, well connected and successful attorneys and get off
lightly...especially in cases like DUI.
You've got that right. It's the dirty little secret of our criminal justice
system. Something like 90% of all criminal cases are plea bargained. Poor
defendants who can't afford decent representation often "take a plea" for
fear of conviction that will lead to longer sentences. Public defenders are
notoriously overworked in most places...especially in urban courthouses.
While the rich and powerful can get terrific representation from highly
regarded, well connected and successful attorneys and get off
lightly...especially in cases like DUI.
Michael OConnor
Jul 2, 2012, 1:09:32 PM7/2/12
to
I think most people believe that defense attorneys are by and large
slimy, and for most of us that disdain probably collectively coalesced
with the OJ trial, and we all saw Barry Schreck talk his way out of
DNA evidence on one test that had IIRC a one in one hundred sixty
seven billion chance that the blood belonged to somebody besides OJ,
and we all saw Johnnie Cochran with his courtroom antics, riding
roughshod over the judge and prosecution. We watched a rich guy buy
his way out of life in prison, thanks to defense attorneys.
slimy, and for most of us that disdain probably collectively coalesced
with the OJ trial, and we all saw Barry Schreck talk his way out of
DNA evidence on one test that had IIRC a one in one hundred sixty
seven billion chance that the blood belonged to somebody besides OJ,
and we all saw Johnnie Cochran with his courtroom antics, riding
roughshod over the judge and prosecution. We watched a rich guy buy
his way out of life in prison, thanks to defense attorneys.
anim8rFSK
Jul 2, 2012, 3:16:42 PM7/2/12
to
In article
<2c9f969a-c2ad-457a...@j25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
But the prosecution was even slimier. We saw Marcia Clark commit
perjury right to Ito's face, and he knew it. We saw the DNA expert for
the prosecution admit that her entire testimony was false. Ito should
have had people taken out of his courtroom in shackles routinely.
Unfortunately the only one he stuck to his guns on his punishment for
was Kristin Jeanette-Meyers.
--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
<2c9f969a-c2ad-457a...@j25g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
perjury right to Ito's face, and he knew it. We saw the DNA expert for
the prosecution admit that her entire testimony was false. Ito should
have had people taken out of his courtroom in shackles routinely.
Unfortunately the only one he stuck to his guns on his punishment for
was Kristin Jeanette-Meyers.
--
"Every time a Kardashian gets a TV show, an angel dies."
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 2, 2012, 4:23:10 PM7/2/12
to
running a law practice?
In nine television seasons of 30 to 39 episodes and 80 novels and short
stories, on the radio and in the movies, Erle Stanley Gardner's Perry Mason
demonstrated that you could run a successful law practice specializing
in criminal defense taking on nothing but innocent clients.
David E. Kelley had four television series featuring criminal law
practices with mainly innocent clients. John Grisham and Scott Turrow
write best sellers about mainly innocent clients.
No one would exaggerate for dramatic purposes, would they?
David Johnston
Jul 2, 2012, 4:54:29 PM7/2/12
to
On 7/2/2012 2:23 PM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
> Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 17:25:13 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>>> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>>> off.
>
>> And they're right.
>
>>> They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
>>> guilty.
>
>> And, again, they're right, but not as often as #1. If you didn't have
>> defense attorneys, though, the percentage would shrink fast.
>
> Mason, you don't know what you're talking about. What do you know about
> running a law practice?
>
> In nine television seasons of 30 to 39 episodes and 80 novels and short
> stories, on the radio and in the movies, Erle Stanley Gardner's Perry Mason
> demonstrated that you could run a successful law practice specializing
> in criminal defense taking on nothing but innocent clients.
Actually he did a fair bit of commercial work as well. I'm not sure to
> Mason Barge <mason...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 1 Jul 2012 17:25:13 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rande...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> Ever since "Law and Order," which often played defense attorneys as
>>> fools or corrupt, people see them mostly as ways for the guilty to get
>>> off.
>
>> And they're right.
>
>>> They believe when a cop arrests someone, the vast majority are
>>> guilty.
>
>> And, again, they're right, but not as often as #1. If you didn't have
>> defense attorneys, though, the percentage would shrink fast.
>
> Mason, you don't know what you're talking about. What do you know about
> running a law practice?
>
> In nine television seasons of 30 to 39 episodes and 80 novels and short
> stories, on the radio and in the movies, Erle Stanley Gardner's Perry Mason
> demonstrated that you could run a successful law practice specializing
> in criminal defense taking on nothing but innocent clients.
what degree attorneys were specialized the way they are now in those days.
Adam H. Kerman
Jul 2, 2012, 5:15:02 PM7/2/12
to
clients into the door. Simple wills always led to murder. Business advice
always led to the murder of one of the business partners. File a divorce?
One of the spouses ended up dead.
It's like Mason himself created the situations in which the murders would
invariably occur. It's called value-added law practice.
BTR1701
Jul 2, 2012, 5:34:01 PM7/2/12
to
insurance so that everyone's ability to obtain legal representation is
'fair'.
trotsky
Jul 2, 2012, 5:44:46 PM7/2/12
to
BTR1701
Jul 2, 2012, 9:21:53 PM7/2/12
to
In article <jst30m$8ei$3...@news.albasani.net>,
A trick honed to perfection by Jessica Fletcher, perhaps the single most
prolific serial killer in American history.
prolific serial killer in American history.
Steve Newport
Jul 3, 2012, 3:03:49 AM7/3/12
to
DUI penalties should be MUCH tougher.
*********************************
*********************************
Mason Barge
Jul 3, 2012, 10:07:45 AM7/3/12
to
On Mon, 2 Jul 2012 21:15:02 +0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman" <a...@chinet.com>
wrote:
That wouldn't be a bad idea for a t.v. series. An attorney without enough
business, so he commits crimes and frames his own clients, but always
makes sure to have some sort of exculpatory evidence so he can get them
off.
wrote:
business, so he commits crimes and frames his own clients, but always
makes sure to have some sort of exculpatory evidence so he can get them
off.
Mason Barge
Jul 3, 2012, 10:43:03 AM7/3/12
to
more power than defense lawyers. So the slimy ones do a horrendous amount
of damage.
Alan Smithee
Aug 13, 2012, 11:29:17 AM8/13/12
to
Dano wrote:
> Poor defendants who can't afford decent representation often
> "take a plea" for fear of conviction that will lead to longer
> sentences. Public defenders are notoriously overworked in most
> places...especially in urban courthouses.
They also get fired if they win too many cases. Having a PD on your
> Poor defendants who can't afford decent representation often
> "take a plea" for fear of conviction that will lead to longer
> sentences. Public defenders are notoriously overworked in most
> places...especially in urban courthouses.
side is like buying antidote from the person who poisoned you.
Back in the 90s six people were accused of molesting children at a Florida
school. Three had a PD and three hired their own lawyers.
Three walked, and three didn't.
William December Starr
Aug 16, 2012, 4:02:06 AM8/16/12
to
In article <k0b6ip$k4a$1...@speranza.aioe.org>,
-- wds
Alan Smithee <al...@last.inc> said:
> Dano wrote:
>
>> Poor defendants who can't afford decent representation often
>> "take a plea" for fear of conviction that will lead to longer
>> sentences. Public defenders are notoriously overworked in most
>> places...especially in urban courthouses.
>
> They also get fired if they win too many cases.
Cite?
> Dano wrote:
>
>> Poor defendants who can't afford decent representation often
>> "take a plea" for fear of conviction that will lead to longer
>> sentences. Public defenders are notoriously overworked in most
>> places...especially in urban courthouses.
>
> They also get fired if they win too many cases.
-- wds
mikeos
Aug 16, 2012, 5:26:13 AM8/16/12
to
convicted crims can pay to upgrade their cell? I believe that a figure
of $60 a night was mentioned. Heard this on BBC radio.
Dano
Aug 16, 2012, 11:31:05 AM8/16/12
to
"mikeos" wrote in message news:I8qdnasJcaQqIbHN...@bt.com...
===========================================
Why don't you get arrested in London and find out?
Get back to us.
Why don't you get arrested in London and find out?
Get back to us.
David Johnston
Aug 16, 2012, 12:13:36 PM8/16/12
to
unusually good track record would get hired away.
Dano
Aug 16, 2012, 3:21:16 PM8/16/12
to
There aren't that many who "like" defense attorneys. Until they actually
need one.
need one.
Mason Barge
Aug 16, 2012, 3:29:48 PM8/16/12
to
its jail, where for something like that they could get a clean single
cell. But jails often house unconvicted suspects.
anim8rFSK
Aug 16, 2012, 10:41:00 PM8/16/12
to
In article <1fiq28dlocrtqdje3...@4ax.com>,
We were doing that here (Arizona) at one point. Not sure if we still
are.
are.
mikeos
Aug 19, 2012, 10:56:09 AM8/19/12
to
Dano
Aug 19, 2012, 11:34:40 AM8/19/12
to
"mikeos" wrote in message news:YZudnZxu1dgUY63N...@bt.com...
===================================
The story itself was reputed to have been heard on BBC radio. Should have
been a clue for YOU.
If it makes you happier...try getting locked up in NYC. <sheesh>
The story itself was reputed to have been heard on BBC radio. Should have
been a clue for YOU.
If it makes you happier...try getting locked up in NYC. <sheesh>
David Johnston
Aug 19, 2012, 12:15:10 PM8/19/12
to
Dano
Aug 19, 2012, 12:24:49 PM8/19/12
to
"David Johnston" wrote in message news:k0r3ed$hko$1...@dont-email.me...
======================================
The quote was never said to be a direct quote. What are we in a court room?
Save me from internet lawyers. Worse than jailhouse lawyers. :-)
Never thought such a simple, off hand remark would garner such concern.
The quote was never said to be a direct quote. What are we in a court room?
Save me from internet lawyers. Worse than jailhouse lawyers. :-)
Never thought such a simple, off hand remark would garner such concern.
David Johnston
Aug 19, 2012, 12:45:02 PM8/19/12
to
people frequently do.
Dano
Aug 19, 2012, 1:13:09 PM8/19/12
to
"David Johnston" wrote in message news:k0r56d$s46$1...@dont-email.me...
=======================================
And THAT has a huge consequence? And you pick THIS insignificant item to
harp on?
I think we can all agree that it's wise to take most unsubstantiated stories
like this with a grain. In fact...that's exactly what I was doing in my
answer. I was mocking the original notion as posted WITHOUT verification.
And THAT has a huge consequence? And you pick THIS insignificant item to
harp on?
I think we can all agree that it's wise to take most unsubstantiated stories
like this with a grain. In fact...that's exactly what I was doing in my
answer. I was mocking the original notion as posted WITHOUT verification.
mikeos
Aug 19, 2012, 2:49:09 PM8/19/12
to
On 19/08/2012 18:13, Dano wrote:
>
> I think we can all agree that it's wise to take most unsubstantiated
> stories like this with a grain. In fact...that's exactly what I was
> doing in my answer. I was mocking the original notion as posted WITHOUT
> verification.
Sorry!
>
> I think we can all agree that it's wise to take most unsubstantiated
> stories like this with a grain. In fact...that's exactly what I was
> doing in my answer. I was mocking the original notion as posted WITHOUT
> verification.
Mason Barge
Aug 20, 2012, 2:44:03 PM8/20/12
to
incidents I have seen were jails, not prisons.
And, actually, I don't know of any good reason a jail should not allow it.
The accused is not being punished and his confinement is a technical
breach of due process, allowed only because the state has to have a way to
keep accused suspects of fleeing the jurisdiction.
Really, letting a person pay for a better jail cell is no different than
allowing house arrest.
Ashley Johnson
Aug 20, 2012, 4:56:27 PM8/20/12
to
On Aug 20, 6:44 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
Why should they have to pay? They are still presumed innocent at that
point. They may very well be *found* innocent at trial, and yet have
had money extorted from them by the state for their nonexistent
"crimes". That seems to be a problem.
> On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 15:56:09 +0100, mikeos <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >On 16/08/2012 16:31, Dano wrote:
> >> "mikeos" wrote in messagenews:I8qdnasJcaQqIbHN...@bt.com...
> >On 16/08/2012 16:31, Dano wrote:
point. They may very well be *found* innocent at trial, and yet have
had money extorted from them by the state for their nonexistent
"crimes". That seems to be a problem.
Paul Derbyshire
Aug 20, 2012, 5:40:11 PM8/20/12
to
Ashley Johnson expressed precisely :
me to think we are able to suck each others tiny penii.
> On Aug 20, 6:44ï¿œpm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 15:56:09 +0100, mikeos <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 16/08/2012 16:31, Dano wrote:
>>>> "mikeos" ï¿œwrote in messagenews:I8qdnasJcaQqIbHN...@bt.com...
>> On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 15:56:09 +0100, mikeos <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 16/08/2012 16:31, Dano wrote:
>>>> On 02/07/2012 18:09, Michael OConnor wrote:
>>>>> I think most people believe that defense attorneys are by and large
>>>>> slimy, and for most of us that disdain probably collectively coalesced
>>>>> with the OJ trial, and we all saw Barry Schreck talk his way out of
>>>>> DNA evidence on one test that had IIRC a one in one hundred sixty
>>>>> seven billion chance that the blood belonged to somebody besides OJ,
>>>>> and we all saw Johnnie Cochran with his courtroom antics, riding
>>>>> roughshod over the judge and prosecution. ï¿œWe watched a rich guy buy
>>>>> I think most people believe that defense attorneys are by and large
>>>>> slimy, and for most of us that disdain probably collectively coalesced
>>>>> with the OJ trial, and we all saw Barry Schreck talk his way out of
>>>>> DNA evidence on one test that had IIRC a one in one hundred sixty
>>>>> seven billion chance that the blood belonged to somebody besides OJ,
>>>>> and we all saw Johnnie Cochran with his courtroom antics, riding
>>>>> his way out of life in prison, thanks to defense attorneys.
>>>> I heard something recently which surprised me - Is it true that
>>>> convicted crims can pay to upgrade their cell? I believe that a figure
>>>> of $60 a night was mentioned. Heard this on BBC radio.
>>>> ===========================================
>>>> Why don't you get arrested in London and find out?
>>>> Get back to us.
>>
>>> London? The use of the US$ sign should be a clue.
>>
>> And that aside, it does in fact occur in the US, although the only
>> incidents I have seen were jails, not prisons.
>>
>> And, actually, I don't know of any good reason a jail should not allow it.
>> The accused is not being punished and his confinement is a technical
>> breach of due process, allowed only because the state has to have a way to
>> keep accused suspects of fleeing the jurisdiction.
>>
>> Really, letting a person pay for a better jail cell is no different than
>> allowing house arrest.
>
> Why should they have to pay? They are still presumed innocent at that
> point. They may very well be *found* innocent at trial, and yet have
> had money extorted from them by the state for their nonexistent
> "crimes". That seems to be a problem.
We have quite a bit in common, do we not Ashley Johnson? It astounds
>>>> I heard something recently which surprised me - Is it true that
>>>> convicted crims can pay to upgrade their cell? I believe that a figure
>>>> of $60 a night was mentioned. Heard this on BBC radio.
>>>> ===========================================
>>>> Why don't you get arrested in London and find out?
>>>> Get back to us.
>>
>>> London? The use of the US$ sign should be a clue.
>>
>> And that aside, it does in fact occur in the US, although the only
>> incidents I have seen were jails, not prisons.
>>
>> And, actually, I don't know of any good reason a jail should not allow it.
>> The accused is not being punished and his confinement is a technical
>> breach of due process, allowed only because the state has to have a way to
>> keep accused suspects of fleeing the jurisdiction.
>>
>> Really, letting a person pay for a better jail cell is no different than
>> allowing house arrest.
>
> Why should they have to pay? They are still presumed innocent at that
> point. They may very well be *found* innocent at trial, and yet have
> had money extorted from them by the state for their nonexistent
> "crimes". That seems to be a problem.
me to think we are able to suck each others tiny penii.
Ashley Johnson
Aug 20, 2012, 5:42:53 PM8/20/12
to
On Aug 20, 9:40 pm, Paul Derbyshire <pd...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
> Ashley Johnson expressed precisely :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 20, 6:44 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 15:56:09 +0100, mikeos <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On 16/08/2012 16:31, Dano wrote:
> >>>> "mikeos" wrote in messagenews:I8qdnasJcaQqIbHN...@bt.com...
> Ashley Johnson expressed precisely :
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 20, 6:44 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Sun, 19 Aug 2012 15:56:09 +0100, mikeos <mike...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On 16/08/2012 16:31, Dano wrote:
> >>>> On 02/07/2012 18:09, Michael OConnor wrote:
> >>>>> I think most people believe that defense attorneys are by and large
> >>>>> slimy, and for most of us that disdain probably collectively coalesced
> >>>>> with the OJ trial, and we all saw Barry Schreck talk his way out of
> >>>>> DNA evidence on one test that had IIRC a one in one hundred sixty
> >>>>> seven billion chance that the blood belonged to somebody besides OJ,
> >>>>> and we all saw Johnnie Cochran with his courtroom antics, riding
> >>>>> roughshod over the judge and prosecution. We watched a rich guy buy
> >>>>> I think most people believe that defense attorneys are by and large
> >>>>> slimy, and for most of us that disdain probably collectively coalesced
> >>>>> with the OJ trial, and we all saw Barry Schreck talk his way out of
> >>>>> DNA evidence on one test that had IIRC a one in one hundred sixty
> >>>>> seven billion chance that the blood belonged to somebody besides OJ,
> >>>>> and we all saw Johnnie Cochran with his courtroom antics, riding
> >>>>> his way out of life in prison, thanks to defense attorneys.
> >>>> I heard something recently which surprised me - Is it true that
> >>>> convicted crims can pay to upgrade their cell? I believe that a figure
> >>>> of $60 a night was mentioned. Heard this on BBC radio.
> >>>> ===========================================
> >>>> Why don't you get arrested in London and find out?
> >>>> Get back to us.
>
> >>> London? The use of the US$ sign should be a clue.
>
> >> And that aside, it does in fact occur in the US, although the only
> >> incidents I have seen were jails, not prisons.
>
> >> And, actually, I don't know of any good reason a jail should not allow it.
> >> The accused is not being punished and his confinement is a technical
> >> breach of due process, allowed only because the state has to have a way to
> >> keep accused suspects of fleeing the jurisdiction.
>
> >> Really, letting a person pay for a better jail cell is no different than
> >> allowing house arrest.
>
> > Why should they have to pay? They are still presumed innocent at that
> > point. They may very well be *found* innocent at trial, and yet have
> > had money extorted from them by the state for their nonexistent
> > "crimes". That seems to be a problem.
>
> We have quite a bit in common, do we not Ashley Johnson? It astounds
> me to think we are able to suck each others tiny penii.
Eeeewww. Get the fuck away from me, you crazy person!
> >>>> I heard something recently which surprised me - Is it true that
> >>>> convicted crims can pay to upgrade their cell? I believe that a figure
> >>>> of $60 a night was mentioned. Heard this on BBC radio.
> >>>> ===========================================
> >>>> Why don't you get arrested in London and find out?
> >>>> Get back to us.
>
> >>> London? The use of the US$ sign should be a clue.
>
> >> And that aside, it does in fact occur in the US, although the only
> >> incidents I have seen were jails, not prisons.
>
> >> And, actually, I don't know of any good reason a jail should not allow it.
> >> The accused is not being punished and his confinement is a technical
> >> breach of due process, allowed only because the state has to have a way to
> >> keep accused suspects of fleeing the jurisdiction.
>
> >> Really, letting a person pay for a better jail cell is no different than
> >> allowing house arrest.
>
> > Why should they have to pay? They are still presumed innocent at that
> > point. They may very well be *found* innocent at trial, and yet have
> > had money extorted from them by the state for their nonexistent
> > "crimes". That seems to be a problem.
>
> We have quite a bit in common, do we not Ashley Johnson? It astounds
> me to think we are able to suck each others tiny penii.
Paul Derbyshire
Aug 20, 2012, 6:22:44 PM8/20/12
to
It happens that Ashley Johnson formulated :
>> We have quite a bit in common, do we not Ashley Johnson? ï¿œIt astounds
mind, whore?
>> me to think we are able to suck each others tiny penii.
>
> Eeeewww. Get the fuck away from me, you crazy person!
You had no problem sucking my tiny penis last night. What changed your
>
> Eeeewww. Get the fuck away from me, you crazy person!
mind, whore?
0 new messages