Research also prevails over assumption. A judge can overturn any verdict except one of innocence. People should really research how appeals are conducted and work before doubting how much control rests with a judge as well.
Printable View
Research also prevails over assumption. A judge can overturn any verdict except one of innocence. People should really research how appeals are conducted and work before doubting how much control rests with a judge as well.
I concur that judicial impartiality is likely a pipe dream in this day and age.
Regarding research, could you please cite which dictionary you are referencing in your above examle?
At your behest, I consulted 2 separate common tomes, The American Heritage Dictionary and Webster's Dictionary. Neither's entry for 'court' was remotely similar to your reference.
I only ask to satisfy my own curiosity as to the source.
And, actually, I have sat on a jury in a grievous bodily harm case. Not murder, or attempted murder, but a serious incident none the less.
Not your level of involvement with the court system for sure, but I have been exposed to it.
Carry on.
Sent from somewhere
Simply google "court definition" and either click on "law" or click on "more definitions". I believe they are sourcing from Oxford but I can't guarantee it. Another avenue would be to look at a legal dictionary (they exist).Quote:
Originally Posted by crays
Insofar as research, I'm referring to appeals there, but most of the American public has *no idea*. Just some tidbits:
1) There is no ability to appeal until a case is entirely concluded, no matter what mistakes a judge has made along the way. People can be subjected to all sorts of judicial overreach that screws their life up, there is no appeal until months after the very end. Some cases can last a decade.
2) "Discretion" is the most commonly applied standard and means even if a judge's decision was obviously bias'ed or incorrect, the appeals court is OBLIGATED to try to craft an explanation that would justify it.
3) "Error preservation" - if you did not raise your problem with the court you have a problem with, you can't appeal it. To be more clear, lets say a judge does something like gives you 5 minutes to speak and then cuts you off under threat of sanction. Well, if you didn't stand there in front of the court and lodge an oral motion/offer of proof (and get held in contempt for it), you didn't preserve your error so you can't appeal it.
This is... a TLDR version and is not 100% accurate it is maybe 95%, with hundreds of other pitfalls I am not mentioning, just simplifying here. For most people, if their attorney fucks up their case, there is no fixing it due to the lack of error preservation. If your attorney fails to research and mention case law, it really doesn't matter if your judgment/verdict/whatever contravenes settled law or is (insert problem) - your attorney didn't preserve the error, there's usually nothing you can do about it.
PS: 11ish years of professional experience. I may rant, but I've seen crazy shit. I've never been arrested or accused of any crime, ever. I have seen plenty of people's lives ruined by criminal/civil/etc. though...
ETA2: And my statistical success rate is much higher than the average. Appeals have an very bad success rate nationally (I forget exactly, 6% +/- something). I'd have to do the math but I think something like 4/10 of what I drafted became wins.
it is more question how long does jurors take for them to say not guilty on all murder charges.
possession is a different story.
Judge just dismissed the Minor in Possession of a Firearm charge, prior to jury instructions.
The statute they charged him under covers handguns, SBRs, and SBSs, not rifles. One would think that someone would have noticed that it was not applicable to the weapon he was carrying at some time prior to the end stage of the trial.
That would require more thought than "Evil black assault rifle bad, white kid racist, must punish"...Quote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
Far too much mental effort for the libtards.
So, the prosecutor just aimed a gun at jurors with his finger on the trigger.
https://twitchy.com/sarahd-313035/20...-usage-photos/
Quote:
Originally Posted by RblDiver
I would like to say that I am shocked, but that response has dulled due to excessive use.
My suspicion is that Binger has probably never fired a real weapon, and definitely doesn't own any.
That's crazy. Yikes! There is no visible indication that gun is safe. Bolt closed. No chamber flag. Finger on the trigger.
Wow.
Attachment 88374
Why is there not a chamber flag zip tied to that damn thing? The defense had his finger on the trigger as well, although he didn't flag the crowd with it.