Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Ilaine who wrote (73924)	9/4/2003 8:29:48 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 82486

nolle prossed Do you guys speak English too? :-) You're going to think he is the luckiest guilty sumbitch on the planet. LOL!!!!!!!

To: Ilaine who wrote (73924)	9/4/2003 10:21:19 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 82486

Lawyers care to comment? UPON WHAT MEAT DOES THIS OUR CAESAR FEED THAT HE IS GROWN SO GREAT? The latest development in the Moussaoui case (*) has my head spinning. A federal judge has ordered that he be given access to a witness he claims can help prove his innocence, and the Justice Department has refused. The betting seems to be that the judge will dismiss the case, and that Moussaoui will then be tried instead by a military tribunal. I'm no expert in Constitutional law, but is the Administration really prepared to assert that a the President can, by Executive Order, overrule both the Compulsory Process Clause and the Double Jeopardy Clause? Any reader more learned than I who can provide clarification is invited to do so. markarkleiman.blogspot.com

To: Ilaine who wrote (73924)	9/4/2003 11:11:57 PM
From: The Philosopher	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

I dunno, Chris, what are we talking about? I came into the argument late, somebody pinged me, I don't really know what ya'll are arguing about. The thread arose when somebody complained about the possibility of a guilty person being acquitted. My point was that a guilty person can't be acquitted. They aren't guilty until they are found guilty by a judge or jury, and if they are acquitted they weren't found guilty, so they are and remain innocent. It was entirely about the context of a decision in a criminal trial. That's why I'm so clear about the correct legal use of terms witin this context. If you're looking at a rap sheet with a dozen or two acquittals and nolle prosses, no way you're going to think the guy was just unlucky. You're going to think he is the luckiest guilty sumbitch on the planet. Now, now. That's wrongheaded thinking. I'm sure they're just a choir boy who had a string of unfortunate encounters with cops looking to make their quotas.