• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Court: Guilty can't sue for false imprisonment

Abbazorkzog said:
I wasn't talking about BLM.
Click to expand...

Thats nice,

But they have given the whole "SJW" movement a really bad name.

So, sorry if I don't take you seriously when you start out a conversation with claiming people to be innocent, because people like BLM and what constitutes "innocent" in their eyes comes to mind.
 
Caine said:
Thats nice,

But they have given the whole "SJW" movement a really bad name.

So, sorry if I don't take you seriously when you start out a conversation with claiming people to be innocent, because people like BLM and what constitutes "innocent" in their eyes comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Nor am I talking about SJW. I politely ask that you stop grasping at straws and leave me alone.
 
Caine said:
Thats nice,

But they have given the whole "SJW" movement a really bad name.

So, sorry if I don't take you seriously when you start out a conversation with claiming people to be innocent, because people like BLM and what constitutes "innocent" in their eyes comes to mind.
Click to expand...

Damn those pesky "social justice warriors" complaining about imaginary problems like MURDER.

Lol ??

Are you being serious ?

You're just assuming that anyone shot by police must have deserved this. Surely you can visualize the flow chart by which your logic operates :

81ef49de8449bc7744d5f8c9b5e82449.jpg
 
Absentglare said:
Damn those pesky "social justice warriors" complaining about imaginary problems like MURDER.

Lol ??

Are you being serious ?

You're just assuming that anyone shot by police must have deserved this. Surely you can visualize the flow chart by which your logic operates :

81ef49de8449bc7744d5f8c9b5e82449.jpg
Click to expand...

Vigil, protest held after Chicago cop fatally shoots 16-year-old boy | WFLD

Yep.... I'll take the police department's word over a thug's family members and "witnesses" in a thug neighborhood in chicago any day of the week.

I may be wrong once in a while.... But I'll be alot less wrong than you.


This is the type of **** Im talking about.

This, Ferguson, Baltimore, and the many murders of police officers by SJWs since this movement has started.

All disgusting.

So don't be surprised when a person like me doesn't trust the word of someone who immediately jumps into a thread dealing with a court ruling by talking **** about police (when this thread didn't have **** to do with cops killing people) and start claiming the "victims" were innocent.
 
Caine said:
Vigil, protest held after Chicago cop fatally shoots 16-year-old boy | WFLD

Yep.... I'll take the police department's word over a thug's family members and "witnesses" in a thug neighborhood in chicago any day of the week.

I may be wrong once in a while.... But I'll be alot less wrong than you.


This is the type of **** Im talking about.

This, Ferguson, Baltimore, and the many murders of police officers by SJWs since this movement has started.

All disgusting.

So don't be surprised when a person like me doesn't trust the word of someone who immediately jumps into a thread dealing with a court ruling by talking **** about police (when this thread didn't have **** to do with cops killing people) and start claiming the "victims" were innocent.
Click to expand...

Great so now you've justified one police shooting.

That leaves 999 more to justify before your grandiose claim holds water. Good luck.
 
Absentglare said:
Great so now you've justified one police shooting.

That leaves 999 more to justify before your grandiose claim holds water. Good luck.
Click to expand...

Umm... I was responding to someone elses Grandiose claims in the first place. Learn to follow the thread.

Someone claimed that cops are running around shooting down innocent people. (BTW, this was a comment that had absolutely nothing to do with the thread conversation up to that point.)
I claim that I'll believe law enforcement over some internet Social Justice Warrior.

Now you are saying I am making grandiose claims.

So, please, tell me what these claims are.... and then I'll try to justify them.
 
Caine said:
Umm... I was responding to someone elses Grandiose claims in the first place. Learn to follow the thread.

Someone claimed that cops are running around shooting down innocent people. (BTW, this was a comment that had absolutely nothing to do with the thread conversation up to that point.)
I claim that I'll believe law enforcement over some internet Social Justice Warrior.

Now you are saying I am making grandiose claims.

So, please, tell me what these claims are.... and then I'll try to justify them.
Click to expand...

No, police kill innocent citizens, at times, and are not necessarily held accountable for those killings.

Your bizarre claim was that no cop has ever wrongfully killed a citizen without being held accountable for it.
 
Absentglare said:
No, police kill innocent citizens, at times, and are not necessarily held accountable for those killings.

Your bizarre claim was that no cop has ever wrongfully killed a citizen without being held accountable for it.
Click to expand...

Please, quote me directly where I said,
"No cop has ever wrongfully killed a citizen without behind held accountable for it."

Or anything close to that.

Im not making the blanket statements here. The guy who started it in the 1st page in this thread did.
 
Caine said:
Please, quote me directly where I said,
"No cop has ever wrongfully killed a citizen without behind held accountable for it."

Or anything close to that.

Im not making the blanket statements here. The guy who started it in the 1st page in this thread did.
Click to expand...

Other guy : sometimes cops shoot innocent people

You : no because i assume that none are innocent based on cherry picking xyz
 
If I was suspected of killing someone simply because of my resemblance to the Police artist's sketch and not having a sound alibi for the evening in question, I would plead no contest to a lesser manslaughter charge if it was offered, but never guilty.

Never say that you did something that you did not do.

The innocents that are railroaded into prison have the hardest time to do. The Parole board wants to hear some remorse from you that they aren't going to get, so you have to stay in the longest.

No contest gets treated just like guilty by the court, but it let's you sue when you are found innocent later.
 
Absentglare said:
Other guy : sometimes cops shoot innocent people

You : no because i assume that none are innocent based on cherry picking xyz
Click to expand...

It has probably escaped your notice, but they are being held liable for it.
 
OpportunityCost said:
It has probably escaped your notice, but they are being held liable for it.
Click to expand...

Many people feel that it doesn't happen as much as it should.

If a ham sandwich can get indicted, it doesn't make sense that so many killings involving police force don't make it past that stage.
 
Cardinal said:
It is the point. I was also responding to an earlier post of yours in which you said that "There are very few cases (e.g. negligent homicide) where the guilt of the defendant is anything but absolutely certain to the defendant."
So in light of just the few examples I've given, the guilt of the defendant is anything but absolutely certain. Apparently you weren't aware until I told you that police can lie about the evidence. They can also lie that someone is ratting on you upstairs, and whether or not that's even true that will invoke the principle of the prisoner's dilemma, thus making any self incrimination worthless. Finally, due to the plea bargaining issue, you "accepting" a guilty plea has next to zero credibility when taken at face value.
Click to expand...
Just a knit to pick. He DID say that the person themselves always know whether or not they are guilty, not the system or jury.

I would also add that it isn't exactly as the thread paints it. The prosecution can't make a deal and then take it off the table if you talk to your lawyer. Your lawyer will review your case and then suggest the best course of action.
Unless the case looks really good against you then most lawyers are happy to go to court and not suggest a plea bargain.
Yes, court can be a bit of a crap shoot depending on the lawyer you get assigned or can afford. And maybe even some people consider this. Some people also might take the 5 years over the chance no matter how small of facing 20 or more instead.
Crappy system but still the person's decision. There is always a choice.
I also agree it depends on the case in question.
There's really no one size fits all in the justice system.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom