• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Encountered my first "Truther" today

triforcharity said:
No, they didn't require it, but they asked if I thought this was acceptable, and I agreed. This is just a courtesy, and it is not a requirement. If I had not agreed, they would have tried to come up with something I thought was acceptable.

This is actually pretty common in the state of Florida.
Click to expand...

If it's common in the state, where I also live and have friends who are lawyers, can you give me another example.
 
yes Red I can give you lots of examples... but you won't believe them.

How about you call your local states attorneys office and ask them what they do in the instances of a plea bargain. You should ask them if when they do a plea bargain, they contact the victim and ask if it is acceptable to them. (which it is, and is often what is done.)

Feel free... you really should try that out instead of making an ASSUMPTION (you know...making an ASS out of U and MPTION).

try again LIAR.
 
RedIbis said:
If it's common in the state, where I also live and have friends who are lawyers, can you give me another example.
Click to expand...

Did you ask your lawyer acquaintances? Prosecution frequently confers with the victims on criminal cases, and in many cases they have a big influence on kind of charges they bring forward.
 
triforcharity said:
No, they didn't require it, but they asked if I thought this was acceptable, and I agreed. This is just a courtesy, and it is not a requirement. If I had not agreed, they would have tried to come up with something I thought was acceptable.

This is actually pretty common in the state of Florida.
Click to expand...

Oops. As suspected, the victim has no right to control the outcome of the case, nor is the victim's agreement necessary.

From the DOJ:

No state has extended or interpreted a victim’s right to confer to be a victim’s right to control the prosecution of the case. Such laws merely provide victims with an opportunity to be heard, giving them a voice, not a veto.
Click to expand...
 
BigAl said:
Which doesn't contradict the original claim.
Click to expand...

Really, because he said:
If I had not agreed, they would have tried to come up with something I thought was acceptable.
Click to expand...

And the DOJ site I quoted says:

Such laws merely provide victims with an opportunity to be heard, giving them a voice, not a veto.
Click to expand...

Sounds like it does contradict his claim. And let's remember victim impact statements are usually for violent crimes. Tri says the kid was charged with two misdemeanors. Why would a judge need the "victim's" agreement on such a case?

You guys are falling for a whopper.
 
RedIbis said:
Really, because he said:


And the DOJ site I quoted says:



Sounds like it does contradict his claim. And let's remember victim impact statements are usually for violent crimes. Tri says the kid was charged with two misdemeanors. Why would a judge need the "victim's" agreement on such a case?

You guys are falling for a whopper.
Click to expand...

You really are that dense. What does veto mean Red?
 
Who says this was a victim's impact statement? Who says that he even talked to a judge? I would hate to think that you're just making **** up.
 
RedIbis said:
Oops. As suspected, the victim has no right to control the outcome of the case, nor is the victim's agreement necessary.

From the DOJ:

Quote:
Such laws merely provide victims with an opportunity to be heard, giving them a voice, not a veto.
Click to expand...

What do you think the bolded part means?
 
RedIbis said:
Oops. As suspected, the victim has no right to control the outcome of the case, nor is the victim's agreement necessary.

From the DOJ:
Click to expand...

ROFLMAO.

Oh man you are really dense.

did ANY of us SAY that TRI was "in control of the prosecutions case?"

No.

Reading for comprehension needs some work. I can recommend some online courses for you (my teaches a great one).

What has been said in response twoof is that prosecutors often will talk to the victim and when they are doing a plea bargain will tell the victim and see if it is ACCEPTABLE to them.

VASTLY different.

TRY AGAIN... this time call a states attorneys office and ASK.
 
I love it when RED shows his ignorance.

http://myfloridalegal.com/pages.nsf/Main/e99f7f48df3b5d7485256cca0052aa0f

13. To consultation with the prosecutor's office, if the victim of a felony, regarding release of accused, plea agreements, pretrial diversion programs, and the sentencing of the accused (and to receive a copy of the non-confidential portions of the pre-sentence investigation report if prepared prior to sentencing).

and
Is the State going to let the defendant "plea bargain" his/her way out of the charges?
In many cases, it is in the best interest of all parties-the defendant, the State, and you the victim-to resolve the case without a trial. Many factors enter into the decision to reach a plea agreement. The first two factors considered are the strength of the evidence and the wishes of the victim(s). If the evidence, for whatever reason, becomes stale or defective, and is therefore not strong enough to support a conviction, as charged, it may be necessary to allow the defendant to "plea bargain" to a lesser charge or a lesser sentence than required by law.

Alternatively, the victim(s) may not wish to undergo the stress of a trial, in which case the State may try to work out a "plea bargain." The State will also consider such factors as the protection of the public, the attitude of the defendant, the need to treat this defendant similarly to other defendants who have committed the same crimes, the state sentencing guidelines, and the expense of taking the case to trial. However, the State will not enter into a plea agreement with the defendant without consulting you first. As mentioned previously, you will be given the opportunity at the sentencing hearing to explain to the court how the defendant's crime affected you personally and financially. Your testimony will assist the court in entering an appropriate sentence, which would be consistent with the terms of any agreement that has been reached between the State and the defendant.

The judge does not have to accept the "plea bargain," and may reject it if you object.


and feel free to contact them to see if they don't work with the victims of the crime for a PLEA Bargain.
Tallahassee Office
PL-01, The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050
(850)414-3700
Fax 850-922-6191
Chief Assistant: Jacksonville Office
1300 Riverplace Blvd., Suite 405
Jacksonville, FL 32207
(904)-858-6919
Fax (904)348-2783
Chief Assistant: John Wethington

Orlando Office
Century Plaza
135 West Central Boulevard, Suite 1000
Orlando, FL 32801
(407)245-0893
Fax (407)245-0356
Chief Assistant: John Roman
Tampa Office
Concourse Center 4
3507 Frontage Road, Suite 200
Tampa, FL 33607
(813)287-7960
Fax (813)281-5520
Chief Assistant: Thomas Smith

Ft. Lauderdale Office
Auto Nation Tower
110 S.E. 6th St., Suite 900
Ft. Lauderdale, FL 33301
(954)712-4600
Fax (954)712-4958
Chief Assistant: Julie Hogan
Ft. Myers Office
Riverfront Center, Suite 338
2075 West First Street
Fort Myers, FL 33901
(239)338-2440
SC 748-2440
Fax (239)338-2304
SC 748-2341
Chief Assistant: George Richards

Miami Office
Rivergate Plaza, Suite 650
444 Brickell Avenue
Miami, FL 33131
(305)377-5850 ex 201
SC 452-5850 ex 201
Fax (305)377-5927
SC Fax 452-5927
Chief Assistant: Carlos Guzman
William Shepherd
Statewide Prosecutor
PL01, The Capitol
Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050
(850)414-3300
Home Page Address http://myfloridalegal.com/swp

West Palm Beach Office
Flagler Waterview Building
1515 N. Flagler Drive, Suite 900
West Palm Beach, FL 33401
(561)837-5000
SC 252-5000
Fax (561)837-5107
SC 252-5107
Deputy Chief Assistant: Todd Weicholz
 
Last edited:
RedIbis said:
Really, because he said:


And the DOJ site I quoted says:



Sounds like it does contradict his claim. And let's remember victim impact statements are usually for violent crimes. Tri says the kid was charged with two misdemeanors. Why would a judge need the "victim's" agreement on such a case?

You guys are falling for a whopper.
Click to expand...

Dodge much ?
 
More information to show REDS ignorance

http://myfloridalegal.com/pages.nsf/Main/E14E8F70D7DFE31F8525749C005012E4

b) Victims of crime or their lawful representatives, including the next of kin of homicide victims, are entitled to the right to be informed, to be present, and to be heard when relevant, at all crucial stages of criminal proceedings, to the extent that these rights do not interfere with the constitutional rights of the accused.

I think being "heard when relevant" is what happened for Tri... the prosecutors office made a plea agreement and wanted to make sure that they "heard" tri when it was "relevant."

and we also have this part
" the right to be present at those proceedings; an opportunity be consulted by the state attorney to express their views"

Amazing thing the US justice system...
 
More to show how full of crap RED is

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/ovc/publications/bulletins/legalseries/bulletin7/3.html

"victim impact statements can influence the court’s decision to accept or reject a plea. Also, consulting with the victim throughout plea bargain discussions allows prosecutors to incorporate the victims’ concerns before presenting a plea proposal to the court. Furthermore, this inclusion may enhance the probability that the plea agreement will meet with judicial approval."

Man red... has this exposed your claims as a complete and utter fabrication? (the original meaning, not your BS one)
 
RedIbis said:
And what does this sound like:

If I had not agreed, they would have tried to come up with something I thought was acceptable.
Click to expand...
Click to expand...

Because TruthersLie already said it, I'm just going to quote him
I'll explain it in small words.

the defendant was charged with several crimes, including a felony. The prosecutors office often will consult (talk to) the injured party. In this case that is Tri.

Tri has stated he has asked for them to go easy on the kid.

During the plea bargaining, the prosecutors office has worked out a deal with the defense attorney. But they are running that deal by the injured party (tri). If the injured party is willing to accept the plea, they can. If they want a harsher sentence, they can ask the prosecutor to go for a harsher sentence.

That is often how Plea bargains work. Now if this kid went to full trial, then it is another matter entirely...\
Click to expand...

What you posted from the DOJ, is that in regards to plea bargains as well?
How do you interpret what's happened here?
 
RedIbis said:
And what does this sound like:
Click to expand...

It sounds like you just got OWNED yet again.

so were you lying about tri's story being "exposed as a fabrication?"

Do you mean that you think the story is false? Because that is vastly different from what you posted.
 
EnJaySee said:
What you posted from the DOJ, is that in regards to plea bargains as well?
Click to expand...

Judging from what he has said, it was regarding "victims' impact statments."

I am not even sure that RedIbis knows what a plea bargain is. Or perhaps is is pretending not to. RedIbis is an extremely dishonest person so who knows.
 
Typical truther research methods, instead of getting information from the horse's mouth, by actually making phone calls, he goes into investigoogle.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom