• 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

RedIbis said:
It depends on who's telling the story. If it's Tommy McTwoof, they'll scrutinize every detail. If it's Archie D. Bunker, they eat up every word.
Click to expand...

I'm sorry...

I seem to have missed your apology for IMPINGING upon Tri's character...

And your outright misrepresentation of the laws of Florida and how the SAO handles things in a plea bargain...

Come on Red, man up and apologize for being such a *****.

ETA: Did you manage to call ANY of the SAO offices I linked for you to ask about consulting the victim in a Plea bargain?
 
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...

That does not in the slightest mean what you think it does.

You suck at research. You've always sucked at research. Barring some extraordinary transformation in your character, you will always suck at research. Give it up, already.
 
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...

No not "oops" victims of crimes are often asked for their opinions regarding what punishment they think is fair. In fact, in many, felony cases the victim(s) are allowed to read victim impact statement at the time of sentencing. This does not mean that the judge or DA is required to follow the victim (s) wishes but it most likely will be considered when formulating a sentence. Why can't you do research with a bit of depth rather then cherry picking facts that are convenient to you?
 
Audible Click said:
No not "oops" victims of crimes are often asked for their opinions regarding what punishment they think is fair. In fact, in many, felony cases the victim(s) are allowed to read victim impact statement at the time of sentencing. This does not mean that the judge or DA is required to follow the victim (s) wishes but it most likely will be considered when formulating a sentence. Why can't you do research with a bit of depth rather then cherry picking facts that are convenient to you?
Click to expand...

Read back on the entire story. Do you really think a victim impact statement was considered?
 
RedIbis said:
Read back on the entire story. Do you really think a victim impact statement was considered?
Click to expand...

It seems there was no victim impact statement. However, you're the one who erroneously first brought it up.
 
I've read the entire thread. Tri was asked for his opinion on what sort of punishment this person should receive, apparently, this was taken into consideration. As usual, you took one line of my post and decided to run with it. I suggest you re-read the first sentence rather then doing your usual cherry picking to wriggle out of the apology you owe Tri.
 
Before law school, I worked for the Crown Attorney's office (Canadian equivalent to the U.S. District Attorney's office) for several years. My job included the screening and vetting of criminal charges as they came through, advising on the appropriateness and/or sufficiency of the charges laid by the police and the sufficiency or insufficiency of the evidence in support of the charges, making recommendations on increasing or reducing the charges, and making sentencing recommendations on (a) a guilty plea, or (b) a finding of guilt after trial.

I was involved in thousands of plea bargain arrangements during my 5 years there, and it was standard procedure to consult the complainant if the matter was one involving physical violence, threats of violence, break and enters, and other charges that involve complainants in a personal capacity (as opposed to, say shoplifting charges, where we would not consult a department store complainant for input on the plea bargain resolution).

We were not, of course, bound by the wishes of the complainant, but we were obligated to consult the complainant in cases of violence, threats of violence, etc., as directed by the Ministry of the Attorney General and various statutes and guidelines.

We very often reduced charges, or stayed charges, or dropped charges, or had individuals enter into peace bonds and such, and we often sent individuals into various "diversion programs" by which they could escape a criminal record entirely. Each case was dependent upon its own facts, but the wishes of the complainant were always taken into account, even though we were not required to agree with them, or to go in the direction that the complainant wanted us to go. We might disagree with the wishes of the complainant and pursue the course that we thought best served the public despite the complainant, but we did at least consult the complainant. Sometimes a complainant would want all charges dropped and we would disagree and insist upon a plea to some charge or another. Sometimes a complainant would want us to proceed on more serious charges than we felt were warranted, but we would not do so just because the complainant wanted us to do so.

If a case was minor, though, and the accused had no record or a limited record, we were always happy when the complainant was agreeable to reducing charges and limiting sentences.

I have lots of friends and colleagues in the Crown's office, and they still follow these procedures.

The discussion about victim impact statements here is a red herring. That comes later in the process, if it comes at all.
 
Last edited:
LashL said:
Before law school, I worked for the Crown Attorney's office (Canadian equivalent to the U.S. District Attorney's office) for several years. My job included the screening and vetting of criminal charges as they came through, advising on the appropriateness and/or sufficiency of the charges laid by the police and the sufficiency or insufficiency of the evidence in support of the charges, making recommendations on increasing or reducing the charges, and making sentencing recommendations on (a) a guilty plea, or (b) a finding of guilt after trial.

I was involved in thousands of plea bargain arrangements during my 5 years there, and it was standard procedure to consult the complainant if the matter was one involving physical violence, threats of violence, break and enters, and other charges that involve complainants in a personal capacity (as opposed to, say shoplifting charges, where we would not consult a department store complainant for input on the plea bargain resolution).

We were not, of course, bound by the wishes of the complainant, but we were obligated to consult the complainant in cases of violence, threats of violence, etc., as directed by the Ministry of the Attorney General and various statutes and guidelines.

We very often reduced charges, or stayed charges, or dropped charges, or had individuals enter into peace bonds and such, and we often sent individuals into various "diversion programs" by which they could escape a criminal record entirely. Each case was dependent upon its own facts, but the wishes of the complainant were always taken into account, even though we were not required to agree with them, or to go in the direction that the complainant wanted us to go. We might disagree with the wishes of the complainant and pursue the course that we thought best served the public despite the complainant, but we did at least consult the complainant. Sometimes a complainant would want all charges dropped and we would disagree and insist upon a plea to some charge or another. Sometimes a complainant would want us to proceed on more serious charges than we felt were warranted, but we would not do so just because the complainant wanted us to do so.

If a case was minor, though, and the accused had no record or a limited record, we were always happy when the complainant was agreeable to reducing charges and limiting sentences.

I have lots of friends and colleagues in the Crown's office, and they still follow these procedures.

The discussion about victim impact statements here is a red herring. That comes later in the process, if it comes at all.
Click to expand...

Red, tip your hat to this lady, son.
 
So? Where is the proof of this story already? Didn't an originally supposed felony make the local paper somewhere?
 
why would you assume that it did? there are over 500 incidences in a cities (every day), ranging from petty theft, to full on murder. Does your paper publish all 500 incidences in the local paper?
 
CurtC said:
It's interesting that the troothers' claims always seem to inferentially implicate the FDNY, but they always refrain from spelling it out. It's usually us who point out that if their beliefs are true, then the FDNY was responsible for murder, but we do that as a way to shut them up. After all, no one would accuse the FDNY of the murder of 3000 fellow citizens and 300 fellow firefighters, right?

I guess I was wrong about that - you found one crazy enough to say that. Best wishes on keeping far away from him.
Click to expand...

Except for Alex Jones, that scumbag comes right out and accuses them.
:shocked:infowars.com/print/Sept11/FDNY.htm
I'm too new here to post a full url yet, you'll have to visit this through copy and paste with a www in front
 
WUBRINY63 said:
So? Where is the proof of this story already? Didn't an originally supposed felony make the local paper somewhere?
Click to expand...

Lordy lordy, looking for PROOF of an alleged interaction between 9/11 twoofer and 9/11 debunker. Got bored after finding all the PROOF that 9/11 was an inside job? Got the NWO runnin skurred enough to focus on loose ends like this?

We demand a new investigation into whether or not triforcharity was accosted by a cartoonishly insane twoofer! Hell, Dick Cheney's sentencing can wait a bit for this mystery to be resolved! Full steam ahead! [/washed-up twoof]

ETA da link from above: http://www.infowars.com/print/Sept11/FDNY.htm
 
Last edited:
funk de fino said:
Never claimed it. You have a shameful lack of integrity.
Click to expand...

Ok, at least you admit that there is no supporting information. At least we're getting somewhere. Now if you could just stop whining and namecalling, maybe we could resolve this.
 
RedIbis said:
Ok, at least you admit that there is no supporting information. At least we're getting somewhere. Now if you could just stop whining and namecalling, maybe we could resolve this.
Click to expand...

Now, you should admit that you have no evidence that Tri's claim "was exposed as a complete fabrication." Then, maybe we can resolve this.
 
RedIbis said:
Ok, at least you admit that there is no supporting information. At least we're getting somewhere. Now if you could just stop whining and namecalling, maybe we could resolve this.
Click to expand...

Show me one poster that has excepted his story as fact? Have posters argued that his story is plausible? Yes. It's not the same thing.

What this thread has evolved into is your complete denial and lack of a retraction of exposing his story as a fabrication, and your ignorance of the plea bargain process.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom