Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The court isn't going to sentence him on his "poor taste". He committed a crime, if we are to believe what the video shows - and I am willing to bet the jury will too.
These kinds of cases almost never go to trial unless the defendant or his lawyer is a complete moron. You get caught on tape, you plead out.
Her background is completely irrelevant. You just want to make ad hominem attacks against her, for who knows what reason.
FACTS
She is a felon and has DOMESTIC TERRORIST charges on her record along with other arrest history.
So now you are defending a terrorist criminal?
Goodness.
* But it was ok for her to attack the candidate with a sign according to you?
Since when does this political association have any relevance in a US court of law? Sounds a bit weird to me. Was this a political rally? Was this persaon assaulted because of their political association? If true, then it is relevant to the defendant like the SEIU case last summer in DC at a tea party rally.
Now if one wants to discuss the SEIU goon who beat up the Tea Party guy selling "Don't Tread on Me" signs last summer, then politics would be admissible in court since the goon beat the tea party guy up because he was selling flags and suppporting the tea party at a tea party rally. This was the motivation for the SEIU goon to beat the guy up.
In no way is the victim considered for any mitigating circumstance in a guilty finding. That would be like saying the rape victim asked for it by coming on to the rapist, so the rapist deserves a break in his sentence. Right
I expect to hear next that rapists should be let go when their victim dresses attractively.
Based on the logic some posters are using to justify the disgusting use of violence on the woman at the Paul debate site, it would seem that it would depend on the political views of the rape victim.
If the woman is a liberal or leans left, then she is a filthy pig that most surely asked for it.
If the woman is a conservative or leans right, then her attacker is a scumbag that should be punished.
Sorry but I never said the guy was right in keeping her held down.
But you did propose a host of irrelevant factors in his defense. Thank God you are not his lawyer.
Quote:
What I did say was she was there for a reason and has a history of violence.
Which is irrelevanat.
Quote:
People do have the right to protect a third party from harm.
Not necessarily. You may want to study up on that before you get into serious trouble with the law.
Quote:
Watch the videos and the lies from this nutjob.
She said she was being chased around the vehicle when she was not.
Not everything she claims has to be true. Only the part about the battery, which we have on tape, so we don't need to take her word for it, so...irrelevant.
Quote:
She is a typical left wing trouble maker who has a history of voilence.
Your politics don't trump the rules of evidence.
Quote:
Hopefully the judge will see her history and base his decision on the fact that she was their to cause harm to the candidate.
Sadly for you, the judge went to law school and knows what is relevant in a battery case and what is not.
Quote:
Who wears a wig and tries to cover up their identity like she did?
Who cares? It's not relevant.
Quote:
So the left wingers here are saying she had the right to cause harm to the candidate by shoving the sign into the window of his vehicle?
No, those who have been to law school here are trying to explain the rules of evidence to you. You are the only one that seems to think this is a political issue.
Quote:
I do not have to be a lawyer to know the judge will look at her past ASSAULT history.
But if you were, you wouldn't make such silly arguments.
She's not on trial.
What he did was beyond poor taste; it was illegal. The young lady's background is irrelevant here.
you have your view, I have mine and I do think it is relavent. I am not excusing what he is accused of doing, I am saying her background can be an issue.
As for a vedeo, I don't even beleive all of them anymore.
There can be so much tinkering with everything today.
Based on the logic some posters are using to justify the disgusting use of violence on the woman at the Paul debate site, it would seem that it would depend on the political views of the rape victim.
If the woman is a liberal or leans left, then she is a filthy pig that most surely asked for it.
If the woman is a conservative or leans right, then her attacker is a scumbag that should be punished.
This is why people should never represent themselves in court. They watch a couple of episodes of Matlock and think they know something...
Based on the logic some posters are using to justify the disgusting use of violence on the woman at the Paul debate site, it would seem that it would depend on the political views of the rape victim.
If the woman is a liberal or leans left, then she is a filthy pig that most surely asked for it.
If the woman is a conservative or leans right, then her attacker is a scumbag that should be punished.
Wrong.
No one is stating her political views are the most important part of this.
Her history and CRIMINAL RECORD prove she is a trouble maker and is a known domestic terrorist.
Nice spin, but "her" political views is what caused her to have such a long criminal record at age 23.
She is a felon and has DOMESTIC TERRORIST charges on her record along with other arrest history.
Not a fact until she is convicted. Was she? Prove it. This is America, not Pakistan.
Quote:
So now you are defending a terrorist criminal?
Bad form. Really bad. Do I now have to explain the straw man argument fallacy to you?
Quote:
Goodness.
Indeed.
Quote:
* But it was ok for her to attack the candidate with a sign according to you?
Again with the straw man argument.
You will do a lot better in this debate - maybe - if you actually stick to what your opponents actually wrote. Straw man arguments are logical fallacy.
you have your view, I have mine and I do think it is relavent. I am not excusing what he is accused of doing, I am saying her background can be an issue.
As for a vedeo, I don't even beleive all of them anymore.
There can be so much tinkering with everything today.
Again, I am not excusing him.
Then you would be quite wrong. The justice system doesn't work that way.
No one is stating her political views are the most important part of this.
You did.
Quote:
Her history and CRIMINAL RECORD prove she is a trouble maker and is a known domestic terrorist.
Perhaps if she were the defendant, but she isn't - and her personal credibility is hardly a factor when we have videotape showing the crime.
Quote:
Nice spin, but "her" political views is what caused her to have such a long criminal record at age 23.
Completely irrelevant and just plain illogical.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
