home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   can.legal      Debating Canuck legal system quirks      10,932 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 10,157 of 10,932   
   John KingofthePaupers Turmel to All   
   TURMEL: Phelan "insufficient evidence" p   
   08 Jul 16 06:34:57   
   
   From: johnturmel@yahoo.com   
      
   JCT: The Comey is a textbook example of the "eyes closed"   
   technique to not see the truth. Judges use it all the time.   
   Justice Phelan said he had insufficient evidence that patients   
   who lost their exemptions had requisite medical need. No   
   matter the uncontroverted evidence staring him in the face, he   
   can always say "not enough."   
      
   This is exactly what FBI Director Comey did in getting   
   Hillary off the hook. He pointed out all her crimes and then   
   simply said he saw insufficient evidence for a "reasonable"   
   chance at conviction. Maybe other better prosecutors would   
   have more reasonable chance.   
      
   But that's it. He sat through 4 hours of grilling admitting   
   every lie and crime Hillary had committed but then simply "saw   
   insufficient evidence." Maybe guys with their eyes open would   
   differ. He did say his whole team agreed. Wow. Sure did pick   
   them right.   
      
   So the very same judicial trick used by Justice Phelan to   
   deny the unchallenged obvious was used by the FBI to deny   
   the obvious. Not that there is no evidence, that there is   
   insufficient to gamble on showing it to a jury.   
      
   Four hours, he played that angle. Sure, she committed every   
   crime in the book but they had insufficient evidence to   
   reasonably expect a conviction. Notice he did not know if   
   his agents had questioned her on her lies! Har har har.   
      
   That 4 hours shows how the technique can be used to deny the   
   whole truth because partial truth still left open a doubt.   
   She was that stupid that she really didn't know what she was   
   doing, is not a great defence.   
      
   Anyway, a neat parlor game would be for everyone to   
   play jury by watching Comey's 15-minute indictment and then,   
   like a good defence attorney Comey says he sees not enough,   
   have a vote of the jury and see if you do.   
      
   But what a wonderful example of the "insufficient evidence   
   shown" cop-out so many judges use to do their dirty deeds.   
   Easy way to ignore the truth by always saying there's not   
   enough even without having your eyes closed.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca