My respect for people's right are being tested

Platapus · 03-17-16, 05:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oberon

Should have been a closed hearing really, murder appeals should be.

Closed hearing? aka secret tribunal? No way that could be abused.

There should not be any reason why due process is to be conducted in secret.

The entire purpose of an appeal is to challenge the decision of the government in a case.

Do we really want to give the government the power to conduce secret hearings and then proclaim "uh, no the appeal was denied, but we really looked at it carefully and son-of-a-gun, it turned out that our initial decision was correct. Imagine that!"

I don't want to live under a government that has that power. I fear that the US is rapidly moving to that and it scares me.

mapuc · 03-17-16, 05:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

Closed hearing? aka secret tribunal? No way that could be abused.

There should not be any reason why due process is to be conducted in secret.

The entire purpose of an appeal is to challenge the decision of the government in a case.

Do we really want to give the government the power to conduce secret hearings and then proclaim "uh, no the appeal was denied, but we really looked at it carefully and son-of-a-gun, it turned out that our initial decision was correct. Imagine that!"

I don't want to live under a government that has that power. I fear that the US is rapidly moving to that and it scares me.

An open hearing could be abused too. Breivik used about two hours to present his saying-and he used about 30 minutes to talk about his manifest an other things.
A court is not a place from where a person can give his or her political view.

Markus

Platapus · 03-17-16, 05:27 PM

But with an open hearing, people would have a much better chance of detecting that the hearing was abused. A much greater chance than with a closed hearing.

As for him speaking? Who cares? Let him speak. The judge can limit the amount of time he is allowed to speak. If he wants to use this time to make declarations, so be it.

Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.

But the surest test for a country's dedication to its citizen's rights is no better demonstrated when applied to someone they really really dislike.

03-17-16, 05:27 PM	#3
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,384 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	But with an open hearing, people would have a much better chance of detecting that the hearing was abused. A much greater chance than with a closed hearing. As for him speaking? Who cares? Let him speak. The judge can limit the amount of time he is allowed to speak. If he wants to use this time to make declarations, so be it. Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me. But the surest test for a country's dedication to its citizen's rights is no better demonstrated when applied to someone they really really dislike. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.