Attempted murder trial. Unusual defense. - Page 2

Stealhead · 09-20-13, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schroeder

I thought the idea of a blank was that it doesn't have a projectile.

They still have a sabot that holds in the powder made often of plastic at close range the bits of the sabot can be deadly.

Wolferz · 09-23-13, 05:48 PM

His ex won't be getting a dime. But, his lawyer will get everything he has to his name.

I think he'd have been better off using live rounds and just doing the deed.

vienna · 09-23-13, 06:41 PM

For those of you who believe this case will result in a "slam dunk" conviction, I refer you to the case of Dan White who, in 1978, murdered two people, the Mayor and a County Supervisor, in the City Hall in San Francisco during business hours. He shot the Mayor four times, once each in the shoulder and chest and then twice in the head. He then reloaded, walked across to the other side of City Hall and shot a County Supervisor five times, the last two shots with the gun barrel touching the Supervisor's head. He had additionally smuggled the gun into City Hall, avoiding the metal detectors at the entrances, by climbing through a lower floor window of the City Hall. You would think if someone armed themselves with a gun, travelled across town to a specific location, entered that location by means of stealth, methodically and cooly shot to death two people, and then left the crime scene, would be a textbook definition of "premeditation". However, his attorneys argued White was acting under diminished capacity (akin to the idea of 'temporary insanity') and White was only found guilty of voluntary manslaughter by a jury. The upshot of the case was the voters of California overwhelmingly voted to abolish "diminished capacity" as a defense in the state's courts...

As someone else has pointed out, the jury will make the final decision, but a crafty defense attorney can make the jury view his client not as a perpetrator, but as a "victim": "Ladies and gentleman of the jury, my client was acting under the duress of psychological conditions which made him unaware of the implications of his actions. My client is the real victim here; he suffered under the strains of his afflictions"... and blah, blah, woof, woof...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_White

http://murderpedia.org/male.W/w/white-daniel-james.htm

<O>

Platapus · 09-23-13, 07:01 PM

It is a sad commentary on our judicial system when both sides (prosecution and defense) are trying to manipulate the jury instead of just using the facts.

I wonder in the inquisitorial system could ever work in this country? The adversarial system seems to have drifted away from its original intent.

Bubblehead1980 · 09-23-13, 11:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

It is a sad commentary on our judicial system when both sides (prosecution and defense) are trying to manipulate the jury instead of just using the facts.

I wonder in the inquisitorial system could ever work in this country? The adversarial system seems to have drifted away from its original intent.

That can be blamed squarely on the government ie the prosecution or the persecution as I like to call them.Due to the prosecutors office being a political operation, politics comes into play, esp in the US.Instead of seeking the truth, the boss ie the district/state attorney makes decisions based on politics, the lower levels have no real discretion. Prime example of this is the Case Anthony case.They knew they had no real case but the sensed blood in the water, overcharged her, went for the throat, figuring public emotions would convict her and they lost the case because they slapped a first degree murder charge on her without any real evidence, then tried to use junk science lol.This happens EVERYDAY even the low profile cases as well.

Another factor is the quality of people attracted to that job.I am sorry, but no attorney worth a damn will stay in a government job for long if they can make more money in private sector.The thing is, many are the talentless hacks and dregs of the legal profession, they are there because its a salary and benefits and requires no real talent or ambition to do the job.They are stooges for the government, nothing more.

Typically, they are self righteous, yes men and women who can and do not think for themselves.I encountered them when I worked at a firm and see the types in class who can't wait to be prosecutors and I often remind them they will be nothing more than a stooge for the government.The look on their face, like that of child who realized their hero was in fact not that great, is priceless.

The defense is there to protect the client's rights and keep the government off their back.The outrageous defenses that come out at times can be blamed on the prosecutions outrageous charges, every action there is an equal reaction.

In a perfect world, prosecutors would play by the rules, defense would ensure client's rights are upheld and everyone would go home happy but what are people to do when the government comes down on them? Use the system to your full advantage to get out of it.

Platapus · 09-24-13, 05:07 AM

I would agree.

Just like it could be said cynically that a jury is made up of 12 people who are too dumb to come up with a reason to get out of jury duty, it could also be said that a Prosecutor is an attorney not good enough to be hired by a defense law firm.

One of the problems is that prosecutors are evaluated on their conviction rate, not the rate in which the guilty party is brought to justice. A prosecutor wants any conviction of anyone.

When it becomes accepted that most cases end on a plea bargain, it becomes easier for the prosecutor to overcharge, intimidate witnesses, and generally lie in order to manipulate the defendant into accepting a plea bargain. If the defendant is poor and can't afford an equally unethical lawyer, all the better for the conviction record of the prosecutor.

Being that prosecutors are agents of the government and are representing the "people" (what ever that means these days), they have to be held to a higher standard and actually suffer consequences for their misconduct.

Definition of Perjury: When someone, other than a lawyer, lies in court.

How often to we read about cases where the prosecution withheld evidence, suppressed witnesses, and flat out lied to the jury? Too many times. But I seldom read about prosecutors being indicted. The worst that seems to happen is that they are asked to resign so they can then write a book.

If a defense attorney pulls a fast one, a guilty person may go free. If a prosecutor pulls a fast one, an innocent person may go to prison.

Which is the greatest risk to our society?

Well, speaking as a law abiding citizen, I am much more afraid of an unethical prosecutor. Hence, as a law abiding citizen, I expect the government to hold prosecutors accountable. With no, or little, accountability, what is governing a prosecutor's actions?

09-24-13, 09:50 AM

if they were blanks then the casings would still show crimping so that would be very easy to confirm or dismiss very easy and they don't need the slugs to prove it but you would think they should still be able to find one if he shot "at" her so shooting in the air to scare her is plausible

Wolferz · 09-24-13, 04:52 PM

And they found out during discovery phase that it was actually a starters pistol that will fire blanks only.

I was only throwing firecrackers at her your honor.

BTW, many district attorneys are elected not assigned. So they do have something to prove in their job performance in order to get re-elected. The number one reason for a laundry list of trumped up charges for any crime. It gives them a better chance of getting a conviction.

Bubblehead1980 · 09-24-13, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wolferz

And they found out during discovery phase that it was actually a starters pistol that will fire blanks only.

I was only throwing firecrackers at her your honor.

BTW, many district attorneys are elected not assigned. So they do have something to prove in their job performance in order to get re-elected. The number one reason for a laundry list of trumped up charges for any crime. It gives them a better chance of getting a conviction.

Yes, the actual DA is elected, and has his ADA's perform the dirty work.Back home in FL they are called State Attorneys and Assistant State Attorneys, only in D.C. is the a more wretched group of scum.

I wrote a position paper on a civilian oversight panel for the the prosecutor's office, much like some rogue police departments now have because they basically answer to themselves.

August · 09-24-13, 05:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Platapus

I would agree.

Just like it could be said cynically that a jury is made up of 12 people who are too dumb to come up with a reason to get out of jury duty, it could also be said that a Prosecutor is an attorney not good enough to be hired by a defense law firm.

One of the problems is that prosecutors are evaluated on their conviction rate, not the rate in which the guilty party is brought to justice. A prosecutor wants any conviction of anyone.

When it becomes accepted that most cases end on a plea bargain, it becomes easier for the prosecutor to overcharge, intimidate witnesses, and generally lie in order to manipulate the defendant into accepting a plea bargain. If the defendant is poor and can't afford an equally unethical lawyer, all the better for the conviction record of the prosecutor.

Being that prosecutors are agents of the government and are representing the "people" (what ever that means these days), they have to be held to a higher standard and actually suffer consequences for their misconduct.

Definition of Perjury: When someone, other than a lawyer, lies in court.

How often to we read about cases where the prosecution withheld evidence, suppressed witnesses, and flat out lied to the jury? Too many times. But I seldom read about prosecutors being indicted. The worst that seems to happen is that they are asked to resign so they can then write a book.

If a defense attorney pulls a fast one, a guilty person may go free. If a prosecutor pulls a fast one, an innocent person may go to prison.

Which is the greatest risk to our society?

Well, speaking as a law abiding citizen, I am much more afraid of an unethical prosecutor. Hence, as a law abiding citizen, I expect the government to hold prosecutors accountable. With no, or little, accountability, what is governing a prosecutor's actions?

Damn well said Platapus.

Platapus · 09-24-13, 05:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by August

Damn well said Platapus.

Every once in a while I get one right.

mako88sb · 09-28-13, 11:30 PM

For the ones more savvy about how the law works then me, congratulations. It was in our paper a couple days ago that the Judge agreed that the accused was only trying to scare his ex-wife. Odd, but I can't find a link for that particular piece of news. He was convicted of breaking into her house and shooting her:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/09/27...n-shooting-her

The one bit that really confuses me is that the doctors were uncertain about the nature of her wounds as they didn't fit the pattern of the usual gunshot. Thus the case for blanks being used seems possible, What I can't understand is surely when the guy was arrested and his gun confiscated, they would of had whatever ammo was in it at the time. Unless he removed and discarded them somehow. If he managed that, it seems more then likely to me that there was real bullets in that gun or why would he bother? Anyway, I think he should be de-ported back to Iraq once his jail time is served.

Bubblehead1980 · 09-29-13, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mako88sb

For the ones more savvy about how the law works then me, congratulations. It was in our paper a couple days ago that the Judge agreed that the accused was only trying to scare his ex-wife. Odd, but I can't find a link for that particular piece of news. He was convicted of breaking into her house and shooting her:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/09/27...n-shooting-her

The one bit that really confuses me is that the doctors were uncertain about the nature of her wounds as they didn't fit the pattern of the usual gunshot. Thus the case for blanks being used seems possible, What I can't understand is surely when the guy was arrested and his gun confiscated, they would of had whatever ammo was in it at the time. Unless he removed and discarded them somehow. If he managed that, it seems more then likely to me that there was real bullets in that gun or why would he bother? Anyway, I think he should be de-ported back to Iraq once his jail time is served.

Thanks

Glad to see he did not get convicted on the attempted murder charge, it would have been a miscarriage of justice.Now, hopefully he will get out in reasonable time, spending 11 months in jail awaiting trial is a travesty.

09-23-13, 05:48 PM	#17
Wolferz Navy Seal Join Date: May 2007 Location: On a mighty quest for the Stick of Truth Posts: 5,963 Downloads: 52 Uploads: 0	His ex won't be getting a dime. But, his lawyer will get everything he has to his name. I think he'd have been better off using live rounds and just doing the deed. __________________ Tomorrow never comes

09-23-13, 06:41 PM	#18
vienna Navy Seal Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Anywhere but the here & now... Posts: 7,718 Downloads: 85 Uploads: 0	For those of you who believe this case will result in a "slam dunk" conviction, I refer you to the case of Dan White who, in 1978, murdered two people, the Mayor and a County Supervisor, in the City Hall in San Francisco during business hours. He shot the Mayor four times, once each in the shoulder and chest and then twice in the head. He then reloaded, walked across to the other side of City Hall and shot a County Supervisor five times, the last two shots with the gun barrel touching the Supervisor's head. He had additionally smuggled the gun into City Hall, avoiding the metal detectors at the entrances, by climbing through a lower floor window of the City Hall. You would think if someone armed themselves with a gun, travelled across town to a specific location, entered that location by means of stealth, methodically and cooly shot to death two people, and then left the crime scene, would be a textbook definition of "premeditation". However, his attorneys argued White was acting under diminished capacity (akin to the idea of 'temporary insanity') and White was only found guilty of voluntary manslaughter by a jury. The upshot of the case was the voters of California overwhelmingly voted to abolish "diminished capacity" as a defense in the state's courts... As someone else has pointed out, the jury will make the final decision, but a crafty defense attorney can make the jury view his client not as a perpetrator, but as a "victim": "Ladies and gentleman of the jury, my client was acting under the duress of psychological conditions which made him unaware of the implications of his actions. My client is the real victim here; he suffered under the strains of his afflictions"... and blah, blah, woof, woof... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_White http://murderpedia.org/male.W/w/white-daniel-james.htm <O> __________________ __________________________________________________ __

09-23-13, 07:01 PM	#19
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,382 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	It is a sad commentary on our judicial system when both sides (prosecution and defense) are trying to manipulate the jury instead of just using the facts. I wonder in the inquisitorial system could ever work in this country? The adversarial system seems to have drifted away from its original intent. __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

09-24-13, 05:07 AM	#21
Platapus Fleet Admiral Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 19,382 Downloads: 63 Uploads: 0	I would agree. Just like it could be said cynically that a jury is made up of 12 people who are too dumb to come up with a reason to get out of jury duty, it could also be said that a Prosecutor is an attorney not good enough to be hired by a defense law firm. One of the problems is that prosecutors are evaluated on their conviction rate, not the rate in which the guilty party is brought to justice. A prosecutor wants any conviction of anyone. When it becomes accepted that most cases end on a plea bargain, it becomes easier for the prosecutor to overcharge, intimidate witnesses, and generally lie in order to manipulate the defendant into accepting a plea bargain. If the defendant is poor and can't afford an equally unethical lawyer, all the better for the conviction record of the prosecutor. Being that prosecutors are agents of the government and are representing the "people" (what ever that means these days), they have to be held to a higher standard and actually suffer consequences for their misconduct. Definition of Perjury: When someone, other than a lawyer, lies in court. How often to we read about cases where the prosecution withheld evidence, suppressed witnesses, and flat out lied to the jury? Too many times. But I seldom read about prosecutors being indicted. The worst that seems to happen is that they are asked to resign so they can then write a book. If a defense attorney pulls a fast one, a guilty person may go free. If a prosecutor pulls a fast one, an innocent person may go to prison. Which is the greatest risk to our society? Well, speaking as a law abiding citizen, I am much more afraid of an unethical prosecutor. Hence, as a law abiding citizen, I expect the government to hold prosecutors accountable. With no, or little, accountability, what is governing a prosecutor's actions? __________________ abusus non tollit usum - A right should NOT be withheld from people on the basis that some tend to abuse that right.

09-24-13, 04:52 PM	#23
Wolferz Navy Seal Join Date: May 2007 Location: On a mighty quest for the Stick of Truth Posts: 5,963 Downloads: 52 Uploads: 0	And they found out during discovery phase that it was actually a starters pistol that will fire blanks only. I was only throwing firecrackers at her your honor. BTW, many district attorneys are elected not assigned. So they do have something to prove in their job performance in order to get re-elected. The number one reason for a laundry list of trumped up charges for any crime. It gives them a better chance of getting a conviction. __________________ Tomorrow never comes

09-24-13, 09:50 AM	#22
Webster Stowaway Posts: n/a Downloads: Uploads:	if they were blanks then the casings would still show crimping so that would be very easy to confirm or dismiss very easy and they don't need the slugs to prove it but you would think they should still be able to find one if he shot "at" her so shooting in the air to scare her is plausible

09-28-13, 11:30 PM	#27
mako88sb XO Join Date: Mar 2005 Location: Calgary, Canada Posts: 423 Downloads: 0 Uploads: 0	For the ones more savvy about how the law works then me, congratulations. It was in our paper a couple days ago that the Judge agreed that the accused was only trying to scare his ex-wife. Odd, but I can't find a link for that particular piece of news. He was convicted of breaking into her house and shooting her: http://www.calgarysun.com/2013/09/27...n-shooting-her The one bit that really confuses me is that the doctors were uncertain about the nature of her wounds as they didn't fit the pattern of the usual gunshot. Thus the case for blanks being used seems possible, What I can't understand is surely when the guy was arrested and his gun confiscated, they would of had whatever ammo was in it at the time. Unless he removed and discarded them somehow. If he managed that, it seems more then likely to me that there was real bullets in that gun or why would he bother? Anyway, I think he should be de-ported back to Iraq once his jail time is served.