Winners only.

[djdilliodon!]

I think the statute of limitations on **** should be higher than for art theft, but that’s my opinion due to the severity of the crime.

I think in terms of what I would want if it was my own family that was harmed.
For example: if someone attacked and harmed my mother? I’d pursue justice until my dying day. And if it wasn’t served, I might mete it out as my final act before leaving the earth.

But that’s just me. Some people think **** is no big deal or that it is less of a big deal over time.

What law did NY change so Trump could be taken to court?

**** is most definitely no small crime. I think anyone who commits it should be hung by their balls personally. NY in November passed the adult survivors act in order to make this civil case possible. In a criminal court of law where it’s based on “beyond a reasonable doubt” a conviction would never be possible in a case like this. You don’t have to have dna evidence every time to prove ****. You can have things like an actual date for example so a person can prove a possible alibi on their whereabouts. In this case of course that wasn’t provided. It was basically a he said she said thing. Now they might think hahaha we got him finally but what they didn’t think about is what happens now after. It’s gonna be total shit show now when their own are gonna be accused in a civil case and if you don’t support the accuser you aren’t part of the club anymore . My guess is cuomo will be next and in that case there is better evidence as it’s something that didn’t happen 69.69 decades ago . Things should get real interesting here I’m sure soon .

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

**** is most definitely no small crime. I think anyone who commits it should be hung by their balls personally. NY in November passed the adult survivors act in order to make this civil case possible. In a criminal court of law where it’s based on “beyond a reasonable doubt” a conviction would never be possible in a case like this. You don’t have to have dna evidence every time to prove ****. You can have things like an actual date for example so a person can prove a possible alibi on their whereabouts. In this case of course that wasn’t provided. It was basically a he said she said thing. Now they might think hahaha we got him finally but what they didn’t think about is what happens now after. It’s gonna be total shit show now when their own are gonna be accused in a civil case and if you don’t support the accuser you aren’t part of the club anymore . My guess is cuomo will be next and in that case there is better evidence as it’s something that didn’t happen 69.69 decades ago . Things should get real interesting here I’m sure soon .

Beyond a reasonable doubt could certainly have happened with this one if the victim and her attorney did what needed to be done to convince the jury of the legitimacy of the claim.

“A juror can have some doubt in their mind, but it cannot be one that would affect a reasonable person’s “moral certainty” that a defendant is guilty.”

This is how a jury can convict without actually seeing the defendant commit a crime.

It looks like the ASA allowed for a one-year look back and in 2019 they extended the SOL to 20 years. For the benefit of Trump’s accuser?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Belief has nothing to do with it? People get convicted all the time based on testimony when there is no proof. The judge or jury or both accept the testimony as credible enough to convict.
Is **** the only instance where you will not believe testimony without seeing something with your own eyes?

If they were convicted without evidence and only on their word then they were unjustly convicted.
No, people lie. You have to prove without doubt. That is how the law works.

Why is a study doomed from the beginning? Because people lie? If that’s the case, then everything involving input from humans is suspect.

I agree. That is why one must question everything.

It’s your opinion, but if it’s an opinion not based on fact, it can lead to poor thought processes and actions. You will not believe or convict without hard evidence, but you will use your “shady” evaluation as a reason to not believe.
It’s a very inconsistent way to approach things. When done on a mass scale? Big problem. One that causes things like insurrection and coup attempts.

The shady evaluation is just how I see most women. It is not the reason to not believe. That reason is because people lie.

It’s ALWAYS “before” if you are asking someone whether they did something or not. You can’t ask if they did something in the future. Before s 100% relevant to things.

You may want some backup on correcting my grammar. "...they ***** before" in my usage is correct. However, asking the accused if they **** people is not relevant to the topic.

If the victim’s testimony is enough to convince me and the jury beyond reasonable doubt, then the defendant should get whatever punishment is prescribed by law.
That’s how the legal system works.

So you, the person who demands facts, has NO PROBLEM convicting someone with your feelings.
Her eyes watered enough to give me butterflies in my simp belly. We must convict this man!!! Yeah, good job soiling our legal system.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Beyond a reasonable doubt could certainly have happened with this one if the victim and her attorney did what needed to be done to convince the jury of the legitimacy of the claim.

“A juror can have some doubt in their mind, but it cannot be one that would affect a reasonable person’s “moral certainty” that a defendant is guilty.”

This is how a jury can convict without actually seeing the defendant commit a crime.

It looks like the ASA allowed for a one-year look back and in 2019 they extended the SOL to 20 years. For the benefit of Trump’s accuser?

So if you are being accused of **** do you want your jury using their feelings to convict you or would you want them to base their decisions on hard facts, undeniable proof?

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

How can you even try to defend yourself when there's no hard fact in the accusation? There's a location and extremely "rough idea" when it happened...there's no way to call a potential witness, corroborate an alibi, on even try to get surveillance video...there's no justice in that scenario...


And I dont know if it's true or not...

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

I think the statute of limitations on **** should be higher than for art theft, but that’s my opinion due to the severity of the crime.

I think in terms of what I would want if it was my own family that was harmed.
For example: if someone attacked and harmed my mother? I’d pursue justice until my dying day. And if it wasn’t served, I might mete it out as my final act before leaving the earth.

But that’s just me. Some people think **** is no big deal or that it is less of a big deal over time.

What law did NY change so Trump could be taken to court?

It's a new law. You can google it. She filed literally within hours of the new law going into effect.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

So if you are being accused of **** do you want your jury using their feelings to convict you or would you want them to base their decisions on hard facts, undeniable proof?

But you set the standard at witnessing the crime, that's an awfully high standard for a **** victim to meet. She's have to know when and where the **** was going to occur and then know who would be selected for the jury. Of course then you'd be a witness, which would disqualify from being on the jury, so we're back to square one.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

But you set the standard at witnessing the crime, that's an awfully high standard for a **** victim to meet. She's have to know when and where the **** was going to occur and then know who would be selected for the jury. Of course then you'd be a witness, which would disqualify from being on the jury, so we're back to square one.

Witness as in see the proof i.e. video evidence.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

How can you even try to defend yourself when there's no hard fact in the accusation? There's a location and extremely "rough idea" when it happened...there's no way to call a potential witness, corroborate an alibi, on even try to get surveillance video...there's no justice in that scenario...


And I dont know if it's true or not...

There are Trump's actions/comments. Like Trump lying about not knowing who she was. Trump saying "she's not my type" and then mistaking a photo of her for one of his x-wifes. "Just grab their *****," and on and on. I don't know that I would have found him guilty, but Trump dug his own hole.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

There are Trump's actions/comments. Like Trump lying about not knowing who she was. Trump saying "she's not my type" and then mistaking a photo of her for one of his x-wifes. "Just grab their *****," and on and on. I don't know that I would have found him guilty, but Trump dug his own hole.

Yup, he's a jackass... let's convict him.

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Witness as in see the proof i.e. video evidence.

Video evidence? We role playing, she likes it rough... plus how many ****** record their crimes?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Video evidence? We role playing, she likes it rough... plus how many ****** record their crimes?

What is it with you, Rob and Booby. Why do you assume the ****** is the one recording it. CCTV footage, security cameras... none of this occur to you guys?

 

[Jimi77 Premium Member]

Yup, he's a jackass... let's convict him.

It's more than "he's jackass." He's a jackass that got caught telling several lies to the grand jury regarding this case. If this is he said vs she said and one guy has been documented lying about facts surrounding the case....

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

So if you are being accused of **** do you want your jury using their feelings to convict you or would you want them to base their decisions on hard facts, undeniable proof?

Asking this as a genuine question: Do you know anything about how our justice system, to include the courts, is set up and operated?

I would fully expect the jury to do what they are supposed to as jurors. Feelings certainly come into play when making a judgment. Doubt is a feeling.
And there is the whole “proof beyond a reasonable doubt” thing.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Witness as in see the proof i.e. video evidence.

But you’ve said video evidence can be faked.
Back to square one.