MSO: Halted & Guilty

Quote from Cutten:

The feds lied to the courts about the non-existent "stock fraud" and insider trading charges. How come they aren't going to jail?

And how come Clinton is not in jail right now? Why didn't Nixon rot behind bars? Reagan? Both Bushes? They all lied to the feds, congress, the courts, the public.

The difference is that Stewart lied about a perfectly legal and moral act. The prosecutors and the presidents lied about either illegal or immoral acts.

So, the logically inescapable conclusion is that the prosecutors and the presidents should go to jail for at least 1 day longer than Stewart does.
More...

Not all of your points are flawed, but that first one sure is. In our intentionally adversarial legal system the attorneys on BOTH sides right or wrong are allowed to present hypothesis and then the jury is tasked with sorting fact from fiction. The feds didn't "lie to the courts" any more than Martha's attorneys lied to the courts by proclaiming her innocence. (though I DO agree that the fraud charges that were rightly dropped were absurd)

We allow prosecutors and defense attorneys great latitude to propose damning/defensive scenarios. I would be in fear of a legal system where the legal representatives on either side were exposed to legal action merely by presenting charges that are later dropped/acquitted or theories of defense that are deemed insufficient by a jury.

JB
 
Cutten:
>What would you guys say, if faced by an about-to-be-fired
>MSO employee and their family?

I would say that it is a shame that their wealthy boss was more concerned about losing 50k (that she could afford to burn without any life impact) than she was about the many people who relied on her decisions for their livelihood.

Or as Rg might have said. 'perhaps you should have researched your boss before you went to work for her'

JB

PS. that last statement of course was not Rg but it certainly applies his principles to the situation and demonstrates why the pure Libertarian view has it's risks...all the hard working MSO employee wanted to do after all was make a living without spending a kings ransom certifying some boss as 'not a joker'.
 
I think the crux of the matter is the federal law that says you can't lie to the Feds. They use the law when they want to punish someone and don't apply it when they don't.

This law is totally misguided and should ONLY POSSIBLY apply if it can be proved that obstruction of justice occurred about an ACTUAL crime.

Going to jail for saying "I don't remember", etc. to the Feds about a nonexistent crime is absurd.
 
Quote from Cutten:

The feds lied to the courts about the non-existent "stock fraud" and insider trading charges. How come they aren't going to jail?
More...
Why are police permitted to speed to catch a speeder?
 
Here is another good question. How can you have obstruction of justice and conspiracy when there is no crime?
 
>Why are police permitted to shoot an unarmed
>person for any reason?

As a rule of law they aren't.

This doesn't mean that mistake are not made. This doesn't mean that crimes are not committed by police. This doesn't mean that officers often get breaks that they shouldn't.

JB
 
In Montengro they are..


Quote from Turok:

>Why are police permitted to shoot an unarmed
>person for any reason?

As a rule of law they aren't.

This doesn't mean that mistake are not made. This doesn't mean that crimes are not committed by police. This doesn't mean that officers often get breaks that they shouldn't.

JB
More...
 
>Here is another good question. How can you have
>obstruction of justice and conspirace when there
>is no crime?

That's easy, but is a matter of "justice" semantics.

Legally "obstruction of justice" includes impeding an investigation. Most of us would agree that achieving justice would include the search for truth -- If one can lie to investigators at will then this would impede said search. "Justice" doesn't just begin when there are charges filed or a conviction -- it's a process that begins with the first questions asked. If we hope to find the truth, even when no crime was originally committed, there must be truth or teeth.

Of course the conspiracy charges simply mean that more than one person worked together in a coordinated effort to accomplish what is charged. The Jury determined that Martha and Bacanovic did just that in lying and hampering the investigation.

JB
 
arrogance.....thats the one word I have for the whole bunch of em'

Did Martha and company (billions) think that they were above the law? we shall see, now.....

These stories about the line in the coffeshop.....about the dollar....I did not know about that....But the arrogance of that family I do know about....

Michael B.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top