|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
acesover Special user I believe I have 821 Posts |
Long time coming. In my neck of the woods. Was number 2 on THE 10 MOST WANTED LIST.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/deat......-BBc6H2f Hope he gets the max if found guilty and I can not see how he won't be found guilty.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
|
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
This is one of the few types of cases in which I fully support the death penalty as it seems that the evidence leaves NO DOUBT as to the defendant's guilt. His own journal documents the slaying of the trooper.
|
|||||||||
gypsyfish Veteran user 383 Posts |
And the handcuffs they put him in when they put the habeus grabbus on him belonged to the state trooper he murdered. Poetic justice.
|
|||||||||
Mr. Mystoffelees Inner circle I haven't changed anyone's opinion in 3623 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 31, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: His own journal will likely be used to prove he was insane. Otherwise, after he steeps in prison for 15 or 20 years, execution will be too cruel and unusual. Meanwhile, there is the book deal...
Also known, when doing rope magic, as "Cordini"
|
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Book deal? No. "Son of Sam" laws prevent convicted criminals from profiting from books they've written about their crimes. Recall that all of the proceeds of OJ Simpson's book "If I Did It" went to the Goldman family.
And, actually, the journal will likely prove that he wasn't insane at all. Insanity is a legal concept, not a psychological one. If the journal shows, as I believe it does, that he fully understood the nature and consequences of his acts, it would hinder, not help, an insanity defense. |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Another kangaroo magic café trial.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
How so, tommy?
|
|||||||||
acesover Special user I believe I have 821 Posts |
Bob,
You cleared up one issue for me. That was the book deal. I did know that the criminal could not profit from a book deal but I was about to ask about the trooper's family. Never really knew about the profits being able to go to the victim's relatives. Just a quick question on that. Suppose they do not like the content of the book for some reason. Can they stop publication or refuse taking the profits from it if they so desire? Not going to ask any specific questions as to why they would not want to receive profits but I would imagine a few could come up. What in effect I am asking is, that would they have to commit to accepting a deal before seeing the book in its entirety? Hope I make myself clear on this.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
|
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Sorry aces, but I really can't answer that. I imagine that supressing the book entirely, or distribution of the profits if the family refused, would be a matter for the courts to decided.
In the Simpson case, I believe that the Goldmans were given all rights to the book, as well as the profits. So they could have pulled it from the shelves had they so desired. I believe they released it and changed the title from "If I Did It" to "Why I Did It" or something similar. |
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Evidence, it can be true or false. False evidence can lead to there being no doubt based upon it. Which is why to some degree evidence is tested in court trials. What you have here on there hand as always is untested information upon which the kangaroo jump their conclusions. Since when or where is there no doubt about a fellows guilt before his trial? Here and now, here at the kangaroo magic café court.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
acesover Special user I believe I have 821 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 31, 2014, tommy wrote: You are correct tommy. He will get his day in court. Then we will execute him.
If I were to agree with you. Then we would both be wrong. As of Apr 5, 2015 10:26 pm I have 880 posts. Used to have over 1,000
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Good.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 31, 2014, tommy wrote: Not at all. It's implicit in my conclusion that the evidence would have to be proven at trial. |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Besides- last time I checked, tommy, Café "verdicts" (including the many you have conclusively rendered regarding the "truth" behind current events) are without effect in the real world.
|
|||||||||
landmark Inner circle within a triangle 5194 Posts |
Quote:
On Nov 1, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: Wait--so you're saying all these posts were for nothing??? Now you tell me!! Soylent Green is people!!!
Click here to get Gerald Deutsch's Perverse Magic: The First Sixteen Years
All proceeds to Open Heart Magic charity. |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Sorry to be the one to break it to you, landmark.
|
|||||||||
tommy Eternal Order Devil's Island 16544 Posts |
Last time I checked, I am not often wrong but I am right again.
Implicit eh. Personally I always found it difficult to read between the lines.
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.
Tommy |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
LOL! You really think that a former defense attorney would think that a trial wasn't a necessary precedent to a verdict?
|
|||||||||
Mr. Mystoffelees Inner circle I haven't changed anyone's opinion in 3623 Posts |
Quote:
On Oct 31, 2014, mastermindreader wrote: Partly the book deal thought flowed from thinking that "not guilty by reason of insanity" would allow for it. I am no attorney, but assume (I know, I know) that SOS laws would only apply to guilty verdicts. I also wonder how such state laws would fare against First amendment rights of free speech. I don't understand the "insanity is a legal concept, not..."? I didn't realize that psychiatrists and psychologists testify only with regard as to whether or not the defendant fully understands the nature and consequences of his acts, with no regard to how inhuman or egregious they are. If you would explain this more fully, I would appreciate it. Thank you! Jim
Also known, when doing rope magic, as "Cordini"
|
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
Jim- All I meant was that "insane" is not a term used in psychology. And in the law it simply means that at the time of the offense, the defendant,due to a mental disease or defect, did not understand the nature or consequences of his or her actions.
As to the former question, Son of Sam laws don't effect free speech, even though the rights of convicted felons may, in many cases, be circumscribed. Here, though, the right to write a book isn't curtailed- simply the right to profit from it. Offhand, I can't recall any case in which someone found not guilty by reason of insanity later sought to profit by writing a book about his or her crime. The scenario does, though, raise some interesting legal questions. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » Finally got the ******* (1 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |