So bill Cosby didn't committ sexual assault. He must have been unfairly prosecuted because his convictions didn't stick. Poor Bill poor oj poor Harvey weinstein
Trump loses 6% in the polls since his fake ear injury
- Thread starter dirtydaveiii
- Start date
No, let's just use the court of:
YOU
So, say it gurl, say it loud and proud:
'OJ WAS NOT A MURDERER"
Like I said, you either believe in the court of law and due process within a democracy, or you believe in public opinion as your court.
Pick one.
Too scary of a question for you I guess. Maybe put your big-boy pants on and take another stab at it?
No.
He got that from the judge's ruling on the defamation case.
tumps been found to be a sexual predator and fraud in one and a fraud in the other. Which one do you deny ?
I certainly hope most people don't call people murders on just a random gut feel.
The type of court and results have everything to do with the state imposing criminal penalties.
Only an idiot from the kingdom of idiots think that courts define the reality.
A nuance that seems too complicated for the poor dear.
This is a man who could watch someone knife someone in an alley and then say that person can't have been said to have assaulted anyone because it wasn't proved in court.
It's a truly bizarre position to take.
Then again to defend a fraudster and a felon who is male yet wears orange makeup you would be cornered into taking bizarre positions
Ruling for defamation is not a ruling of rape. It's a ruling of defamation based on an opinion.
No such thing as a ruling in court for "sexual predator".
You seem to be confused between personal opinions and actual law.
Who said anything about using the court of public opinion as the basis of our justice system? (Other than you?)
No wonder you are having so much trouble.
What a deranged world view.
It wasn't criminal court. Therefore "criminal penalties" don't apply to findings in civil court.
If you don't believe that courts are reality, then what is your brand of justice? i.e. the court of public opinion? Gut feel?
If you witness someone being assaulted and stand as a witness for the prosecution in criminal court that will most likely result in a guilty verdict along with any other evidence (burden of proof).
There is no "burden of proof" in civil court. No witnesses necessary to find for one party or the other.
He denies both.
Courts are only important when he agrees with them.
It's the classic conservative position - "There must be in-groups whom the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."
Therefore Trump cannot be bound by law just because it found him guilty, but he must be protected by the law wherever he has not been convicted yet.
See?
if civil and or criminal courts are charging democrats or anti trump republicans they are just. If they charge Donnie they are corrupt and need to be done away with
Pretty sure that's not true.
It isn't relevant here, though, since that wasn't something at stake in the decision.
You seem to not know what a judge's decision is.
My god!
It's almost like criminal court is its own thing with its own rules!
It's also as if I didn't say criminal penalties should be applied for the civil court findings.
Amazing!
You seem to be the only person who thinks anyone is in favor of people having criminal penalties imposed without due process.
Oh, so you are just completely delusional.
Gotcha.
Yes, there is a burden of proof in civil court.
Holy shit, what do you think goes on there?
And whether or not the person who assaulted someone is ever convicted in court, they still assaulted them.
That you think otherwise is really disturbing.
To be such an authoritarian follower that you will let the government tell you what reality is and then just believe them despite your own experience?
That's awful.
The funny part is JC denies that Trumps 34 felonies in a criminal court count either
When someone believes that someone is guilty based on their own opinion and bias, that's the court of public opinion.
ie OJ was found not guilty in criminal court, yet some people believe he's a murderer. They are entitled to their opinion.
Imagine a society where someone is found not guilty in criminal court, but people continue to assume they are guilty. What then? Is that fair?
Someone may not agree with the verdict or believe the trial was unfair (which sometimes it is seeing as how appeals have overturned the original verdicts).
You are responding to a conversation between another poster and myself.
Either follow along or don't jump in without understanding the context.
So we're trumps 34 criminal convictions wrong and his sexual assault and frauds also wrong ? I don't follow your (lack of) logic
