Started By
Message
re: Just want to say
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:45 pm to The Spleen
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:45 pm to The Spleen
quote:
I keep saying it because it is the Constitutional standard someone else brought up several posts back. I was wondering why that standard applied for Rittenhouse when he was labeled a murderer, but not for Blake who has been labeled a criminal.
OK. Blake was being arrested for warrants. He chose to be violent, threatening deadly force against the arresting officers. He was shot FOR THE VIOLENT REACTION AND THREATENING DEADLY FORCE AGAINST THE ARRESTING OFFICERS. He wasn't shot because of the warrants.
Rittenhouse WASN'T SHOT because he posed no threat to the arresting officers. It doesn't get more clear than that. Apparently, you think Blake was shot because of the warrants. He wasn't.
1
Posted on 9/2/20 at 8:57 pm to TidenUP
Once again, I’m not arguing the facts or merits of the 2 cases. I’ll accept the facts of each case as you present them. The accused in each one is still given the presumption of innocence in a court of law.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 9:17 pm to The Spleen
And I won't argue that principle. One chose to get violent and won't get to have his day in court to face the charges in those warrants. One chose to have his day in court by giving himself up to face those charges. The officers, in both cases, simply wanted to do their jobs. The officers would have loved to have both situations resolved without violence. Unfortunately, that didn't happen.
Posted on 9/2/20 at 9:37 pm to The Spleen
quote:
Once again, I’m not arguing the facts or merits of the 2 cases
Of course you aren't.
If you did that you'd realize how moronic your stance was.
This post was edited on 9/2/20 at 9:39 pm
Posted on 9/2/20 at 9:41 pm to TideSaint
Woman assaults 12-year-old boy in Boulder over Trump yard sign, police say
Ah, the tolerant Left. What a fine group of individuals. I guess assault just runs in their DNA.
quote:
Boulder police spokeswoman Shannon Aulabaugh said the suspect drove up to the boy and said something to the effect of “you want something to look at,” and used a closed fist to strike the boy in the back of the head and arms four to five times, and scratched him.
Ah, the tolerant Left. What a fine group of individuals. I guess assault just runs in their DNA.
This post was edited on 9/2/20 at 9:44 pm
Posted on 9/3/20 at 7:55 am to TideSaint
quote:
If you did that you'd realize how moronic your stance was.
My stance is that every person arrested or charged with a crime in this country is given the presumption of innocence in a court of law. It's enshrined in the Constitution. I fail to see how that is moronic. This conversation started when someone called Rittenhouse a murderer, and someone responded that he has the presumption of innocence, which is correct. I simply asked why that same presumption of innocence was never brought up when posters were calling Blake all kinds of names labeling him a criminal for his actions in the video(not talking about any prior convictions he may have). Nobody seems to have an answer for that.
I also said that I don't think the presumption of innocence means anything in the court of public opinion. I can clearly see Blake resisting arrest in that video, and can logically conclude his resistance to being arrested lead to him being shot. Legally though, he's still innocent of resisting arrest until proven guilty of it in court, just as Rittenhouse is innocent until proven guilty in court.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 8:08 am to The Spleen
quote:
Nobody seems to have an answer for that.
I answered it last night. He knowingly violated his restraining order by showing up to his victim's house. Therefore, he forfeits his presumption of innocence. He violated a court order. It's indisputable. End of story.
He may be innocent until proven guilty on the other charges, but he is absolutely guilty on that one.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 8:13 am to TideSaint
Restraining order violations still go before a judge who decides if it was a violation.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 8:20 am to The Spleen
quote:
Restraining order violations still go before a judge who decides if it was a violation.
So, in your opinion, did he violate his restraining order?
It's a simple yes or no question. No need for a three paragraph response.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 8:21 am to TideSaint
Posted on 9/3/20 at 8:22 am to The Spleen
quote:
I keep saying it because it is the Constitutional standard someone else brought up several posts back. I was wondering why that standard applied for Rittenhouse when he was labeled a murderer, but not for Blake who has been labeled a criminal.
To correct you here I am not labeling neither here nor have I. Someone called out another poster for their opinion and said they were trashy for it, but yet their opinion on the person calling them a murderer was no different.
This post was edited on 9/3/20 at 8:26 am
Posted on 9/3/20 at 8:24 am to TideSaint
quote:
So, in your opinion, did he violate his restraining order?
No clue. I haven't followed the story close enough to form an opinion.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 8:50 am to The Spleen
quote:
No clue.
So you won't admit the simple truth that he was in a place he was court ordered to stay away from?
Good Lord.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 9:02 am to TideSaint
quote:
So you won't admit the simple truth that he was in a place he was court ordered to stay away from?
It's not that I won't, it's that I don't know it to be a simple truth. The only place I've read about this restraining order is on this board, so I'm not knowledgeable enough to form an opinion on it. Like I said, other than the video and discussion on it the first few days, I haven't been following that case all that closely.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 9:35 am to LovetheLord
quote:
Wow! Isn’t this such a shame.
Broken links usually are.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 9:38 am to TideSaint
It was your link. I don’t know how to refer directly to a link.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 9:42 am to LovetheLord
Gotcha. Yeah, it's a little disturbing.
Posted on 9/3/20 at 10:06 am to LovetheLord
quote:
Can you imagine your sister’s rapist, or even attempted rapist, being paraded around as some sort of saint?
Yeah, lauding accused rapists is a pretty shitty thing to do.
Washington Post
Posted on 9/3/20 at 10:16 am to The Spleen
The lawsuit is about defamation.
Page 18 of 26
Latest Alabama News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News