Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    I am Murloc! shadowmouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Dongbei, PRC ... for now
    Posts
    5,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke
    Plenty of very legitimate reasons to dislike the justice system, especially in the US
    While that may be true, that isn't the topic of the thread. The question in this thread is "Can you be put into jail just with a confession?' not, "What do you think of the American judicial system?"

    No, condescending was having a layman tell me about law ("It’s not like they’re in any way equipped to be making that judgement, we just allow them to."), while ignoring that bench trials are a thing. Notice that I hadn't taken a particular stance when I entered the thread, I had simply suggested searching a particular phrase for more information. Results would have included information about coerced confessions and other problems.

    Edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82
    It's hilarious you think that the fact that people might rule differently than the law would dictate is a good argument for juries though.
    You know what the alternative is? Come over here, where I live, because that's the alternative. A lot of people aren't well prepared to vote either, but they do and it is generally considered a good thing. Consider the fancy name for what you just said -- jury nullification:

    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82
    Jury Nullification

    A jury's knowing and deliberate rejection of the evidence or refusal to apply the law either because the jury wants to send a message about some social issue that is larger than the case itself, or because the result dictated by law is contrary to the jury's sense of justice, morality, or fairness.

    Jury nullification is a discretionary act, and is not a legally sanctioned function of the jury. It is considered to be inconsistent with the jury's duty to return a verdict based solely on the law and the facts of the case. The jury does not have a right to nulification (sic), and counsel is not permitted to present the concept of jury nullification to the jury. However, jury verdicts of acquittal are unassailable even where the verdict is inconsistent with the weight of the evidence and instruction of the law.

    See U.S. v. Thomas, 116 F.3d 606 (2d Cir. 1997).
    Source: https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/jury_nullification

    Consider how jury nullification has been used to address sodomy laws and the Volstead Act in the US. If, for example, you favor the HK disorders being treated as protests, you should be in favor of juries who may not choose to follow the exact wording of the law.
    Last edited by shadowmouse; 2020-01-02 at 05:44 AM. Reason: Avoiding chain posting
    "No one -- however smart, however well-educated, however experienced -- is the suppository of all wisdom"

    Sixty years. One sexagenary cycle complete, a new adventure awaits.
    shadowmouse, previously bungeebungee

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by bungeebungee View Post
    While that may be true, that isn't the topic of the thread. The question in this thread is "Can you be put into jail just with a confession?' not, "What do you think of the American judicial system?"

    No, condescending was having a layman tell me about law
    You're both being condescending. Does that help?

  3. #23
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by bungeebungee View Post


    You know what the alternative is? Come over here, where I live, because that's the alternative.
    What do you have there?

  4. #24
    I am Murloc! shadowmouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Dongbei, PRC ... for now
    Posts
    5,473
    You're both being condescending. Does that help?
    Depends, do you actually have a point or are you just being condescending?

    Quote Originally Posted by Stormvind
    What do you have there?
    It is a system in evolution. Probably the main difference relevant to the discussion on juries is that jurors are appointed and are seen as more like judges:
    The jurors are allowed to participate in all hearing activities of People's Courts according to the law, enjoying the same rights as regular judges after assuming their posts. The jurors are not chosen on a per-trial basis, but serve five-year terms in the jury pool, working on different cases from time to time.
    https://news.cgtn.com/news/3d637a4e3...d/share_p.html

    For a more detailed (but dated) discussion: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu...ontext=macintl

    Caution, this article goes back to a time not long after the system was introduced and it predates the 2015 changes.
    "No one -- however smart, however well-educated, however experienced -- is the suppository of all wisdom"

    Sixty years. One sexagenary cycle complete, a new adventure awaits.
    shadowmouse, previously bungeebungee

  5. #25
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by bungeebungee View Post
    Depends, do you actually have a point or are you just being condescending?


    It is a system in evolution. Probably the main difference relevant to the discussion on juries is that jurors are appointed and are seen as more like judges:

    https://news.cgtn.com/news/3d637a4e3...d/share_p.html

    For a more detailed (but dated) discussion: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu...ontext=macintl

    Caution, this article goes back to a time not long after the system was introduced and it predates the 2015 changes.
    That sounds a lot like the lay judges here in sweden in the lower courts except the lay judges are put there by politicians.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by Qnubi View Post
    Let's assume you go to the police and tell them you have murdered someone (you didn't) and feel guilty about it. They then ask you where the corpse is and you would claim you cremated everything and as such there is no proof left. What would happen? Nobody would announce someone is missing, all they have is a confession that is wrong. I am curious how that would go.
    They can put you in Jail for being drunk in public. Putting you in Prison is a different thing entirely.

  7. #27
    I am Murloc! shadowmouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Dongbei, PRC ... for now
    Posts
    5,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Stormvind
    That sounds a lot like the lay judges here in sweden in the lower courts except the lay judges are put there by politicians.
    Ah, thanks! Nice to learn something, I'm not as familiar with Scandinavian law and its quirks as I'd like to be.
    "No one -- however smart, however well-educated, however experienced -- is the suppository of all wisdom"

    Sixty years. One sexagenary cycle complete, a new adventure awaits.
    shadowmouse, previously bungeebungee

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by bungeebungee View Post
    Depends, do you actually have a point or are you just being condescending?


    It is a system in evolution. Probably the main difference relevant to the discussion on juries is that jurors are appointed and are seen as more like judges:

    https://news.cgtn.com/news/3d637a4e3...d/share_p.html

    For a more detailed (but dated) discussion: http://digitalcommons.macalester.edu...ontext=macintl

    Caution, this article goes back to a time not long after the system was introduced and it predates the 2015 changes.
    My point was hand waving criticism of any justice system, is not the way to have a discussion.

  9. #29
    I am Murloc! shadowmouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Dongbei, PRC ... for now
    Posts
    5,473
    @Josuke You seem to have missed that I wasn't handwaving criticism, I was explaining something to a layman who was going off on a tangent and will probably continue to do so.

    There is a topic for the thread, perhaps the derail can be moved to another thread with a clear topic for discussion. Feel free to take the lead on that and I'll ring in on it.
    "No one -- however smart, however well-educated, however experienced -- is the suppository of all wisdom"

    Sixty years. One sexagenary cycle complete, a new adventure awaits.
    shadowmouse, previously bungeebungee

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by bungeebungee View Post
    @Josuke You seem to have missed that I wasn't handwaving criticism, I was explaining something to a layman who was going off on a tangent and will probably continue to do so.

    There is a topic for the thread, perhaps the derail can be moved to another thread with a clear topic for discussion. Feel free to take the lead on that and I'll ring in on it.
    You seem to be missing self awareness.

    This thread was on topic until you started derailing it by saying it was being derailed. It is obvious you dont like the direction the conversation was taking, but it wasnt off topic. You cant talk about this and ignore the justice system because it is "off topic".

    Anyway your explaining went very well didnt it. Thanks for doing that, you're making the world a better place.

  11. #31
    Homeless people have been known to commit offences to get sent to jail just to have shelter and food they offer as basic necessities, so false claims are a thing.

  12. #32
    Stood in the Fire
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    382
    Quote Originally Posted by Daedius View Post
    Homeless people have been known to commit offences to get sent to jail just to have shelter and food they offer as basic necessities, so false claims are a thing.
    Wasn't there a guy that robbed a bank for a glass of water?

  13. #33
    I am Murloc! shadowmouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Dongbei, PRC ... for now
    Posts
    5,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke
    Anyway your explaining went very well didnt it. Thanks for doing that, you're making the world a better place.
    It did, actually. Stormvind asked something reasonable and I got to learn something too. You? Your previous "contributions" were to quibble over the use of words.

    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke
    Laws are different in different countries.
    Quote Originally Posted by Josuke
    Do you mean prison or do you mean jail?

    Because if you get arrested at all you will end up in jail.

    If you meant would you be charged and sentenced for the crime (which is how you end up in prison)? Doubtful.
    That's wisdom of the ages stuff there champ. Well researched, clearly supported... Please do keep the derail going though, I appreciate the humor.
    "No one -- however smart, however well-educated, however experienced -- is the suppository of all wisdom"

    Sixty years. One sexagenary cycle complete, a new adventure awaits.
    shadowmouse, previously bungeebungee

  14. #34
    @bungeebungee plenty of countries have no jury system. It’s hilarious you think the only alternative is China though.
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    100:1 odds that he wont
    Quote Originally Posted by freefolk View Post
    Okay. I'll stop sharing my views.

  15. #35
    You can and people have been, but it really depends on the country and specific cases.
    Normally, your claims would be investigated and if they cannot be proven, then you are free. Well, no, you most likely would get hit with the book for lying to the police (as you should...).
    This is obviously done to try to avoid false confessions/taking fall for someone else.

  16. #36
    Look up Jens Söring.

  17. #37
    I am Murloc! shadowmouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Dongbei, PRC ... for now
    Posts
    5,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82
    plenty of countries have no jury system. It’s hilarious you think the only alternative is China though.
    Pssst. Keep up! If you go back to where Stormvind asked what the system here is, you'll notice that China 1) has a jury system, 2) the jurors are appointed. Those two things address your complaint that jurors are not trained for the role they play.

    The problem, of course, is that I doubt you'd trust the neutrality of those jurors precisely because they are appointed. On the other hand, jurors in the American system have specifically played a role in changing bad law through jury nullification ... something you've failed to address. Juries in the American system are there because they do reflect the views of the community. As far as trials with no jury, you've also dodged the fact that bench trials are an option.

    I notice that while you are struggling to come up with responses, you've yet to actually say what system you think *would* be better and why it would be better. Out of the "plenty of countries" not using juries, one example is Sharia law. Is that what you're proposing? Come on out and say so then.
    "No one -- however smart, however well-educated, however experienced -- is the suppository of all wisdom"

    Sixty years. One sexagenary cycle complete, a new adventure awaits.
    shadowmouse, previously bungeebungee

  18. #38
    The Undying Doctor Amadeus's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    In Security Watching...
    Posts
    38,571
    It depends there would still need to be enough circumstantial evidence in line with your statement. Otherwise you can have all the evidence in the world along with a confession. It likely wouldn't be enough.

    However they can hold you in jail until it is all sorted. If what you said doesn't hold up the next phase would be to find out why. I mean perhaps you decided to take responsibility for someone else. So just because you didn't actually do it, doesn't mean you might not serve a lot of time and be convicted almost as if you did.
    "Intellect alone is useless in a fight...you can't even break a rule, how can you be expected to break bone" Khan Singh

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by bungeebungee View Post
    Pssst. Keep up! If you go back to where Stormvind asked what the system here is, you'll notice that China 1) has a jury system, 2) the jurors are appointed. Those two things address your complaint that jurors are not trained for the role they play.

    The problem, of course, is that I doubt you'd trust the neutrality of those jurors precisely because they are appointed. On the other hand, jurors in the American system have specifically played a role in changing bad law through jury nullification ... something you've failed to address. Juries in the American system are there because they do reflect the views of the community. As far as trials with no jury, you've also dodged the fact that bench trials are an option.

    I notice that while you are struggling to come up with responses, you've yet to actually say what system you think *would* be better and why it would be better. Out of the "plenty of countries" not using juries, one example is Sharia law. Is that what you're proposing? Come on out and say so then.
    Keep up, you posted an article discussing the US legal system.
    Quote Originally Posted by zenkai View Post
    100:1 odds that he wont
    Quote Originally Posted by freefolk View Post
    Okay. I'll stop sharing my views.

  20. #40
    I am Murloc! shadowmouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Dongbei, PRC ... for now
    Posts
    5,473
    Quote Originally Posted by Vegas82
    Keep up, you posted an article discussing the US legal system.
    Ah, still dodging! Answer the question -- if you're going to bitch about something, what do you think is better? I see how you've hit nearly 33K posts, you don't have anything to say, you just +1.
    "No one -- however smart, however well-educated, however experienced -- is the suppository of all wisdom"

    Sixty years. One sexagenary cycle complete, a new adventure awaits.
    shadowmouse, previously bungeebungee

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •