Woman allegedly impersonated prosecutor, dropped charges against herself • Hacker News Board

Re: Woman allegedly impersonated prosecutor, dropped charges against herself

#331

Post by eru » Tue, Nov 03, 2020, 5:54 AM UTC

wpietri wrote: post #328

eru wrote: post #322

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a maximum amount of punishment you want to mete out to convicts. Otherwise everything would carry a penalty worse than death. So there's a trade-off between handing out more of that punishment in fines to be paid to the victim or in economically inefficient activities like prison time. As a related matter, I think corporal punishment deserves more consideration. Mostly because it's cheaper to administer than…

The person we're discussing is heir to a $20 billion fortune. A fine that would constitute actual punishment to him is in the billions. Which I'm entirely in favor of here, preferably 19.9 billion or higher. But restitution isn't punishment. Restitution helps reduce harm to the victim, and is a separate issue entirely to punishment.

Sorry, I wasn't talking aware that you were talking punishment as in the need to cause pain for some abstract moral reason or to make people feel good.

I was more worried about issues like deterrence and restitution.

Punishment and deterrence are somewhat related, but not the same.

Re: Woman allegedly impersonated prosecutor, dropped charges against herself

#332

Post by o-__-o » Wed, Nov 04, 2020, 12:33 AM UTC

chordalkeyboard wrote: post #208

o-__-o wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are reading into this too much. This is a case of Dead Men Can't Speak. Rather than leave evidence of a crime, opportunity cost of murder is getting off scot-free. The media turned it into primetime theater, but it was never about race. It is about stand your ground and ultimately how the dead can't defend themselves in court.

This is true. The prosecutor should have observed that Stand Your Ground applied to Trayvon Martin who has reasonable belief that he was being pursued by someone intending to do him harm. Martin was not afforded equal protection under the law.

No. Martin is dead. The prosecutor could not bring any affirmative defense for Trayvon Martin because he was not there to argue Stand Your Ground. Hence the statement "dead men can't speak". The prosecutor could and did bring circumstantial evidence, but ultimately Zimmerman could claim stand your ground and successfully argue it.

Whatever else you are applying to the situation is entirely in your mind and does not apply to facts of the case.

Re: Woman allegedly impersonated prosecutor, dropped charges against herself

#333

Post by chordalkeyboard » Fri, Nov 06, 2020, 3:08 AM UTC

o-__-o wrote: post #332

chordalkeyboard wrote: post #208

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is true. The prosecutor should have observed that Stand Your Ground applied to Trayvon Martin who has reasonable belief that he was being pursued by someone intending to do him harm. Martin was not afforded equal protection under the law.

No. Martin is dead. The prosecutor could not bring any affirmative defense for Trayvon Martin because he was not there to argue Stand Your Ground. Hence the statement "dead men can't speak". The prosecutor could and did bring circumstantial evidence, but ultimately Zimmerman could claim stand your ground and successfully argue it. Whatever else you are applying to the situation is entirely in your mind and does not a…

yes, Martin is dead and was unable to assert his rights. It then fell to the prosecutor to do so in his stead and he neglected to perform that duty. This is how a grown man was able to pursue a teenager to his home in contravention of the orders from the 911 dispatcher and kill him in the resulting physical confrontation without legal consequences.

Re: Woman allegedly impersonated prosecutor, dropped charges against herself

#334

Post by o-__-o » Sun, Nov 08, 2020, 2:26 PM UTC

chordalkeyboard wrote: post #333

o-__-o wrote: post #332

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Martin is dead. The prosecutor could not bring any affirmative defense for Trayvon Martin because he was not there to argue Stand Your Ground. Hence the statement "dead men can't speak". The prosecutor could and did bring circumstantial evidence, but ultimately Zimmerman could claim stand your ground and successfully argue it. Whatever else you are applying to the situation is entirely in your mind and does not a…

yes, Martin is dead and was unable to assert his rights. It then fell to the prosecutor to do so in his stead and he neglected to perform that duty. This is how a grown man was able to pursue a teenager to his home in contravention of the orders from the 911 dispatcher and kill him in the resulting physical confrontation without legal consequences.

Soooo if you cannot assert your rights you cannot stand your ground. What happens when you have two people claiming stand your ground?

Dead men can’t speak. Stand your ground is an affirmative defense. Or in other words, when in Florida carry a big stick and don’t be afraid to use it.

Honest question, are you saying the prosecution should have ignored years of case law and argued on purely circumstantial evidence? (Because Martin’s girlfriend was a baaaaaaaad witness. Like beyond bad. Like I would have been ashamed to have her as my star witness. Why would the one person who could hear the struggle of the fight have an attitude, on the stand, towards the prosecutor fighting for her bf?!?!!)

Re: Woman allegedly impersonated prosecutor, dropped charges against herself

#335

Post by jimz » Fri, Nov 13, 2020, 4:33 PM UTC

pnw_hazor wrote: post #329

jimz wrote: post #278

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And it does, of course, very frequently. The US Court system's problem is not a matter of discovering such frauds and wrongdoing, and in some fields it's almost impossible to get away with this sort of conduct, but overall, there's little avenues of redress. Civil litigation is obviously the biggest area and the best positioned to both catch and remedy the fraud. Some criminal proceedings have similar robust checks,…

I agree with everything you say here. At least in the State of WA, I think prosecutors have qualified immunity and can be sued or charged for Brady violations. I think one of the biggest 'frauds' is the churn in the lower courts. It often seems like judges, clerks, public defenders, and prosecutors are pretending they are doing something helpful or important while the repeat defendants think of the whole situation as…

Sadly, in theory this is true but over the last 20 years there had been two - yes, TWO - cases where a prosecutor was prosecutoed for misconduct that materially prejudiced the outcome of the trial. Both required more than just Brady but also outright fraud. For all intents and purposes under the current system, it's very much a case of two egregious outliers covering the entire dataset in terms of prosecutions. I will believe it when I see it if intentional bad conduct will actually get challenged, and I'm not holding my breath. Power tends to self-perpetuate and this is simply the apotheosis of the unchecked exercise of power.

The two cases mentioned above: https://digitalcommons.pace.edu/ cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1635&context=lawfaculty

Re: Woman allegedly impersonated prosecutor, dropped charges against herself

#336

Post by chordalkeyboard » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 2:55 AM UTC

o-__-o wrote: post #334

chordalkeyboard wrote: post #333

Earlier quoted context omitted.

yes, Martin is dead and was unable to assert his rights. It then fell to the prosecutor to do so in his stead and he neglected to perform that duty. This is how a grown man was able to pursue a teenager to his home in contravention of the orders from the 911 dispatcher and kill him in the resulting physical confrontation without legal consequences.

Soooo if you cannot assert your rights you cannot stand your ground. What happens when you have two people claiming stand your ground? Dead men can’t speak. Stand your ground is an affirmative defense. Or in other words, when in Florida carry a big stick and don’t be afraid to use it. Honest question, are you saying the prosecution should have ignored years of case law and argued on purely circumstantial evidence? (B…

> What happens when you have two people claiming stand your ground?

One of them initiated the violence or the reason for justified violence, and that person (the aggressor) is in the wrong, generally speaking.

> Dead men can’t speak. Stand your ground is an affirmative defense.

Its an affirmative defense to charges of assault, yes. This is why it applies to Martin even if everything Zimmerman said is true.

> Honest question, are you saying the prosecution should have ignored years of case law and argued on purely circumstantial evidence?

No, they should have relied on the facts not in dispute, which is that Zimmerman followed a person home, that person was unknown to him and had every right to be there, and Zimmerman acted contrary to the wishes of the 911 operator when he exited the safety of his vehicle to pursue a teenager down the path. For this reason, Martin's alleged reaction to attack Zimmerman was an act of self-defense by a cornered juvenile.

> Because Martin’s girlfriend was a baaaaaaaad witness. Like beyond bad. Like I would have been ashamed to have her as my star witness. Why would the one person who could hear the struggle of the fight have an attitude, on the stand, towards the prosecutor fighting for her bf?!?!!

Yes, she was a bad witness because she lacked the signs of class and education that would have made her likely to arise sympathy in the hearts of the audience. and Martin was a bad victim because he was a young, healthy, skinny black kid.

None of that changes the part where an adult male followed a kid home and provoked an assault.