Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

citoyens.soquij.qc.ca

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

311–318 of 318 posts

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#311

Post by Natsu »

chef_boyarz wrote: post #292
Natsu wrote: post #196

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In this case, they apparently ignored several prior complaints until the guy videotaped this guy giving the man (who tried to run over his kids on several occasions) the finger and making a gesture (wrongly) described as "throat slashing." Of course, this nutjob is absolutely paranoid and was constantly driving in a reckless manner around small children who wanted to play in their neighborhood, some of whom he videot…

The prosecutor didn’t ask for the case to be thrown out. The prosecutor decided not to cross examine Mr Epstein. She then asked the judge for an acquittal. She knew that the prosecution had lost after Mr Epstein testified and the “victim” lied under oath. There was no point cross examining and wasting more of the taxpayers money and courts time. Although the trial should never have taken place at all

That's a fair clarification and that is what happened, but to be clear, when I said they asked it to be thrown out, I was referring to the prosecutor asking the judge for an acquittal.

That's... not normal. And the judge praises her for this, specifically. I assume he knows more about the total situation than most of us and would generally defer to him on that point, since he's obviously no fan of this farce.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#312

Post by standardUser »

Arch485 wrote: post #178
standardUser wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hard to imagine "the right thing" ever involves using force to detain a citizen who poses no urgent threat and has not engaged in violent behavior. That detainment may be temporary, but it is a complete and utter denial of all basic human rights to the person being detained.

The police didn't use force; it says in the court documents that, when arrested, the accused complied completely with the police.

If you resist arrest, police will use force to detain you. That's how that works. Did you think arrest was voluntary? I'll pretend you're not trolling and actually needed this explained to you.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#313

Post by gerdesj »

raattgift wrote: post #241
gerdesj wrote: post #153

I have no idea what a UK version of this transcript would look like but I rather enjoyed this one from Canada. The Décision is spelt out with exquisite precision throughout the entire document. King Charles III's Justice is quite clearly very well dispensed in Canada.

tl;dr: https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/JCO/Documents/Ju... > (wiki overview https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Twitter_joke_trial#cite_ref-Hi... >), which summarizes the very different first-instance trial (in England & Wales) of Chambers from this first-instance trial of Epstein (in Canada). In particular, Chambers was accused of threatening to blow up an airport, which is rather different than giving someone…

If you want to get some decent information, then riling experts on HN is a good start! Thank you for putting me in my place. You clearly know what you are on about.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#314

Post by unixgoddess »

jakear wrote: post #298
barry-cotter wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you don’t want to be exposed to other people live somewhere you can’t see your nearest neighbour.

A brief look at their comment history makes me quite sure they should be kept far away from... anyone, really. Except maybe a psychiatrist. To the grand parent, if you're reading this: please get help. Your views on what activities are/aren't appropriate for children have no place in civil society. 9 year olds, dude.

and who are you to say what "civil society" means?

more importantly, attacking the messenger rather than rationally discuss their arguments is very suspicious...

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#315

Post by unixgoddess »

barry-cotter wrote: post #263
unixgoddess wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

for many people there's nothing beautiful in a child's laughter, especially if they don't have children of their own, so they are only getting the annoyance of noise without the good parts. moreover, in my experience, when children play, 80% of their interactions is ugly insult-throwing, not laughter. Also, why should the wishes of a group (children) be more important than those of another (those who wish to enjoy so…

If you don’t want to be exposed to other people live somewhere you can’t see your nearest neighbour.

where? it's become nearly impossible because of overcrowding.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#316

Post by jakear »

unixgoddess wrote: post #314
jakear wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A brief look at their comment history makes me quite sure they should be kept far away from... anyone, really. Except maybe a psychiatrist. To the grand parent, if you're reading this: please get help. Your views on what activities are/aren't appropriate for children have no place in civil society. 9 year olds, dude.

and who are you to say what "civil society" means? more importantly, attacking the messenger rather than rationally discuss their arguments is very suspicious...

Don't confuse "the messenger" with "the messenger's message, viewed in context with their other messages on related matters".

Or do, because they're both you.

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#317

Post by unixgoddess »

jakear wrote: post #316
unixgoddess wrote: post #314

Earlier quoted context omitted.

and who are you to say what "civil society" means? more importantly, attacking the messenger rather than rationally discuss their arguments is very suspicious...

Don't confuse "the messenger" with "the messenger's message, viewed in context with their other messages on related matters". Or do, because they're both you .

nope, your comment is all about me personally, my mental health, not my ideas. It's the age old "argument" used to dismiss rational conversation: "no point discussing it, it comes from a crazy guy"

Re: Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

#318

Post by zemnmez »

zemnmez wrote: post #169
EntrePrescott wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

leaving aside the show of incompetence of that specific "crown prosecutor", what I find even far more shocking is that in 2023 there still is such a thing as a "crown prosecutor". I'd say it's high time to gain full independence and throw the English "crown" out of Canada.

“the crown” is an idea stemming from english constitutional law representing “the state”, i.e. the legal entity constituting the country. It doesn’t have a lot to do with the physical monarch except in metaphor. It looks like, based on some Googling, that Jamaica, which is a republic (canada is not) still uses the term “crown” in this sense: https://www.mof.gov.jm/careers/crown-counsel-mlss-legal-serv...

wanted to correct this one: I confused Barbados with Jamaica here. Barbados is a republic. I am sure its laws still use the term "the crown", but it looks like it uses the term "Public Prosecutor" instead of "Crown Prosecutor".
Post reply on HN