Dude, you're getting a cell! Sweeeet!!
- Thread starter Wulf
- Start date
Originally posted by t.c.cgi
Wow, so if I do comercials, and try to buy drugs, they'll let me off with a slap on the hand? Webster's should update it's dictionary.
Justice - n. : The selective enforcement of laws for the benefit of the wealthy.
of course.....and can you believe they are always saying "its harder then it looks to be a star".... well doing a little work.... getting a ton of money.... being able to break small laws.... how is that not all fun and games?
TC
SubCrid
Originally posted by t.c.cgi
Wow, so if I do comercials, and try to buy drugs, they'll let me off with a slap on the hand? Webster's should update it's dictionary.
Justice - n. : The selective enforcement of laws for the benefit of the wealthy.
Hehe... you really think the US tries to convict everyone they catch buying marijuana?
Needaham45
Spaceman
If your not famous they do. It's all scam. Recently (past 10 years), to boost the economy, we've been building a lot of prisons. Towns are actually lobying to the state governments "Build a prison here!" Why? Because with a prison there are more jobs. More jobs, more people in town, more money cirrulating, town develops. The only problem is we need people to put into prisons. So, we find loop holes and in the laws, and pass new ones, to convict just about everyone (especially where I live - in New Jersey. I think they're going to make breathing illegal soon). I heard about this one guy who overdosed on heroin, and they had him arrested and convicted on drug posession, because when they found him, the drugs were still in his body. He was still in posession of them though, so he got sent to jail. It's ridiculous - it really is.
Quarto
Unknown Enemy
Well, you're demonstrating their problems right now. If you got caught with marijuana and let off lightly, nobody would know. And even if they knew, nobody would care. That's not how it works for them, though - when a star gets the same treatment that an ordinary person would get, people are all outraged because "it's not fair".
Take the O.J. Simpson case, for example. I don't know whether he was innocent or not, but that's really besides the point - everybody assumed that he was only found innocent because he was famous, and that in fact he was guilty. Guilty not because he was proven guilty (he obviously wasn't), but because he was famous.
Needaham45
Spaceman
With OJ there was an overwhelmingly large amount of evidence thatmade him seem guilty. The problem was it was all circumstantial evidence - no hard proof. While it was clear he did it, there was no hard evidence to convict him on, so the jury, legally had to aquitt. I don't think it really has to do with fame - for once.
Needaham45
Spaceman
While everything your saying is true, even if OJ was your average person, legally, teh jury had no choice but to aquitt. I'm not saying that mistakes haven't been made in justice when someone was convicted on circumstantial evidence, even less than what OJ had, but in those cases too, the jury legally had to aquitt. That doesnt' mean they did, but that's what they were supposed to do. And if so many people think he should have been sent to jail, then that's pressure too. I haven't talked to a single person who thought he was innocent. I'm just syaing that legally the jury had to do what they did.
Dominator
Rear Admiral
I am not very familiar with US law but what I know from criminal law system of my country - especially evidence law (oh, man I will have exam of this in few months 
)it is possible to convict someone only on circumstantial evidence if it is convincing enough. In this case in my opinion it was convincing enough for me (and virtually all people I know who followed this case on TV or press) but combination of very good defenders, medicore prosecutors and public opinion gave the result we know. This is especially fault of prosecutors, because they present evidence, and they did it poorely.
)it is possible to convict someone only on circumstantial evidence if it is convincing enough. In this case in my opinion it was convincing enough for me (and virtually all people I know who followed this case on TV or press) but combination of very good defenders, medicore prosecutors and public opinion gave the result we know. This is especially fault of prosecutors, because they present evidence, and they did it poorely.Concordia_FP
Spaceman
Well, it IS New Jersey...just joking...it's totally opposite in North Carolina...they let everyone off for murder
The whole system is corrupt... i mean c'mon... you cant reform a murderer... thats for less serious crimes....they are let off TOO easily... i mean they can get college degrees!! thats right.... the government thinks it will help change them, so they use citizen's tax dollars to pay for prisoners to get college degrees. so let me see... if i kill someone in a softey state... get oh say... maybe 20 with the possibilty of parol... then i can get a masters degree... for FREE!!!... thats messed up.
Fortunatly i live in a state, Virgina, that has no problem with issuing death penalty... the only just punishment for murder.
Aries
Vice Admiral
hell yeah, it's messed up. but what do you expect from a system that designed to keep people OUT of jail?
damn right, the death penalty is the only just punishment for murder. You kill someone, you deserve to die yourself, preferably in the manner that you killed the other person, though that's just my opinion. I used to live in Texas, the state that leads the country in executions.