Juries

https://www.sfexaminer.com/news/cal...-felony-convictions-on-juries-beginning-2020/


Good morning all,

Had initially planned to title the thread "Jury trials being phased out".

I believe this is going to happen.

 

The article seems quite reasonable.

I do not understand where you got the idea that "jury trials being phased out" there is absolutely no mention of implication of that in the article. In reality it appears to be a genuine attempt to make trials fairer.

 

Putting "people" on juries who have proven that they are unable to control their glandular activities makes juries more fair?!

Wow, what a special point of view.

What the article proves is that God needs to replay His Sodom and Gomorrah solution in California. San Francisco and Los Angeles going away would be a beginning for America getting its melanomas cut out.

The only cure for cancer is to annihilate it.

 

Good morning Brownbear,

The implication is inherent.

Some (many ?) persons would not serve on a jury with these people regardless of the rehabilitation level.

There is a cost to jury trials. It would take more time to assemble a larger jury pool. This is an additional cost.

Already "Middle-America" is experiencing a declining standard of living.

As an aside, how would a defendant charged with a sex crime fare without a jury of peers ? Have you factored in to the peer definition the matter of one's prominent and professed "religion" ? their political affiliation ?

Perry Mason is gone.

 

Absolute rubbish.

I'm surprised and disappointed that an intelligent person like yourself can even make that link. It is clearly about redressing a situation where a sector of the community is not getting fair trials due to a long running lack of black jurors. There is no other implication.

 

Good morning Brownbear,

We are in disagreement.

Did you know that several years ago Virginia's Supreme Court had a black Chief Justice ? Nation-wide there is an elaborate appellate process and for the indigent there are public defender attorneys. It's far from well-funded and well-staffed but it exists and funds are available from other sources.

The large and numerous murders are not occurring in Bristol Virginia, Cheyenne, Wyoming and Taos, New Mexico.

President Reagan's charged murder attempt defendant was in a courtroom with a predominantly black jury.

I still hold to my view. Many people would not serve on a jury if they felt they could not speak and act freely.

 

I, too, fear we are in disagreement.

The additional information you have given above may be relevant, but does not appear in the article. I believe the article as presented by you was clear, and your assertion does not appear to be based on the article you presented as evidence, but let's agree to disagree, in a friendly way, as you are (I believe) a US citizen and the issue is a matter for the US people, and I am a UK citizen.

 

Good morning Brownbear,

Yes, a US citizen.

True, the issue is US but the overall background is valid for discussion by all.

What article can be read without knowing the context and all else related ?!

 

One core dogma within the Secular Humanist anti-religion religion is that people who are poor or have a criminal history have in their lives been oppressed.

Friends, life itself is an unholy oppression. Welcome to the fetid fields of a Purgatory undeserved.

Truth is that crime causes poverty.

If you have made up your mind to set about developing a career of criminal activity, make sure that you are exceedingly intelligent about how you go about its development and the regimen of your business conduct. If you are not paying-off the authorities, then you are done-for -- your future will involve imprisonment or having "gone missing". The men of my family did not spend a day in jail. However, their friends had many an all-expense-paid vacation experience provided them involving concrete rooms festooned with iron bars.

My dad was a gambler. Not I.

 

We are only as good as the evidence we present - most articles are not unbiased, and this worth bearing in mind. Some articles that I notice our US brothers posting re UK issues are so wide of the mark they are worth even commenting on. I suspect the same holds true with the UK press. This makes it difficult to gauge a global perspective. I could suggest that the press has a conspiracy to "keep us in the dark, whilst apparently informed" but that would make me sound paranoid like one of those prepper type blokes you keep hearing about in the media

 

Good afternoon Brownbear,

Is there really such stuff as "evidence" ? Evidence is far from universal. I've lived and worked in places where "facts" are far from universal. For example; define "terrorist", define "mentally ill", define "corrupt".

Reading articles and discussing them allows for developing insight.

Global perspectives requires having experience with the subject matter being discussed. Otherwise, it is Plato's ALLEGORY OF THE CAVE. Much is just shadows; the missed elephant in the room.

What is labeled "the press" is not a medium for information. The "press" is for opinion-molding.

The "prepper' idiots are less about prepping and more so idiots. We've had people here call themselves "preppers" while dangerously storing large quantities of gasoline. They had no knowledge about grounding and all the rest. It's about the same with long-haul motorcyclists. Buying a machine has little to being a long-haul motorcyclist.

I know what's really going on in Hong Kong because it's been my second home. Articles present views. For more accurate information check insurance rates, conceding that even the Lloyd's crews are also politicized.

Even "insured" is not universally defined.

 

I verily despise the current fashion of people defining themselves or even others by their race in like manner to despising people who define themselves by their sexual orientation.

I happen to have a very outdated idea that people should be more than race or sexual orientation. Strange today I know!!


What we have today in government accelerating these concepts in division for cultivating votes...not was the law broken or violated.

Government today is heavily invested in professional victimization for votes.

This victimization substitution scheme is today reaching demonic proportions.

We saw this in the OJ trial where, as predicted, the police department would be on trial.....not the defendant.

Be warned....

Ishmaelites run wild.

My non Ishmaelite .02,

Watcherchris

 

Yes, in presenting a viewpoint academia throughout the western world (I say western world as until recent times the eastern world had a different view of evidence) requires more than an opinion. So (to use a contentious example) I may say "climate change is happening" and the target audience may, or may not agree, but if I were to say "climate change is happening because Pragmatist has too many campfires" then I would have to show that I had either researched this assertion by giving, for example, a calendar showing that you'd had 364 campfires in 2019 and the amounts of heat and carbon generated along with a reasonable explanation of why I believe it is all your fault.

If I don't do that I am merely giving my opinion, which is simply a viewpoint. My opinion may be correct but it also may be utterly misguided (one fo the key problems with the media, and to a degree this extends to members posting on all forums) is that a viewpoint is being presented quite usually without sufficient supporting evidence - we all do it in conversation, for example - the viewpoints that are presented are not unreasonably presented from viewers perspective, they are simply what the viewer sees.

So back to Pragmatist allegedly causing climate change, once I have presented my evidence it is for others to "peer review" that evidence to make sure it is valid. What would usually happen is that interested parties and opposition viewpoint parties test the evidence to establish whether it has merit or can be disproved. This is how science, for example, reaches a viewpoint.

On a forum such as this most people (myself included) make a statement and often post a supporting link. But, of course, it is quite easy to find stories/articles that show a different perspective, and we are drawn towards giving evidence that supports our views and beliefs.

To use your original post as an example the article made no reference to the points you introduced later, and on the basis of the original article alone there was no supporting evidence (in the manner explained above) so what we have is opinion, followed by an introduction of other ideas when challenged. From an academic standpoint that is rather like someone saying "yeah but" and diverting the subject with unrelated ideas. To give you an example you later mentioned a black judge, but in doing so did not discuss the implication that a black judge would be more likely to be from an educated background and, hence, with views more akin to wealthier whites (I think we would both agree that it is harder to get on in life if one is from a poorer background, and that there is not wealth equality between races in the US and more than there is in the UK - the example I give you to support that is the racial mix in the Senate, which is predominantly white).

As it happens I find your views on this matter very interesting, and it is also good to hear views from other nations as the UK media has a tendency to portray other nations as rather foolish (take look at how the UK portrays President Trump. It appears than many users on this forum seem to like him, however the UK media generally portrays him as a simple minded buffoon - actually it is none of the business of the UK media or people, he was elected in the US).

Anyway - evidence - there you have it

 

Mostly I find you posts indecipherable, and a simple list of mismatched sentences, but this I do agree with. I believe we are equals in birth and race/gender/sexual orientation should not define any of us.

 

Good morning Brownbear,

"Academic" equates to uselessness in the US.

Go to sections of Rome and inquire with academics when human life begins. They ask this question at the faculty lounge, University of California Berkeley.

What is not an opinion ? Even the Scientific Method is based on opinions. I was taught that the inert elements were inert until I learned that they were not.

In the US, for the most part, "peer review" does not exist. The peers are all economically dependent on the same sources for rice bowl replenishments.

Incorporating by reference and incorporating by implication have been used for ages.

My mention of Virginia's black Chief Justice of the Supreme Court (believe died in office) did not mention any implication involving educational background because most Forum Members know some basics.

Actually, I do not agree. I gulp coffee at various veterans' halls around here and can discuss certain material not eligible to discuss elsewhere. Many members of these vet clubs come from poor backgrounds - and many created their own upward mobility. I am dealing with ALL the races and all the socio-economic groups from all the settings, rural, suburban, urban, mixed, foster homes, grew up with aunt, ... the black churches (many more programs than just being houses of worship) adoption programs, etc, etc.

Yes, agree, there is much inequality in wealth between the black and white races. A closer examination with show other factors at work, such as leaving school, having a child wild still a teen and no husband, refusing to learn skills (many free programs throughout Virginia), alcohol consumption, much party life, ......

Besides liking Trump, I am a member of "Team Trump". His reform programs, for example, his minimizing black unemployment, is the best in US history. Trump's name is really synonymous with "Reform". Some of my colleagues don't like him because he was a Vietnam War draft dodger. It requires a well-though out calibration for the like-dislike matters of life.

......

Other post; Watcherchris' material requires a substantially large knowledge - base to understand.

 

Brownbear

No problem..

What I am often want and failing to describe is a broader attempt by government to "herd " Americans by working on our prejudices.

If necessary to cultivate or manufacture prejudices for purposes of control or herding and particularly through division and not unity. Another version and often not recognized by those put on the puppet strings is the deliberate manufacturing of the next bad guy or bad group of people.

Here is an example of a textbook social and political racist...there are more.

https://www.breitbart.com/clips/201...-trump-are-not-good-people-be-afraid-of-them/

One has to be educated in public school and never got past it to become this stupid....and then try to herd the rest of us.

He is publicly declaring his racism and stupidity. He is not the only one....this is demonic.,,in its nature.

A 180 degree flip flop of common sense.

I've caught a lot of this kind of thing in Democratic Debates...cultivating division...particularly through professional victimization.

Lincoln warned us and so long ago about someone working on the prejudices of the people.

My non Ishmaelite .02,

Watcherchris

 

What Lincoln foresaw...

https://ratical.org/corporations/Lincoln.html

Notice he states Republic....not Democracy.


Hope this helps.



Oh ...and you know this Russian collusion nonsense...

I need to find it on line somewhere...but Lincoln is supposed to have said at the end of the Civil War...

"We have now defeated England for the third time"

It can be very telling what is often left out of our education...particularly history.


I bust out laughing every time someone tries to sell the Russian Collusion narrative.

History...you gotta know some history.


My non Ishmaelite .02,

Watcherchris

 

the problem with juries is that regular reasonable people are rarely on them. for instance if i was called would i want to sit in a courtroom for several weeks living in cheap hotel rooms , eating cheap restaurant food. when i was to be paid minimum wage. i have got a job and family and two houses to look after . i would find a way out. the only people that are going to be on a jury are people without attachments like friends, family, real jobs, responsibilities. the complete opposite of what you want on a jury.