Irish law is crazy!

Jiro said:
no jury is going to convict her :)
Click to expand...

I wish I had your faith in the justice system.

I wish I had your faith in juries.

However I have heard several jurors tell me they followed the judges instructions to the letter even though it went against their inner sense of right and wrong.
 
If that happen, then I 'll just have to go to jail happy knowing that my child was safe because of me.
 
you know this is all messed up really but do we forget that will all this stuff going on that the usa has also allowed abortion and assisted suicide? (sorry to get off subject Stefan) isn't that murder also? it's not debated. it's happening every day and it's murder. just as someone would intrude on someone's house and they are accused of killing the guy. your killing that baby and your killing that person. that's wrong! (once more sorry for off subject)
 
Berry said:
I wish I had your faith in the justice system.

I wish I had your faith in juries.

However I have heard several jurors tell me they followed the judges instructions to the letter even though it went against their inner sense of right and wrong.
Click to expand...

that is true. if they acquit her and the judge feels that they made a very biased decision, the judge can nullify it and declare it as mistrial. But then... if it drags on, it will become very unpopular against the prosecutor and politicians. People will start protesting and demand a change in gun law. The politicians do not want to change the law. Sometimes - the Governor may either pardon her or commute her sentence to avoid the whole mess and unpopularity.

so...... yea
 
Kaja said:
you know this is all messed up really but do we forget that will all this stuff going on that the usa has also allowed abortion and assisted suicide? (sorry to get off subject Stefan) isn't that murder also? it's not debated. it's happening every day and it's murder. just as someone would intrude on someone's house and they are accused of killing the guy. your killing that baby and your killing that person. that's wrong! (once more sorry for off subject)
Click to expand...

I'm afraid to even go there. It's the type of subject that could start a small war on AD. A bit like discussing religion, might not be suitable for AD?
 
stefan2832 said:
I'm afraid to even go there. It's the type of subject that could start a small war on AD. A bit like discussing religion, might not be suitable for AD?
Click to expand...

:giggle: @ your post

a small war? lol you missed the whole gun debates between me and jillio last year :)
 
I did disturb 2 guys trying to steal my wifes car about 10 years ago.
I produced a hammer and stood my ground [which is a really stupid thing to do as my life is worth more than a stupid car.] Thankfully they backed off. The cops caught them 10 minutes later. In court they got a 1 month supended sentence..[Big deal!]
I had to take a day off work to get the car repaired.
 
Berry said:
I wish I had your faith in the justice system.

I wish I had your faith in juries.

However I have heard several jurors tell me they followed the judges instructions to the letter even though it went against their inner sense of right and wrong.
Click to expand...
I've never heard a judge tell jurors to go against their sense of right or wrong. He's supposed to instruct them as to what the law is, and the jurors are supposed to judge the testimony and evidence before them. The judge doesn't instruct them how to vote.
 
Reba said:
I've never heard a judge tell jurors to go against their sense of right or wrong. He's supposed to instruct them as to what the law is, and the jurors are supposed to judge the testimony and evidence before them. The judge doesn't instruct them how to vote.
Click to expand...

That's why Berry said he doesn't put that much faith in the system.
 
Jiro said:
- http://www.alldeaf.com/topic-debates/51881-gun-law.html
Click to expand...

That was an interesting thread Jiro, thanks.
Guns are banned in Ireland...yet any criminal can get one easy.
Last year a motorcycle cop pulled over a car in the city center..happened to be a criminal, shot him and drove off. It's an ongoing debate here if our police force should be armed.

I hope I'm not giving people the impression that Ireland is rife with violent crime. It's not that bad, we just have problems the same as anywhere in the world.

.
 
stefan2832 said:
I did disturb 2 guys trying to steal my wifes car about 10 years ago.
I produced a hammer and stood my ground [which is a really stupid thing to do as my life is worth more than a stupid car.] Thankfully they backed off. The cops caught them 10 minutes later. In court they got a 1 month supended sentence..[Big deal!]
I had to take a day off work to get the car repaired.
Click to expand...

oh my dear!! you told court about restrain order or not?
 
Well i think that if someone is going to break in to some one elses home then they shouldbe prepared for the consiquences even if it comes in the way of deadly forse.if some one broke into my home i would defenitly shoot and ask questions later.
 
Jiro said:
Each state is different but Florida and Texas are infamous for "Castle Doctrine" law aka "Stand Your Ground" aka "Make My Day".

in most states - that law is limited to your household. recently Florida has extended that to car. If you were driving somewhere and you're getting carjacked, you are legally allowed to shoot him in self-defense. each state with Castle Doctrine is slightly different. Some requires verbal warning. Some doesn't. Some requires a certain parameter in order to justify it.

Now - here's an even more tricky law.... "Duty to Retreat" which is different from Castle Doctrine. In Castle Doctrine - you can just give a verbal warning and then shoot'em if you feel threatened. In fact - some states do allow you to shoot without warning as long as there's a sign post like "TRESPASSER WILL BE SHOT ON SIGHT". However - in "Duty to Retreat", you must TRY to get away from the household and then announce your intent to use deadly force. You may shoot if you were threatened - such case where robber would run after you.

Sadly enough... firing a warning shot or brandishing your gun is illegal. This country does not make any sense anymore. You can easily get screwed over little fine-print. Whenever you're in self-defense situation, the cops will ask you what happened. You are NOT obliged to tell the story immediately. You may notify the officer that you will submit your statement at later date with your lawyer. No problem.

Contact your lawyer who specializes in firearm-related cases first before you talk to officer. I have 2 in my cellphone. the NRA hotline and NJ gun-specialized lawyer.
Click to expand...

Another reason to love TX Jiro. Some nigth I just sit by the front door with my shotgun and imitate the old Mervyn's commercial......."open,open,open" :lol:
 
Reba said:
I've never heard a judge tell jurors to go against their sense of right or wrong. He's supposed to instruct them as to what the law is, and the jurors are supposed to judge the testimony and evidence before them. The judge doesn't instruct them how to vote.
Click to expand...

He DOES instruct them how to vote. He instructs them to vote according to the law and the evidence before them.

In fact if you tell a perspective juror that they can vote as they please and that the juries can in fact make or break laws with their votes -- you will be charged with jury tampering.

And the jurors so informed will be dismissed from duty.
 
Berry said:
He DOES instruct them how to vote. He instructs them to vote according to the law and the evidence before them.

In fact if you tell a perspective juror that they can vote as they please and that the juries can in fact make or break laws with their votes -- you will be charged with jury tampering.

And the jurors so informed will be dismissed from duty.
Click to expand...

Well Duh! I would HOPE jurors vote according to the law and the evidence. Sometimes the don't though and you get verdicts like OJ's. The last thing we need is activist jurors. Activist judges are bad enough.
 
Berry said:
He DOES instruct them how to vote. He instructs them to vote according to the law and the evidence before them.
Click to expand...
Instructing the jurors on the law, and telling them how to vote are two entirely different things.

In fact if you tell a perspective juror that they can vote as they please and that the juries can in fact make or break laws with their votes -- you will be charged with jury tampering.
Click to expand...
I didn't say that judges should tell jurors that they can "vote as they please" in some willy-nilly fashion without following the law.

I didn't say that juries should make or break laws. How on earth can juries "make" laws anyway? They aren't part of the legislature.

"jury tampering n. the crime of attempting to influence a jury through any means other than presenting evidence and argument in court, including conversations about the case outside the court, offering bribes, making threats, or asking acquaintances to intercede with a juror."
jury tampering legal definition of jury tampering. jury tampering synonyms by the Free Online Law Dictionary.

And the jurors so informed will be dismissed from duty.
Click to expand...
If the judge truly tampered with a jury, not only would the jury be dismissed, the judge would be in deep legal doo-doo.

However, if you're saying that the judge wrongly advises the jury during the trial, then the lawyers for both sides who are present would surely have something to say about that. I find it hard to believe that the lawyers would ignore something like that. At the very least, that opens up opportunities for an appeal of any guilty verdict.

Also, once the jury is in the deliberation room, nothing that goes on in there is available to the judge unless a jury member specifically contacts the judge. Deliberations and votes are private during the trial.
 
Back
Top