- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
0
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:13 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
's been two years and you still don't know why you were wrong about that? Really?
Yes really
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:13 am to SCLibertarian
quote:
I'm no Kasich fan, but self-defense is an affirmative defense.
True.
quote:
If it's raised by the Defendant, he or she should bear the burden of proving it. That's basic criminal or civil law.
You got that backwards and you apparently lack even the most basic understanding of the law here. People with your lack of understanding are why we need SYG and Castle Doctrine laws.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:17 am to SDVTiger
Obviously.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:17 am to DisplacedBuckeye
Yes its obvious how much of a fraud you are
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:19 am to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
What's your position on tandem kayaks?
kayaks are for homos
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:23 am to SDVTiger
quote:
Yes its obvious how much of a fraud you are
He's no fraud.
He doesn't even hide it anymore, he's no Conservative.
I wonder how old irl Cuckeye is.
God forbid he's a fairly young guy, I can't imagine how miserable he is.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:23 am to Clames
quote:
You got that backwards and you apparently lack even the most basic understanding of the law here. People with your lack of understanding are why we need SYG and Castle Doctrine laws.
No I don't. I've done this for a living for almost a decade dipshit. If you're charged with murder or manslaughter, you have the option to raise self-defense as one of many defenses to the charge. The person charged has the burden of proof as to any and all affirmative defenses. Even SYG and Castle Doctrine are affirmative defenses that must be proven by a Defendant. That is how the common law has worked for the past 800 years.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:31 am to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:Excuse me?
His legal fees aren't going to change
Are you nuts?
Provide an agenda-driven prosecutor license to force proof of innocence upon a defendant, rather than the other way around, and there is no question the pool of defendants will grow, as will their legal bills.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:52 am to Clames
quote:
You got that backwards and you apparently lack even the most basic understanding of the law here. People with your lack of understanding are why we need SYG and Castle Doctrine laws
Actually, you have it backwards and you apparently lack even the most basic understanding of the law here.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:58 am to SDVTiger
No wonder you had trouble with it.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:58 am to 225bred
quote:
kayaks are for homos
I like what I'm hearing.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 11:59 am to NC_Tigah
quote:
Provide an agenda-driven prosecutor license to force proof of innocence upon a defendant, rather than the other way around, and there is no question the pool of defendants will grow, as will their legal bills.
You’re going to spend just as much time with your lawyer in either case, and probably even more time in court if the prosecutor has more elements to prove.
And the prosecutor doesn’t force proof of innocence on anyone. Affirmative defenses operate as an excuse for commiting the underlying act.
You still committed the act, if the prosecutor so proves. it’s your job to prove that you had an allowable excuse.
You’re still going to have to litigate the issue of self defense, whether prosecution or defense is the one raising it. The state is going to be attempting to show that you didn’t do it in self defense, and you’ll be opposing it, whereas previously you assert it and the state opposes. This law doesn’t change the amount of issues at trial or the amount of testimony needed.
This post was edited on 12/28/18 at 12:01 pm
Posted on 12/28/18 at 12:01 pm to SCLibertarian
quote:
If it's raised by the Defendant, he or she should bear the burden of proving it.
That's not how this works. You are innocent until proven guilty. The prosecution must prove you guilty. You don't have to prove yourself innocent.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 12:02 pm to DisplacedBuckeye
quote:
Kasich 2020
Yes folks, back from his bomb embarrassing Presidential run in 2016 it's John Kasich.. But this time it's different. He claims to be a Republican, but in this episode, we learn that he is truly a Democrat. Don't miss this episode..
Posted on 12/28/18 at 12:04 pm to Nguyener
quote:
That's not how this works.
Thats exactly how this works. (I guess not anymore in Ohio)
quote:
The prosecution must prove you guilty. You don't have to prove yourself innocent.
They have to prove you guilty of the act/crime. If you have an allowable excuse (affirmative defense), you must assert that your commission of that act/crime was excusable. It has always been this way, and is that way everywhere.
Homicide committed in self defense is still homicide. You simply have an excuse. Making the prosecutor prove a negative is a weird precedent to set.
This post was edited on 12/28/18 at 12:06 pm
Posted on 12/28/18 at 12:08 pm to ILeaveAtHalftime
quote:FALSE!
You’re going to spend just as much time with your lawyer in either case
If the burden of proof is on the prosecution (a tenet of innocent-until-proven-guilty btw), many cases would never reach court. If the burden of proof is on the defendant, and you claim that burden will reduce prosecution and defense cost, I just don't know what to tell you.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 12:08 pm to Jjdoc
quote:
What a shitty veto on Kasich's part.
I read the veto, and he brings up some good points.
He basically wanted the bill to go back for more discussion by the new legislature. The lame duck legislature overrode him. Oh well.
Posted on 12/28/18 at 12:11 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
If the burden of proof is on the prosecution (a tenet of innocent-until-proven-guilty btw), many cases would never reach court.
This entire discussion pre-supposes that the prosecutor chooses to pursue charges and the case goes forward.
If your point is that this change will result in less trials, then yes I will agree with you on that point. Less people would be brought to trial theoretically.
But as far as expenses incurred in your defense, the change will not necessarily lower the legal bills of any defendant whom prosecutors take to trial. Shifting the burden at trial isnt going to lessen the amount of effort or time it will take to prepare and litigate the issue.
This post was edited on 12/28/18 at 12:15 pm
Posted on 12/28/18 at 12:12 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
If the burden of proof is on the prosecution (a tenet of innocent-until-proven-guilty btw), many cases would never reach court.
Possibly.
This new law requires prosecutors to prove that self defense was not the motivation - imagine how many murderers will now walk free.
Page 3 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News