Slashdot Mirror
Social Networking Sites Becoming Useful For Lawyers
chareverie writes "With how the internet has become, social networking sites such as Facebook and MySpace have become a tool for crime solvers, employers, and now, lawyers. Two weeks after Joshua Lipton was charged in a drunk driving case, the college junior attended a Halloween party dressed as a prisoner, with the words 'jail bird' on his costume. Not surprisingly, his prosecutor was able to obtain photos of him at the party that were posted on Facebook, and claimed he was an 'unrepentant partier who lived it up while his victim recovered in the hospital.' The photos were presented in a slideshow, with one of them showing Lipton holding a can of Red Bull in one hand, and an arm draped around a girl bearing sorority letters. The judge agreed with the prosecutor, and changed Lipton's sentence to two years in prison. The article also cites other instances of people getting harsher sentences from pictures of them posted online."
title should be "useful for prosecutors". while prosecutors are "lawyers", this article and topic is far more specific.
... of douchebaggery.
Last week some 18 year-old punk was speeding and hit two women who were in town from St. Louis to see the Cardinals play the Phillies. One of them later died.
The cops found his MySpace page, and it's apparently full of pics of him drinking and smoking pot, and the article even says he used a mugshot from a prior arrest as his default photo. The cops got wind of it and snagged his computer and other stuff from his house with a search warrant, and they'll probably use it to stave off any attempt at the "but he's a good boy who just made a mistake" defense.
After reading the article, I am completely disgusted... especially with his parents, under whose noses it seems much of his bad behavior has been going on. Call me old-fashioned, but I think parents should try to raise their kids to, you know, not be a colossal fuckup.
The best part, IMHO, is that for all his "I'm just Mr. Buster Badass" posturing on his MySpace page, he is apparently throwing up in jail because he's so scared (insert derisive Nelson Muntz laugh here).
~Philly
The laws should be defined more explicitly, so that the same punishment for the same crime can be applied.
Leave it up to the judge and jury. They will have intimate knowledge of the case, a legislature hundreds of miles away won't.
People with certain personalities
Personalities? What in the hell? Is "dumb" a personality? Read the article, man. People like this deserve to go to prison.
and as we know certain races,
No, I don't know.
get effected disproportionally because the law gives too much flexibility in determining the severity of the punishment.
Wait, what?
too much flexibility
All right. How about this: mandatory death sentence - Texas style, not California - for anyone convicted of drunk driving.
Happy, now?
Any fucktard that drives drunk deserves - at the very least - a serious asskickin'.
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
I don't have a problem with this. The kid obviously did not take the weight of the crime he committed seriously - he acted with contempt and callousness. Someone who acts like this, versus someone who does something bad but admits he was wrong and regrets it, should, as far as I am concerned, receive more punishment.
As far as you claims about race is concerned, that is totally bogus.
But then you run into troubles with a fairly petty crime being considered equivalent to a fairly serious crime. Mandatory minimums cause ludicrous penalties for drug crimes.
This is correct use of technology- hands down, a winning proposition.
Now, it may not be so when prosecutors dredge up photos unrelated to, older, than, or from a different person with the same name, so this only argues for more transparent ways for hosts, services, and users to find unshakeable ways to authenticate what happens under their aegis. opt-in automatic encrypted transmission watermarks, anyone?
responsibility, what a concept!
(or learn 2 anon, use 7 proxies, etc)
I don't understand the problem here either. This is two "OMG Privacy" stories that have come up in the last few days. This isn't "OMG Privacy". This is quit being a fucking moron and advertising your private life to 3rd parties or the world. In each of the three cases I am fucking glad they found those pictures. Those pieces of shit deserve to be rotting in prison instead of out partying after that crap. In case you skip the article it talkes about 3 cases of DUI, in 2 of which people died and the third almost died. Then these pieces of human filth went out partying and posted pictures showing exactly how seriously they took the fact that they went out driving drunk and murdered someone. I am personally very happy these fuckwits posted these pictures and the prosecution found them. In at least two of the cases mentioned here the bastard was probably going to get probation.
So...let me put it this way. If you are a worthless dumbass criminal making life worse for other people PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE post pictures of yourself doing illegal things online. Record yourself talking about the crime and make it an mp3. Take videos of you beating hobos or other nonsense and put them on youtube. I would much rather a society where the criminals effectively go to the authority and say "Hi, I'm a fucking moron criminal asshole, please arrest me!" than the world where the cops have to wiretap, and search, and investigate. So, please, in the interest of keeping our society free, go post your stupidity online, make it easy to find, that way the authority can leave the rest of us the fuck alone since we aren't doing anything wrong.
The only change I can believe in is what I find in my couch cushions.
The amount of true remorse that a defendant feels and expresses can and should be used when determining sentencing. It's called a 'mitigating circumstance.'
Did it ever occur to you that there were circumstances, such as prior history, that could affect the sentence? The claim that blacks are being unfairly punished is a totally bogus one.
... but on the "races" bit, yes, for the same offense, blacks more often get jail time while whites walk. Justice might be blind, but it ain't colour-blind when it comes to sentencing.
I've heard that, but I'd need to see some actual data. Not a press release from a Leftist "thinktank".
I suspect the gap would magically disappear if you took the socioeconomic levels into account. I'm sure a poor white kid (with a public defender) would get a worse sentence than a black kid from a rich family (with a family-hired lawyer).
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
What does that statement have to do with an attorney using publicly posted images in a legal case, which is what the story is actually about?
Or are you just hung up on being a racist?
---- Booth was a patriot ----
I don't know about preventing prosecutors from using photos. However . . . to deter employers from viewing and abusing social networking pages, employees might post legal terms of service under which employers agree to scram. This idea should not be taken as legal advice for anyone, just fodder for public discussion. --Ben http://hack-igations.blogspot.com/2007/11/privacy-advocates-such-as-nyu-professor.html
Benjamin Wright, Dallas, Texas, benjaminwright.us
All right. How about this: mandatory death sentence - Texas style, not California - for anyone convicted of drunk driving.
DUI level drunk driving or .15 swerve all over the road drunk driving?
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
What does a 25 year old (former) sex-offender from Texas, have to do with this 20 year old (former) college student from Rhode Island? Other than that they have the same names?
It only takes one man to change the Wisdom of the Crowd to Tyranny of the Masses.
The claim that blacks are being unfairly punished is a totally bogus one.
No, it isn't. See http://archives.cnn.com/2000/LAW/05/04/civil.rights/index.html and http://sentencing.typepad.com/sentencing_law_and_policy/2006/01/should_criminal.html for starters.
#!
So what we have is a guy who was known for drinking alcoholic beverages, now drinks non-alcoholic Red Bull instead. Any lawyer worth his or her fee, would've pointed out this evidenced change in behaviour as a sign that the subject no longer drank, and therefore should have a reduced sentence.
It's all down to the interpretation.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
George W. Bush does coke, gets arrested, gets a new drivers' license number "000000005" to hide the arrest, gets a bunch more DUIs ... and hasn't done any jail time yet.
If he were black?
until such time as the preponderance of judges and attorneys can be embarrassed by archival pictures/movies on the Internet.
#!
Two years minus maybe 40% off for good behavior is a mere 438 days. Let's say Drool Bucket slaps his forehead and cries "Idiot!" 20 times each day (in between rapes). This is well under nine thousand forehead slaps. IT... COULD... WORK!! (file under "Forrest Gump Area of the Intelligence Curve" or "Repeatedly Learning Your Lessons the Hard Way".)
Wow. That page really shows a lot about a person's integrity. Sexual assault, forced incest and now DUI. Plus 6 mug shots. He's a winner.
Did I get that right? He went to court, got away with a rather mild verdict, then the prosecutor showed that he is "partying" and this is grounds for a more serious conviction?
Hello? Did partying now become some sort of grounds for a harsher verdict? What should he have done? Mourn and weep for at least 2 years or whatever the court deems "appropriate"?
This is sick, people. This means you're not only judged for what you do but also for what you feel.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
If he were black?
The same would have happened of course. He'd still have a rich and influential father.
Well, I did a google search, and in a few moments found such work. (Remove references to Conrad Black -- most results have cites to the original sources.)
This sort of thing saddens me. People actually think that the US has become entirely color-blind? And, Slashdotters aren't able to do google searches?
And I've personal experience with this too. I was on the jury of a murder case. It was astounding how often certain other jurers brought up race. For instance, apparently, all black men come "from the same place" and can tell each other apart perfectly!
Obama admitted to doing drugs, and he's not going to jail.
Yet, once he's president, he'll have the official capacity to pardon all non-violent drug offenders... think he'll do it???
Buckle your ROFL belt, we're in for some LOLs.
I work as an Orientation Leader at my college; familiarizing incoming freshman with the campus and what it's like to be a college student, etc. One of the things we warn them about is to not put anything on facebook that they wouldn't want their family to see. Of course, they don't listen and we've had RAs write kids up for things they've done just because the RA saw pictures of it posted on facebook.
When kids get their room assignments, they instantly check their roommates out on facebook. Every now and then we hear stories that even before they've met the roommate, parents ask for a new one because the roommate's facebook page makes them worry the kid might be gay.
This sig is false.
Last I checked, Red Bull was NOT an alcoholic beverage. Had he been photographed drinking alcohol I could understand the increased sentence.
Is that you, Josh?
hahaha watch the cornhole, luser.
I guess some people still can't get in through their skulls that the internet isn't some sort of silly game. If you post something, anyone has access to it, including law enforcement. It's like that woman who tried to take out a hit on someone via Craigslist a while back. What the hell is going through these people's minds?
Better yet, why get the government involved at all? If you think this would be a good idea, start your own shuttle bus service. I find it ironic that your signature proclaims that the government is our enemy, but your first reaction in this case is to ask for more government intervention.
U need to use a fake identity & gender like Heroine. Anything U say will be used against U, especially if U store your entire life on the Goog network.
"If it shows up under your name you own it," he said, "and you better understand that people look for that stuff."
Which is entirely the problem. I don't have a MySpace page, but my real name (and variations of initials thereof) shows up on MySpace. A negligent, or perhaps merely aggressive, prosecutor might use the unsavory content - posted by others, under a false name - against me should I ever be charged with a crime.
The problem, as I see it, is the public at large is not necessarily aware that anyone can register anyone else's name on a social networking site. Take my online identity, for example. Though I don't think there's anyone at ./ who would mistake me for the Microsoft billionaire, I'm not so sure about the public at large. (In fact, I chose the moniker to suggest that I was the opposite of Gates, but I'm not sure that's apparent). Many of these people choose "normal" sounding first and last names for their online identity, oblivious to the fact that there are likely many people in the world with the same name in meatspace.
The society for a thought-free internet welcomes you.
...and I think this case is tragic. But why fudge up two lives?
I actually read the article to see if it was as bad as it sounded... and yes it is.
First of all, he was drinking Red Bull, which is non-alcoholic, and while he was at a party I'd be thinking he'd be excited to be alive. Just me though.
The other cases in the article are just as bad. A lady at a party drinking wine after a car accident? Wine just screams alcoholic!
The prosecution is saying she should be in AA? They know that she's an Alcoholic and didn't just make a bad choice? She's no longer aloud to drink anymore because of a bad choice? AA doesn't teach you to act correctly when you drink, it tried to get you to stop drinking completely
And to say "she was doing nothing but having a good time" is insane. Obviously she's been going from party to party non-stop for the past X months. How do you know she WASN'T going to AA? Just because you have a picture of something less than appealing doesn't mean you have to whole story.
I have to imagine they'd have more than that for a Judge to up the sentence to two years. Not to say I don't think they deserved it but expecting people to become inhuman because of an accident is just plain stupid. A guy drinking red bull is a good example of just how RANDOM these pictures can be and yet they are grounds for upping a sentence? give me a break.
I think most people should search the net for the potential child's name before committing to it, and like wise the govt dept should warn you if your childs new name might be in conflict with major felons and to avoid it at all costs , no matter if its wanted.
Choose weird names, like movie stars do, Moonshine,Coke,Lushchild.
Liberty freedom are no1, not dicks in suits.
All right. How about this: mandatory death sentence - Texas style, not California - for anyone convicted of drunk driving.
Happy, now?
I'd definitely support such a law. There really isn't any reason why one that is drunk or under the influence of drugs, should be sitting at the wheel. It's the most easily avoidable crime, and it's a deadly one - hence, I feel the death penalty is an appropriate deterrent.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Funny thing about the internet, it's not just other people's bad judgement that lives on forever but yours too. I wonder what your kids will think when they read this - after you been lecturing them on their behaviour.
politicians are like babies' nappies: they should both be changed regularly and for the same reasons
No, this is how it should have been in the first place. Should I really have sympathy for some stupid frat boy who can't do anything but binge drink? Fuck no. It's pretty easy to not drink and drive, yet this guy was too stupid to avoid it. He should have had the book thrown at him to begin with. Thinking that some jackass frat boy could have somehow felt bad about the situation and been given a smaller sentence in the first place was the screw up. People like that don't need prison, they need executed.
"He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing." --Paul Atreides, Dune
Have George Bush on your friends list.
If you quote this signature there'll be 72 copies of Windows ME waiting for you in Heaven.
How about ----- govt free taxis to drive drunk people home.
How about ----- govt hires homeless and/or gang members to beat the crap out of people caught driving drunk.
That would solve the drunk driving problem, and reduce other crimes at the same time. I bet you could find people willing to do it for free, or even pay for the privilege.
A program which would reduce crime and might make money (and would probably be incrediby popular), I should run for office...
If people feel compelled to stick photos and information about themselves and their possibly illegal and/or immoral activities on a public website of the friggin' Internet, I have not an ounce of sympathy for them. If you want to do things that may get you in trouble with the law, wreck your marriage, engender a lawsuit, get fired from your job, etc., it doesn't take a genius to understand that it might not be a great idea to advertise those activities to the world...
"Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket." -- Eric Hoffer
And the victim's coping strategy would be what? Oh right, lie in a hospital bed for a few weeks or months, out of work and perhaps physically or mentally damaged for life.
Using a party as a "coping strategy" is simply denying introspection or responsibility - thus, the non-reduced sentence is entirely appropriate.
Yeah? Well I think you're overrated too.
Sentencing Project and Human Rights Watch?
Fail.
Like I said: produce some real data, not from a Leftist "thinktank", and I'll consider it.
As for the Prof's blog, a quick scan revealed:
Now, two new reports, by The Sentencing Project and Human Rights Watch
It's a friggin' self-referencing circle. Much like the On Killing farce.
I may actually check out both "reports", but I suspect my bias will be confirmed.
If there actually is a widespread problem with sentencing, you're not going to win any converts to the cause by indirectly attacking a third/half of the population (eg: implying that only Leftists care about fair sentencing) or by only citing studies from Leftwing "thinktanks". A systemic problem, if that is the case here, can only by solved in a constructive, bipartisan way.
Save the Kool-Aid for the orgy, because I ain't drinking any.
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
He'll only have the capacity to pardon non-violent drug offenders in federal prison -- not those imprisoned under state laws.
Most things I hear or read deal with sentencing disparities based on the race of the victim. Here's a GAO report (PDF) from 1990 submitted by what appears to be the Senate judiciary committee. Strom Thurmond is listed among the submitters. He's hardly leftist.
From the findings:
The findings section does discuss some reasons their results are not the last word on this subject.
http://archive.gao.gov/t2pbat11/140845.pdf
When the axe came to the forest, the trees said, "Look out - the handle was once one of us."
I can tell you here in the south that if a black and a white both get busted for drugs,the white will get rehab and the black will get the pen. I have also been slammed up against the police car and had the cop tell me to my face " I don't know which makes me more sick: a long haired freak like you or the nigger you're riding with". So yeah,I hate to break the news to you,but the clean cut white boy walks while the black rots in jail. Is it fair,hell no. But that is the way it is. Unless you increase police pay by a hell of a lot more than it is now you are going to always have bullies taking the job for the power.
I have also sat in court waiting to buy my way out of a pot bust(I know,a long haired white boy that smoked pot:shocking) and watched as black kids that had less than I did get sent up for anywhere from 6 months to as high as 3 to 5. Meanwhile I paid $800 and got told after my lawyer had a nice little behind the scenes talk with the judge to "have a nice day". Is it fair? Again,not so much. But as the old saying goes "money talks". I was just surprised how little money it took to walk away. But don't ever doubt for a second that your race, appearance and financial status affects how you are treated by the law. And as always this is my 02c based on my experiences with the system,YMMV
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
Not really accurate. What you are in fact saying, is someone foolish enough to allow photos of them to be published on the internet which could possibly be interpreted as them being unrepentant, rather than perhaps being severely depressed and attempting to deal with that depression by the foolish consumption of alcohol which would alter their behaviour by affecting inhibitions.
On the other hand of course are people who were careful enough and had better friends and hence no pictures were published of their activities, when attempting to deal with the guilt, shock and of course trying to bury the fear of upcoming penalties for their poor behaviour.
After all isn't it extremely rare for people to deal with stress by drinking alcohol, or when dealing with depression, or when attempting to assuage a guilty conscience. Either the judges should wake up to themselves or everybody should be treated the same under law, that after all is one of the most important principles of justice that all should be treated equally.
Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
This is sick, people. This means you're not only judged for what you do but also for what you feel.
Ummm, you realize that this isn't a new thing, right? The facebook part might be, but many lawyers have often pushed for lenience in cases where clients have shown true remorse for their actions, and vise-versa for the prosecutors against those who don't.
Feeling sad for your actions and being willing to change is part of the reformation process, which is part of what the justice system is about. A kid that's partying it up 2 weeks after killing somebody isn't feeling remorse, and isn't so likely to reform after a slap-on-the-wrist or token sentencing.
If you think posting photos of yourself vomiting over the cat on MyFace/SpaceBook is a good idea, don't whine if your future employer disagrees with you.
(Perhaps you know you're getting old when creating a "Who gives a shit?" macro is a useful time-saving device.)
Like his lawyer didn't dress him up and tried to pass him off as a clean living kid who just had a terrible accident happen to him while the angels are crying.
As long as the defence is allowed to lie about their clients attitude the prosecution should be allowed to use the truth to tear those lies down.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
But don't ever doubt for a second that your race, appearance and financial status affects how you are treated by the law.
You forgot attitude. :)
- A scruffy, disheveled, translucent white guy.
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
morale of the story.. don't put your private life on public display.. because sooner or later someone will use it to their advantage
Yet, once he's president, he'll have the official capacity to pardon all non-violent drug offenders... think he'll do it???
He'll only have the capacity to pardon offenders of federal drug laws, not state.
I'm too old to verify this but recently on the news I heard that drinks such as Red Bull are being mixed with alcoholic beverages. It was pointed out that this is very dangerous. The point is that drinking something like Red Bull doesn't exclude the consumption of alcohol and sometimes doing so simultaneously.
It's shit like this that makes me want to become a defense lawyer. Fuck this prosecutor. The case needs to stand on what happened, not on the defendant's sense of humor.
The case did stand on what happened. This was sentencing, which does take into account the defendant's likelihood of recidivism, repentance, social utility, etc. And the defense uses mitigating factors (first offense, volunteers at a homeless shelter, joined AA, etc.) just as much as the prosecution does, if not more.
Maybe you should become a defense lawyer - a few years of law school would let you give an informed opinion on this instead of talking out of your ass.
Good. You act like a dildo, you reap the consequences.
Chances are, if said dildo was seen in a drunken stupor, with said whore under arm with sorority letters, etc..... This wasn't his first time.
Seems said Dildo could use a lesson in how to be a bit more discreet, change his partying habits, and said dildo doesn't need to be so "popular".
Dumbass kids today. "I should be able to do whatever I want, with no repurcussions. You shouldn't be able to use anything against me I post in public to attempt to elevate my reputation:.
Welcome to reality, shithead. You make yourself out to look like a drunk, act like a drunk, post public pictures of you being drunk in public, and then act surprised someone calls you a "DRUNK".
Kid should have gotten twice the sentence he did.
YMMV, IANAL, ROFL, etc.
--Toll_Free
It's kinda sad that some people here say "if he put it on facebook its his own fault" but most people (aka non-nerds) have no idea why privacy is important at all.
Any information you put online about yourself is a invitation to hurt you in some way or another, be it finacially through identity theft or because the first thing HR does when they see your job application is type your name into google, or physically like the classic myspace-children-predator type ...
The point of this article should be "yet another way to get fucked for people with no idea about privacy", not "blah who cares, he's a idiot anyways"
produce some real data ... and I'll consider it
Uh, the data in the studies is real and empirical. I did 'produce' it. Do you actually have any facts at *your* disposal?
not from a Leftist "thinktank"
Uh, so? These organizations are not just sign-carrying pressure groups. Human Rights Watch is widely respected and aggressively non-partisan. They've drawn fire and praise from all over the political spectrum; see "What They Say" on their home page for starters. The Innocence Project arose from the discovery that DNA testing exonerated substantial numbers of the wrongfully incarcerated, and is focused on correcting the systemic defects in the judicial system that put them there, which is a pretty difficult mission to characterize as partisan. These are not 'Leftist' organizations in the sense that they advocate a political agenda. Again, do you have any facts at *your* disposal?
It does so happen that most of the people who donate to such organizations are liberals, but, frankly, it's difficult for any reasonably intelligent observer of the American political scene not to conclude that commitment to human rights is a predominately liberal issue there.
It's a friggin' self-referencing circle.
Uh, why? Where do the linked studies and organizations cite the blog? Where is the evidence that the Prof. is a partisan? Do you have any idea what you're talkking about? There's a lot of info and links on the site; I just put the link there so people could find info on the topic.
A systemic problem, if that is the case here, can only by solved in a constructive, bipartisan way.
I agree that miscarriage of justice is a bi-partisan issue (and where it's being addressed effectively, it's a bi-partisan effort, as both the Human Rights Watch and the Innocence Project can attest) but hey, you're the guy who made the debate political. I stand by my earlier statements on who cares about civil and human rights in this country, and who doesn't. Is Gitmo a Republican issue?
I may actually check out both "reports"
Gee, thanks.
I suspect my bias will be confirmed. I'll bet.
Kool-Aid
I'm not the one drinking Kool-Aid here. The linked studies analyze empirical data that was not made up by the authors as a matter of opinion. The facts and analysis in the studies can be analyzed and checked, and the conclusions debated on that basis. To assert that any organization that you, personally, mischaracterize as 'liberal' is not capable of producing a credible study per se (and indeed, your mischaracterizations in the first place) is pretty strong evidence of the vast quantities of Kool-Aid you've already consumed.
#!
OK, what is the coping strategy of the guy in a wheelchair for the rest of his life?
What is the coping strategy of the parents of the kid he kills while driving drunk?
What is the coping strategy... Oh wait, nevermind. You have the same mindset he does. Fuck everyone else, you will be assimilated, and I can do whatever I want. Fuck your laws, rules, guidelines, etc. I CAN DO WHAT I WANT.
Entitled punk. Welcome to the real world. The world where you actually have REPURCUSSIONS for your actions. Where when you FUCK up, it can come back to HAUNT you.
That's the problem. His own actions / photos PROVED he was a "3 strikes" kind of kid. Bottom line. Had he had a little bit of intelligence (beyond how to pour a whore into bed), he would have realized that his popularity show (myspace page) COULD have fucked him in the future.
But, then again, he would probably have signed up for an ARM mortgage, drove an Escalade EXT, complained the entire time about how much it costs to drive it, etc. all the time wondering why he has no money living above his means.
Intelligence at it's finest.
--Toll_Free
No he wouldn't have.
There are no black men in this country as powerful as George H. W. Bush. Period.
There really isn't any reason why one that is drunk or under the influence of drugs, should be sitting at the wheel.
You should watch North by Northwest for an example. Granted, it is slightly far fetched...
>north
You're an immobile computer, remember?
Lesson learned: Druggies, make sure you get a haircut or pay $800.
Are you John Edwards?
Game: Player 'Donald J Trump' now has AI skill level 'experimental'.
Frankly, I'd rather elect someone who openly admits to behavior that may be in violation of law than someone who obsessively hides from the reality of his or her past. Both Nixon and GW Bush come to mind here.
And I wonder about Senator McCain with respect to admissions. Of course he did admit to wrongdoing with respect to the Savings and Loan scandals as well as other issues of favoritism. I have met Senator McCain and think he's a good man. Haven't met Senator Obama but I have read the thoughts of his he put into his books. Seems like an upstanding American patriot who would strive to do the right thing for America.
But what I cannot believe is that Senator McCain, after all he went through, did not do drugs and did not drink to excess. I lived across the street from a Vietnam veteran who was not imprisoned by the NVA and there were not enough drugs and there was not enough alcohol in the world for him after what he experienced as a draftee. I lived up the street from another who came back a paraplegic, and he regularly drank to excess.
Fact is, what you put on the Internet about yourself is public. So if you don't want someone to take advantage of you or to disparage your character, don't post anything that might be taken wrong. This lawyer was doing what all lawyers do in a very creative (for lawyers) way: He was raising questions as to the man's character before a jury so that the jury would disregard any testimony from him or from anyone who said he had a good character.
Gods don't kill people, people with gods kill people.
"The best part is why have Facebook and MySpace so even those of us without the brainpower to use even the simplest of markup can easily show off for the entire world what kinda of asshats we can be when we really try."
I still don't get why people even use facebook (or any social sites). Near as I can tell, it's a vestige of the adolescent misconception that you are the center of the universe and everything you do is interesting and important.
Perhaps that's not fair. It persists well into adulthood as well.
The fact that everything people do and say online lives forever and will affect you for the rest of your life seems to have not sunk in with many people. I'm glad my adolescence and early adulthood are long gone and forgotten by everyone. I can't imagine trying to explain what I did 30+ years later when I was in my mid teens.
I'm assuming this whole thing is like the hula hoop. Seemed like a good idea for a while, and then we threw them out in the late 60's.
You were mistaken. Which is odd, since memory shouldn't be a problem for you
Am I supposed to sit around for the rest of my life feeling sorry?
No, but until the sentencing is over would be a good idea.
Whose business is it but my own how I handle things emotionally?
If the things you are handling are criminal charges brought against you, judges apparently think that it is their business how you handle it. Your emotional handling of breaking up with your girlfriend, not so much.
http://marriedmansexlife.com/
You are a selfish person and I'll tell you why.
You're rewriting the story as if the perpetrator is the victim. Had you been Joshua Lipton, how would you have been injured in this case? How are you the victim when your willful voluntary actions caused the accident? Why would you need time to cope if you're not the victim? You don't. Plain and simple. In this case, you are a criminal and the law cannot let you off the hook simply because you're having a hard time coping with the fact you did something bad and you're now fearful of experiencing a criminal sentencing.
Camping on quad since 1996.
All right. How about this: mandatory death sentence - Texas style, not California - for anyone convicted of drunk driving.
Happy, now?
Any fucktard that drives drunk deserves - at the very least - a serious asskickin'.
I've been saying the same thing for a while. It's too bad our "legal system" doesn't take drunk driving seriously. Look at all these idiots out there with 10 DUI's. My wife, stepson (5 years old at the time), and I were hit by a drunk a few years ago, and nothing was done to him, he got a few month's house arrest and paid the court a $200 fine.
> I feel the death penalty is an appropriate deterrent.
Because people who are high and/or drunk have been known to carefully weigh the consequences of their actions? :)
It can't be that hard to convince someone who is very drunk to drive somewhere, even if they had no intention of driving when they started drinking.
Okay my sarcasm detector must be malfunctioning.
Personal injury firms are not just using myspace/facebook etc. to check witnesses, as the parent noted, but the conduct of the person suing.
It's hard to claim you are permanently disabled from working when your facebook claims you've just finished a marathon or a roofing job or that your chronic fatigue is due to the fact that you're off your head from pot 24/7
Sometimes, people fuck up. Maybe you always lived a good life, but you just screwed up one night, and that screw up had real serious consequences (like someone died). However, that isn't necessairily reason to throw the book at you. If you show real remorse for what you've done and try to make it right in what ways you can, well then the courts can and should take that in to consideration. However the corollary to that is if it is clear that you don't care about the harm your actions have caused and indeed continue on with the behaviour that cause the problem, well then the courts need to MAKE you care with a stiff sentence.
Sentencing should be highly discretionary. Some people are really good people who just screw up, and once they do don't really need any additional punishment. The courts should be allowed to recognize that, and not punish them just for the sake of punishing them. However some people are just self centred assholes who will continue to cause harm to others until stopped. The courts should be allowed to punish them harshly, to give them a reason to keep their behaviour in line in the future.
There really isn't any reason why one that is drunk or under the influence of drugs, should be sitting at the wheel.
I think you will find there is very little reason involved in such senseless crimes. DUI punishment is already pretty severe, yet people still do it, probably because they are drunk and can't reason.
Then again, even very smart and reasonable people still commit pretty dumb crimes which are already punished by death (Re: Hans Reiser)
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
Let's not forget the possibility that a culture that built up around gangstas, bragging about prison time, and shooting people in the face for dissing you; might actually be committing more crimes. What is the product of this kind of culture? Black youth are six times more likely to die of homicide than white youth and seven times more likely to commit a homicide. Homicide is the leading cause of death among African-American males ages 15 to 29. I don't think about skin color, it's about cultural values. Bill Cosby has it right.
We are all just people.
"If he were black?"
Daddy would still be the Director of Central Intelligence. Have you seen the shit the CIA did during the 1970's?
Human Rights Watch is widely respected and aggressively non-partisan.
If you're a Leftist or, at the very least, are pro-abortion and pro-LGBT.
If you're a Conservative, well, ....
frankly, it's difficult for any reasonably intelligent observer
Yep. That about finishes my sentence.
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
Why it's not always a good idea to post pictures of yourself online or talk about personal things in great detail.
Ave Molech Setting
The US criminal justice system has several purposes: deterrence (specific and general), punishment, retribution, rehabilitation (incapacitation serves as all four, theoretically). US laws were originally founded in the Judeo-Christian tradition of English common law, which includes the idea of an eye for an eye.
The First Amendment came 170 years or so later to North America than did English common law.
I think if you asked any judge if punishment were part of his sentencing (which is called the "penalty phase" in many jurisdictions), he'd say you are quite wrong.
Slashdot "libertarians": Small government for me, big government for those I disagree with. -1, I disagree with you
There we go. The GAO. Truly non-partisan. Thank you.
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
oh man you are sooo uninformed. Everybody knows that Booker T. is more powerful than George H.W. Bush.
I take my children to see Madonna(..), but I never for once ever thought I was in the same business.Chris Rea.
Another fact-free response. You're going to have to do better than that, son.
#!
Thats right! He was charged with a crime but he still went to a party! And he drand red bull! Hang him! Didn't he know that anyone accused of a crime has a mandatory one month mourning period during which it is illegal to be happy?
If video games influenced behavior the Pac Man generation would be eating pills and running away from their problems.
I lol every time that somthing like this comes up. All these idiots putting their private lives up for the public scrutiny of prospective employers, business partners, invistigators, prosecuters and anyone else who might want to use your personal life against you.
I try where possible to keep my IRL and OTI presences unlinked.
I only buy pepper spray that's been tested on anti-vivisectionists.
You should watch North by Northwest [imdb.com] for an example. Granted, it is slightly far fetched...
Great, now I have the instrumental theme stuck in my head.
I'm not considering the socio-economic question because I'm not really addressing it, nor do the studies cited, at least in any detail. I was responding to the OP's broader statement of being unconvinced that there were any racial disparities at all, and then basically discounting a lot of the evidence a priori because of his political biases. The idea was to show that there a fair amount of evidence for racial inequalities throughout the process.
I actually agree with you and he that economic and educational gaps account for a lot of disproportionalities in convictions. But this is only one element of the problem of racial bias in the judicial system - arrests and sentencing, for example, are areas where disproportionate treatment of minorities are harder to explain away in this way.
#!
Another fact-free response.
What's the point? It'd be easier to convince a Creationist that God doesn't exist.
Doesn't matter, really, because someone else - rpillala - posted a link to a GAO report. You may want to look for it, since - ah, well - that's what people mean when they say non-partisan.
It's damn disturbing. And frustrating - because of the age of the report and the lack of analysis of socioeconomic factors.
You're going to have to do better than that, son.
Ugh. No. I don't. You're a self-satisfied twerp that wants to fight for the hell of it. Get a hobby.
"The fight for freedom has only just begun." - Geert Wilders
yes, but they don't usually caption these drinking-jailbird-costume-wearing pictures "Remorseful?"
Any fucktard that drives drunk deserves - at the very least - a serious asskickin'.
Set the BAC limit at a reasonable level and I'd agree with you. MADD, really a neoprohibitionist group, has been pressuring states to constantly lower the BAC to a point where it's really meaningless. .08 BAC, most drunk driving accidents are caused by recidivist alcoholics with a much higher BAC. If you really want to save people from drunk drivers, focus on them.
While there is measurable impairment at a
Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
I wonder if it would be too politically incorrect to do the same sort of study to see if there are factually lighter sentences for females than there are for males. In my daily newspaper I constantly see a rather large difference between the sentences for males and females but I wasn't in the courtroom so I don't know the facts surrounding the cases such as if the males typically have a greater history of criminal conduct, the gender of the presiding judge, and things like that.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
Well, I did a google search, and in a few moments found such work.
Great, I can't wait to follow the link to read what you found. This should be highly informative.
<scan remainder of post, fail to find any links>
Shoot, guess none of that actually exists. I'll just stick to my previously held perceptions then, as there's nothing here to make me want to change them.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Yes, the world is run by supreme asshats, so let's by no means punish the garden variety asshats when they hurt people and continue to be asshats. Brilliant solution there, sparky.
So the college kid who hasn't lived long enough to be a "recidivist alcoholic" but who still has a .15 on the road gets... what? And the high school girl who "just had one beer" but weighs 90 pounds? How about all the other multitude of situations where people are unable to drive? I agree that BAC is a bogus measure, but, well, impaired is impaired. For that matter, why do drunks get jail when an old lady who plows into a crowd of pedestrians gets her license suspended for a month? It's an imperfect system, that's why. Run for town council if you want to change things.
If you can't drive after even one drink, you should be arrested no matter your BAC. Learn to drink at home, or at a bar that calls taxis for you, or, for cripes sake, with a designated driver. People stupid enough to take/post pictures of themselves like the people in the article (yeah, I read it) deserve the harsher sentence as they are showing that they are not remorseful and that they can't plan ahead ("gee, no one will ever see this if I post in on the intertubes!")
Maybe you should become a defense lawyer - a few years of law school would let you give an informed opinion on this instead of talking out of your ass.
But if he wasn't talking out of his ass, how could he be a lawyer?
...photos of myself walking old ladies across the street and rescuing babies from burning buildings. That should acquit me from any future crimes.
I hate this business about admitting to crimes and being repentant. A scumbag or confidence trickster can easily say they are repentant whilst I've seen quite a few cases of innocent people being kept in long after they should have been allowed out. It just shouldn't enter into the picture at all when considering parole.
thou discernest my thoughts from afar
>You're a self-satisfied twerp
No, I think that would be you actually. (At least, that's how you have come across to this independent observer)
I don't know whether there is any racial bias in US sentencing but at least the other poster is trying to provide information here rather than just confusing the issue (I assume you are not actually stupid enough to really think that anyone who supports human rights must be liberal - where would the right wing be without individual rights?)
The other poster seems prepared to look at contradictory information, so why not give it to them rather than just claiming there is no point.
You've made a start with the link to the GAO report - why not deluge the other poster with other data that backs up your assertion and see how they react?
You think about skin color if you consider that shit to be black culture. Holy hell, the guy I grew up who is in jail for that gangsta tip was a white mormon. Just because you see black people on the Tee Vee doing gangsta rap doesn't make that indicative of what you call "black culture".
Most of the black folks I know act nothing like that, and I went to a majority black church when I was a kid. Get a damn clue.
-The world would be a better place if everyone had a hoverboard
These photos could have been posted by anybody. I've even looked at random profiles of people I don't even know and found photos with me in them. It's quite difficult to put a stop to that.
If you avoid drinking, or driving, altogether it is. Otherwise, it becomes somewhat of a guessing game. Even if you spend the night, you can still be intoxicated in the morning.
When you think of this as a victory, just keep in mind most people come out of prison far from rehabilitated; they come out ready to make your life, as a law-abiding citizen, a living hell. Your tax dollars wasted, your entire infrastructure crumbling, this is just another destroyed soul; an individual that will never regain stability, education, or employment. A true American criminal. Just like the victim, his life is screwed forever. Eye for an eye? I'm surprised Americans are at war with radical Islam with values like this! You guys would fit right in over there! Our prison system is simply a place for criminal minds to grow, and gangs to fill their ranks quicker than could be possible anywhere else. It is full of repeat offenders who lose their ability to function in the outside world, it's the same death sentence every time. Or at least, a 'completely wasted life sentence.'
Thank you, American justice system, we will soon have another bitter criminal lurking in the darkness. We're all doomed.
Wow. Not only did I point you to google, but told you what to negatively enter into the query to avoid a bunch of incorrect links. In the time you took to post this message, you could have easily done this. But I guess you are too busy finding excuses for not changing your beliefs.
Once again, how sad.
As if finding on the Internet is good enough proof?
There are no black men in this country as powerful as George H. W. Bush. Period.
God forbid--if the idiot liberals have their way, you'll be eating those words in a few months when Obama the marxist rises to power.
There's no place like
In general I don't have a problem of using extra sources of information like Facebook. What I find disturbing about this is that the judge's decision was influenced, even according to the judge, by photos that someone else posted to facebook. From what I can tell that photographer was never cross-examined to establish the actual context of the photograph. For all we know, someone who didn't like the guy might have coerced him into a non-representative situation for a moment so they could snap the photo to put on Facebook, then tag him in the photo to make it easy for any prosecuting lawyer to stumble upon.
Was he dragged to a party by friends to take his mind of things after 2 weeks of hell? Who else was there? Were they all close friends, and were they the sorts of people who'd try to embarrass him for his mistake? Well I hope the courts investigated that properly. Perhaps he did deserve what he got in this case, but if it's as easy to influence a judge as this article implies, it concerns me.
http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Snarkyness
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
Tee Vee doing gangsta rap doesn't make that indicative of what you call "black culture"
I didn't that it "black culture", you did. I go to But the gangsta culture, is primarily made up of African-Americans. So when a very large percentage of gangsta culture goes to jail for the crimes that are bragged about on the radio, everyone says it's discrimination against African-Americans. Of course the black folks you know don't act like that, you met them in church, which if you had read the link to Bill Cosby's speech you would have seen that not going to church is one of reasons for the cultural failing of poor urban culture. My church here in NYC is about 25% Black, 40% Latino, 35% White. We don't have any gangs, we don't have any shootings, most everyone there is a very decent person (except me I'm a bigoted asshole). But when I come home from work on the subway and over hear a group of teenage boys bragging and laughing about jumping some kid, six to one: "Ha ha ha, I kicked him in the head BAM. Gotta respect me son." Can you guess what kind of music was playing from the crappy speaker in one of their cell phones? I'll give you a clue, the music strongly advocated that the way to get bitches was to earn money and respect by shooting people for failing to give you money and respect. I see something similar close to one a week. Now, this was at at 11pm on a week day, during the school year. Where the kids you knew growing up allowed at age 15 or so to be out at 11pm miles from home on a school night? Since I work evenings, I also get to see the kids hanging out during the day while school is in session. Guess what most of the teenage kids I see skipping school have in common? A culture that places very little value on education or authority. Now perhaps it is just chance that the majority of those kids have the same skin color, but it's not chance that those kids, embracing that culture, end up being crime statistics. Modern poor urban culture is a recipe for disaster. Until the people that propagate that culture face up to that, the situation will only get worse. Not everyone who is black is a proponent of that culture, but most of the people that propagate the culture are black. The culture is the problem, but the skin color is what is reported in the statistics that seem to point to racism.
We are all just people.
Yes, I know that this is sentencing, and there's a lot of leeway there. But my point still stands because--
Here's the thing: Jail is expensive. It costs all of us. Two years of jail for a traffic accident is excessive, even if that accident happened under the influence. Take his license away, put him on probation, whatever. But throwing him in JAIL for 24 MONTHS is a total waste of time and money. It helps no one. It just gets the judge's and the DA's and the cops' rocks off.
I grew up in an insurance adjuster's office (as in, the office is attached to the home). I have watched, in my lifetime, traffic accidents go from tragedies to crimes. I've met these "monsters" who "cause" terrible accidents. They're normal people.
We maneuver these giant hunks of glass and steel at high rates of speed through narrow corridors full of other fast hunks of glass and steel, and there are more of those hunks every day. Accidents are going to happen. Furthermore, no one is a perfect driver all the time; it is entirely possible that you will be the cause of a terrible accident. And increasingly, if someone dies in an accident, the person who fucked up will be charged with homicide. Whereas in the old days you might get your license yanked for a long time or even forever, you are now looking at hard time alongside people who actually woke up one day and decided to murder someone.
It is insane.
Of course, drunk driving is a little (but not as much as people think) different. He should have known he was impaired and he shouldn't have been driving. But you know what? He was impaired. He didn't get up that morning and think, "I'm gonna go out, get my drink on, and drive my car into some shit. I hope someone goes to the hospital, too!" It was an accident. It was his fault; he was negligent, but it was an accident.
Two years of jail on the public dime is excessive for an accident, especially one that didn't even have a fatality.
Likelihood of recidivism? Repentance? Social utility? There is nothing about going to a party and making a self-deprecating joke that comments on any of this. Is he supposed to never drink again? No. He's supposed to never drive again. Is he supposed to never have fun again? See his friends again?
I stand by every word I wrote. This is excessive. Pictures of him at a party do not communicate anything other than "hi, I'm a DA and I want to lock this kid up to fuel my male-male rape fantasies." They are moments in time. They are indicative of nothing.
Or Rush Limbaugh?
You kill a woman while voluntarily drunk-driving, then a week later (out on bail) go out do party and make jokes about the murder?
That's not called being "happy," it's called being a sociopath.
People like that who can't see a difference between Right and Wrong should be locked up immediately upon diagnosis of the condition.
Obama likes poor people so much, he wants to make more of them.
"Modern poor urban culture", you almost hit the nail on the head. You see, kids growing up in poor environments, most especially when they are on government aid end up having all those screwed up qualities that you hate. I grew up on food stamps and next to the projects so I got to see it happen. Let me tell you, how the kids acted had nothing to do with being black or white.
That a vast number of black folks are poor is the symptom of years of racism and the problem. It has nothing to do with the fact that great numbers of poor folks in cities are black. I don't have a solution for all that bullshit of course, but it doesn't excuse spouting your mouth off in ignorance.
-The world would be a better place if everyone had a hoverboard
The problem Black people have is they have little or no opportunity to prove what happens to them was real. When you're getting unfairly treated by a cop, the only record that matters is the police record, which is going to say you were at fault and the cop was not. And if they beat the crap out of you then they can just say you did something to deserve it. Then the black people have to deal with white people who (1) apparently don't experience this themselves and (2) feel a lot more comfortable believing racism doesn't exist. In this discussion group, people have claimed racial discrimination affects the outcome for Black people in courtrooms, and other people have claimed that is not true and demanded references to support the claims. Even though several people have actually posted references to support the claims, the people who claim it doesn't happen are getting modded insightful and nobody is demanding that they post any references to prove there is no disparity. Because it feels good and that's all that matters.
How were the photos even relevant? A man does a bit of whistling by the graveyard (and is showing holding a can of Red Bull, which last I checked has no alcohol), and this is reason for harsher sentencing? Going to a Halloween party is sign that one is an unrepentant partier?
Oh, and to Mr. Perlin -- not everyone who drives drunk is an alcoholic. It's quite possible to do stupid things involving alcohol without being an alcoholic.
Nothing in that post is the least bit racist. Troll-like, maybe, but racist... no.
I see your last name is "klein". That confirms your identity.
Most fucking Jew fag want to be a lawyer so they can screw up the system. No wonder now 90% of the lawyers are kikes.
This guy deserve everything going his way. And we don't need any Jew fags to defend them.
The claim that blacks are being unfairly punished is a totally bogus one.
Absolutely. It is bogus. We have punished unfairly whites, blacks, browns, yellows equally.
Truly yours.
hilarious
>>While there is measurable impairment at a .08 BAC, most drunk driving accidents are caused by recidivist alcoholics with a much higher BAC. .08??
Here in California, for a 20 year old like the guy in the article, the cutoff is .01. According to the DMV, a 280 pound 20 year old who drinks a single beer and waits four hours for it to wear off is "definitely unlawful":
http://www.dmv.ca.gov/pubs/hdbk/pgs72duichart.htm
And it's not necessarily illegal for 20 year olds to drink, either... with parental consent it's actually legal.
While I think 0.08 has definitely impairment (four drinks in one hour... most people will feel it), the one drink in four hours law is just unbelievable.
Actually, he would have the capacity to pardon anyone subject to the laws of the united states whether in federal or state prison or the county jail. They president's authority comes from the constitution which is the supreme law of the land.
But Obama wouldn't dare do it. He isn't stupid. An act like that would not only get him tossed out on his ear, but hurt the democrat party's electability so badly that they would be leading the charge for his removal to save ground.
I can see someone in the public not admitting to doing drugs or something illegal. There are many minor children who could take that as a hint of "so and so did it, look at them". Those of us who did do drugs knows at least one burnout who wastes a lot of their life and most likely one person or more who lost their life to drugs. It isn't really something you want juveniles to think is ok despite others telling them it isn't. They will come to whatever conclusion without president X's admissions or claims of it doesn't hold you back.
People in public view are often role models to some degree and should think about the images they impart on the youths. Most areas have public intoxication and decency laws for much the same reasons. It may be old prudy church bitches calling for them, but the reasons are the same.
So at least consider the idea that someone might not want to admit to any wrong doing that there is no chance of getting busted for because of the impressions it might leave on younger audiences. I think Bush's answer to the question was simply not to answer it and claim something along the lines of the question not being appropriate.
If you're going to toss about emotionally-charged words such as these, at least do so responsibly and with accuracy. Also bear in mind that intent does make a difference both under the law and to those left behind.
"Murder" implies premeditation and malice aforethought. (You don't murder someone by accident.) "Manslaughter" or "negligent homicide" would be more applicable here, more likely the latter.
"Sociopath" implies that he was actually glad that the woman was killed. (Not showing regret for an action is not the same as revelling in it.) It would be more fair to say the guy was being "callous" and "unrepentant".
"Stupid" also comes to mind, but doesn't really have much bearing on how he felt about the woman's death or his part in it.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
He said provide a source not from a biased site. The guy failed to do so.
I can find biased sites all day long that claim Bush never lied, he has the constitutional authority to ignore the FISA laws, and the economy is in great shape (well it isn't as bad as people have claimed). But most of everything on those sites use special interpretations just like any liberal biased sites including the ones posted.
The problem is that someone is looking at the prisons being populated largely by black when they are a small percentage of the population. They are then looking at conviction sentencing with no context at all into economic advantage (able to afford a lawyer or relying on over worked public defender), repeat offenders, extenuating circumstances, gang membership (when is the last time you heard of a white Gang?) and so on. For a long time, crack cocaine carries a higher sentence then cocaine. It stems from Crack Cocaine actually escaping the cocaine laws and needing a special law to be made to address it after the cocaine laws were passed. And guess what, Crack is more prevalent in lower income areas and densely populated areas which also happen to be where a lot of the black population lives.
So yes, you can look at a car on the street, not knowing who it belongs to, not knowing if it is mechanically sound or even running, not knowing when the last time it was driven, and claim that someone has reliable transportation but you simply guessing just like they are with the claims of racial discrimination on sentencing.
In fact, I suspect this entire thread came out of a play on the white guilt that most liberals and idiots seem to have were they feel somehow personally responsable for all the problems of the minorities (well, they partly are with the housing projects). My guess is that it is a ploy to get voters out to vote for obama seeing how this came up. But I'm guessing at that.
Actually, in most recent times, it has to do with the projects and shit from the 60's and 70's. You take thousands of low income and unemployed people, mostly black, and condense them in cheap property in blighted areas (that was why it was cheap) and what do you expect?
BTW, the projects were started by well meaning liberals attempting to "help" the poor and neglected minorities. Tearing them down and dispersing the housing throughout the cities preferable close to employment opportunities could fix most of it in a generation or so. Of course as we found out in Louisiana after Katrina, "Not in my back yard" was the battle cry of the liberals (well, mostly everyone who saw all the crime from New Orleans coming to their neighborhood with the people)when setting up temp housing and attempting to relocate displaced citizens.
The hard part of this is that it's not just what you put on the net about yourself. The Red Bull picture from the article was posted by someone else. It showed up on the defendant's Facebook page because it was tagged with his name, not because he posted it.
I understand what you're saying. I tend to agree. However, at the same time all you're pointing out is that when the punishment for crime 'X' is 'Y' blacks tend to serve 'Y' minus a little. Granted, blacks more often serve the listed punishment but they are serving the punishment for the crime. It's not as if the maximum punishment is 5 years and they're unfairly being sentenced to 10.
Invoking the personal responsibility rule if someone commits a crime with a maximum 5 year sentence how can they complain when they get 3 or less? Your post is kind of like complaining to the cop while you're getting a ticket that everybody else is also speeding why aren't they getting tickets too.
Maybe the solution isn't that blacks should get off they way you did. Maybe it's that you should have served your time. That, or we change these stupid laws and let people get on with their lives unmolested. Both white and black.
I have watched, in my lifetime, traffic accidents go from tragedies to crimes. I've met these "monsters" who "cause" terrible accidents. They're normal people.
Forgive my cutting, but it's interesting to look at these two sentences next to each other. The vast majority of murderers are also normal people, not monsters. It's also why they don't wake up and decide to murder "someone", they usually murder someone known very well to them. It's also why the rates of recidivism for murder are lower than any other crime. You're pissed off at your step-father, you take a knife to him, you're unlikely to be that pissed off at anyone else.
So, if recidivism is the only reason we're talking about incarceration, then we should let murderers free and lock up drunk drivers all the time.
But, as you point out, that's not the only reason:
Likelihood of recidivism? Repentance? Social utility? There is nothing about going to a party and making a self-deprecating joke that comments on any of this. Is he supposed to never drink again? No. He's supposed to never drive again. Is he supposed to never have fun again? See his friends again?
Yeah, going to a party and joking about it while you're still on trial does comment on both the likelihood of recidivism - you aren't taking the situation seriously, so you're unlikely to be deterred in the future; the possibility of repentance - again, you're acting like you feel you did nothing "wrong"; and the social utility - it's not an effective deterrent for others if we don't incarcerate drunk drivers.
I stand by every word I wrote. This is excessive. Pictures of him at a party do not communicate anything other than "hi, I'm a DA and I want to lock this kid up to fuel my male-male rape fantasies." They are moments in time. They are indicative of nothing.
So, if a murderer had pictures of a party during the trial with a banner reading, "I'm happy the bastard's dead", that would indicate nothing? Or if the pictures were of this kid weeping, looking at the wreck of his car, vowing never to drive drunk again, that would indicate nothing? Our actions are the only outside indication others have of our feelings, and the feelings are what mitigate or exacerbate the punishment we deserve.
That a vast number of black folks are poor is the symptom of years of racism and the problem.br>
While that may have been very true in the past, that reasoning doesn't hold water any more. You may have noticed that there is a black man that will hopefully be our next president. The reason that there is a cycle of poverty in poor urban Black culture, is because of the values that the culture has. Education and hard work are discouraged. Poor urban Asian youth have a much higher graduation rate and a much lower incarceration rate because they hold a different set of standards. You may rightly point out that potential employers view Asian youth very differently from Black youth, but that is because the Asian youth have earned a reputation for being hard working, respectful and self disciplined. Yes there are Asian street gangs, but the over all culture embraces values that employers see as assets. There is no evil rich white man preventing urban Black culture from adopting these values that lead to success. But being called an "Oreo" for valuing education and hard work and clean living is going to hold down poor Blacks. Guess which demographic is mostly likely to hate someone for being an "Oreo"? I'm not mouthing off in ignorance, I'm looking at world I walk through every day here in northern half of Manhattan (Harlem and Washington Heights). To simply categorize poor urban Blacks as "victims" and then assume that they are unable to have personal accountability is dehumanizing and racist. The only potential thing that poor urban Blacks don't have that poor urban Asians do have is the understanding that education and hard honest work will lead to success. They only reason that they don't have that understanding is because everyone is too overrun with white guilt or victim mentality to assert such a simple truth. Stop holding people back by making excuses for them like they are somehow deficient.
We are all just people.
This is slashdot. What is this "drinking to excess" you speak of ...
The kid obviously did not take the weight of the crime he committed seriously - he acted with contempt and callousness. Someone who acts like this, versus someone who does something bad but admits he was wrong and regrets it
Yes obviously, we can obviously tell this from a single photo. Someone who regretted it would clearly never have fun again. They certainly wouldn't try to put the stress of a trial out of their mind by drinking and socialising with friends. Instead they'd do something like, I don't know, stay at home and post emo poetry to Slashdot.
(The guy may or may not have been an arse, who may or may not deserve prison. But I'm not sure that trial-by-Facebook, where a person's sentence is influenced by whether they are caught having fun one time during their trial , is a good thing.)
You are the one who must be young. Yes, I know it may affect getting a job, but the employers who would screen you out because of something "immoral" you did as a teenager are control freaks who will burn you out. Professionals do business to get work done, not play kindergarten games of who did what. They only look at your history to find things relevant to the job. I suppose you think it is okay for them to tell you which church to attend and where to live. You may make a little more money, but the costs of dealing with them will more than overrun the value of the extra cash. I'd rather not work for someone who thinks behaving like the Taliban is acceptable. There are religions which ban coffee, tea, even soda. Why should I have to obey all of their tenets?
In a couple of years when you have gone through a few divorces and have stress related health problems, among other things, you will know what I am talking about. And as for being social, you don't know what that is. Just because you don't see a person doesn't mean you don't have a connection. I'm sure plenty of people have said the same things about the telephone and letters.
SO what are you saying? Is it that those with money get better defenses then those without? Or is it that the judge and everyone is a racist? I mean if you didn't have the money for that lawyer or the $800, you would have been just as bad off so it doesn't seem like race was the issue. The judge also has a copy of your record when your in front of him, it is likely that he knew about past incarcerations and repeat offenses and you didn't.
In either case, it would be economic and other factors besides race. The situation with the cop, they should have been terminated over the instance. It doesn't take higher pay to fix the situation, just better screening and higher qualifications to be a cop. Of course you ratted the cop out so he could be disciplined for his comments right?
Tell on the cops,yeah right. You see,I have this weird little habit of liking to live. You do NOT f*ck with the cops in these little southern towns,not if you have any common sense. Best just to stay out of their way.
And as for the court,that is easy to explain. The cops here think they are all Dirty Harry and rarely bother with things like warrants and rights and all that crap. The white guy gets a lawyer who gets it all tossed out. The black guy gets a "public pretender" who tells them to plead guilty whether they are or not and doesn't do anything he doesn't have to. As I said in my post,it is all about race,status, and appearance. Studies have been done that show if the same case is tried twice and the only difference is race the black guy loses.Same thing if it is white trash VS someone in a nice suit. That is just the way it is. Folks can pretend they aren't prejudiced all they want,but if it is me and a black guy in court I'm betting i walk out and he don't. Let me give an example:
I watched on the day of my case a guy walk in wearing an Armani suit. He was on his 17TH! DWI,this time slamming into some cars while he was at it. Do you honestly think Mr. Armani went to jail? Nope,he was told "don't do that again" and given a fine. On the same day I saw one white trash and one black guy,both were there for DWI. White trash on his 3rd,black guy on his 3rd. White trash got 1 year suspended and a fine,black guy got 6 months in jail. Do you really think their rap sheet topped 17 DWI busts? Do you think there might be a reason the only DWI that didn't walk away was black? Do I like that race,class,and status matters more than the facts? No. But to pretend that justice is blind is simply fooling yourself. It has always been about race,class,and status,we just like to pretend that it isn't. But as always this is my 02c based on my experiences,YMMV.
ACs don't waste your time replying, your posts are never seen by me.
If your too scared to stand up for yourself then why are you bitching. And BTW, I have "told on the cops" and got some of them fired, some of them penalized internally, and I am partially responsible for a former county sherif serving time. Although my complaint was originally over city police, the state decided to audit the entire area because the city in question is the county seat too.
The thing is, you don't tell the same cops. You tell the state, federal cops. You tell the press and you tell the mayor and other public officials. You then tell them what your doing to make sure that is anything happens to you, the information will get around. I too am a long haired country boy. I don't do drugs but have had a similar run in as you have. I didn't succumb to their orders and challenged their every move. But then again, my situation was entirely different then yours. It also helps when I do a lot of business with local lawyers.
Well, no. It isn't about race, it is about economic disparages if we are to believe things as you put it. Getting a public "pretender" instead of your own competent lawyer is an economic issue, not a race issue. I would also like to see the studies. A good defence verses a poor defense on the grounds of economic advantage has nothing at all to do with race other then incidental factors. Race isn't a motivator at all.
And again, your citing money not race or discrimination. You don't give enough details about the cases to make an informed decision anyways. But I also question the legitimacy of your claims. A DWI after the 3rd offense in most sane states is a loss of license (driving privileges) usually for life. If 16 of them went buy without a license suspension, then your state is obviously fucked or your out right making shit up. There should have been a charge for driving on a suspended license. If there wasn't, and your not making things up, then the laws for DUI/DWI/OMVI just don't carry any serious punishment.
There is also the situation of a lawyer. If a lawyer is prese
What would they think?
Ummm.... racist much?
Look--an anonymous liberal coward.
Do you know the definition of racist?
Nothing in that comment was racist.
It's not that I don't want Obama to be president because of his skin color--it's that I don't want Obama to be president because he's a marxist.
There's no place like
I'm not saying that the projects wern't the problem, what I am saying is more racism won't solve a problem that racism started. It's idiocy to think so.
-The world would be a better place if everyone had a hoverboard
I'm not categorizing anybody based on race, quite frankly that's what I'm trying to tell you is the problem. Skin color means jack shit, its where you grow up and that's how you should tackle the problem. Previous racism is what aggregated people into the projects and all the other low income places. Most folks should be treated based on their situation and the culture of the place that they live.
If racism is rampant in that culture as you suggest(white racism) that is something that should be dealt with.Of course, I can only speak from my own experiences and never heard anyone being called Oreo except on fresh prince.
As I said before, trying to solve a problem that was created in the past by racism, with more racism is pure idiocy at its best.
-The world would be a better place if everyone had a hoverboard
I was pointing out that removing them and dispersing the residents across the cities mixed within different neighborhoods will fix the problems. Well, as long as they are reletively close to a job source and aren't pilled up again to instill a sense of helplessness when the employment potential of a particular area is out numbered by the additional residents.
The problems aren't really race either. Race is just an identifier that complicated things. The problems are the social and economic issues surrounding corralling poor people into an area and then dumping them as far away from the productive areas with decent work opportunities. This causes poverty and all the ills that come along when people feel desperate or locked out.
In fact, America's history of race issues stem directly from economical issues. After the civil war, all the slave holding plantations were shut down and the slaves were set lose without a source of income nor a way to feed themselves. They were willing to work for nothing because they usually got nothing. This caused displacement of white workers who much like today in the problems with illegal immigration, gained great disdain from them and the identifying mark was color. This was the working behind the starting of the KKK which was originally a union to stop the displacement of white working by freed slaves by limiting the black opportunities and dealing harshly with people who denied those limits.
Over time, people have forgotten these factors. Prejudice is typically defined by hatred for no other reason then the color of someone's skin. This side steps the entire issues underlying the problem and neglects any meaningful resolution to it. In South Africa, it is the opposite where the whites are the oppressed because they were displacing blacks. It all stems from the same social economic problems. No other countries have had the same issues which is why you don't see race problems like you do in America and South Africa in other countries. It is a unique situation that race is more of an identifier then a cause. That's also why quotas won't work and only perpetuate the problem. You displace someone with an under qualified person because of race or use race as a qualifying basis, and you are discriminating against someone else and causing the same disdain as what caused the KKK to sprout wings and become such a impact on our history. This problem is compounded by gangs and high crime rates presented by piling poor people in places with no or little opportunities for them.