Let's see. Wall Street had done nothing wrong, pulled through a border stop, got out of its car at the "wrong" time, got beaten and charged with assault?
And this author guy, he conspired with thousands of himself to defraud the government and public to the tune of trillions. When caught he suffered no punishment and was actually given more money to prop up his ponzi schemes.
Yeah, I can sure see the similarity there...
No, actually, the issue is that cops shouldn't beat people. That's my issue.
This incident started when the border guard needlessly beat an unarmed person, wasting time, money, and trust in the government, as well as merely hurting an innocent.
I don't care what was done to disrespect this officer's authoritah. He's got a job and his temper isn't a valid excuse for beating customers.
I've seen some jury selection, and read questions used in others. Without coming out and asking anything that'd give the rest of the jury any ideas they do their absolute best to weed out anyone who knows ANYTHING, especially about law.
After that the judge instructs the jury as to their specific role, always leaving out their ability to refuse to convict and usually specifically denying this.
Jurors know.
Some. Those who survive the cull, know which legal views of the judge to ignore, etc.
It needs to be part of the instructions though, and judges need to be fired/charged for lying about a jury's role. Because should-know obviously doesn't equal does-know and an uninformed jury is dangerous.
Really? So there are some 6+ billion people out there just waiting to help straighten out US government excess?
Many of whom already realize that they'll have to deal with the USA one way or another.
Yeah.. I'm sure if the GP sent out a call for help, he'd get credible responses.
Asking for what? Someone to solve his problem, unlikely. People to participate in port blockades and such around the world timed to coincide with his actions, etc, to put more economic weight behind them, likely.
The GP is right about being one of 300 million.
If we're talking only those willing to be inconvenienced then it's closer to 300 of those.
But this isn't just some local issue. The USA using treaties to force ruinous and stupid policies on the rest of the world will eventually touch everyone.
If he whines about poor zoning rules he's likely on his own, if he asks for help in ensuring better elections or protecting threatened voters he'd get it.
If its more important to have the US market available for your products, then perhaps your country needs to fix its domestic economy issues so as to support the political structure that suits you.
In other words: "If you don't want to be taxed, tariffed, and blockaded, merely force everyone in your country to live by these new laws."
Ah.. from "well sure, if I'm willing to go to jail" to "do things that will get you sent to jail."
From? To? No, just pointing out that the same penalties exist everywhere but he's at the source - the RIAA is lobbying his government, his government is threatening mine and by extension me. If he leaves he gains no safety, or choice, but merely loses whatever power he has.
Not only that, but massive destruction and murder are your suggestions. Brilliant!
To get your country back they seem like a perfectly fair, and small, price. Imagine how King George would have described the war for American independence?
Usually when politicians get hung for vote fraud it's treated as just and reasonable punishment for treason, not murder. And yes, you might find it an essential step to getting honest government, bastards rarely get voted out.
You're killing hundreds of thousands in Iraq, destroying so much it's unbelievable, and you're whining because I point out that you'll need to fight for change... Dumping some tea(DVDs?) in the harbour? Burning an office building? These are massive destruction? Your failure of scale amuses me. That doesn't even approach what they spend lobbying in a year.
The same everyone who is always instructed by a judge that they do NOT have that right.
if Watts hadn't been such a passive-aggresive ass-hole
Sorry shithead, but cops/border guards/etc are OUR employees. Like starbucks clerks, this is what they're paid for.
If they hadn't been cops, just armed thugs pointing guns at him, he would have shit his pants, shut his mouth [...]
And if I made a credible threat to kill you, you'd stop posting. Which means what exactly? That you're an asshole for not shutting up without me having to?
It's not behaving like an asshole to question orders, get out of a car, etc. But even if it was, it's still not a justification for violence in a non-emergency.
There is no way I'm defending the police's subsequent actions
Bullshit, by talking about what he did you are justifying their actions. Why else do you think you're talking about it?
No, quick to explain that if you want sanity you can't just move - not only is no government great, but the crap the USA is pushing will follow you. If you want it to end you won't get results by hiding elsewhere and hoping the treaty can't find you.
How about you show us all how it's done?
Well, I assume you've expressed your displeasure and not had your concerns addressed by your representatives...
You're also presuming that pursuing this goal is most important thing for someone (in this case, me) to pursue.
It's important enough you'd consider moving half the world away from friends and family. I guess you do this lightly?
[...] whether or not me spending my life [...]
You get vacations.
[...] fighting for IP issues [...]
Well, I'd think a government that is able to impose laws/treaties against the popular will of the people would be a problem in one more than one area...
Yes actually, I think they're directly comparable. Both think they have a right to push their choice on others, even where the rules and voters wishes may directly say otherwise.
As for the Iraqi-9/11 link, the evidence against Saddam/Iraq was too convenient - it had been clear that Bush was trying to link them to 9/11 from the beginning. Even before the US/UK fabrications were made clear there was never any international agreement on this evidence. The rest of the world was rightfully skeptical because even if this out-of-the-blue evidence was true, and that looked really unlikely, there was still no evidence of an imminent threat and even if there was, the sanctions in place were expected to be enough.
Nope, the only people who fell for this were those blinded by fear/rage/revenge, in other words you and some of your countrymen.
Meanwhile, Guantanamo is still operational, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are still raging, nobody has been punished for the wiretapping, allowing torture, etc...
Only the very naive think Obama is one of the worst. The rest of the world can see he's business as usual. Your partisan nonsense hides this and prevents us getting something better.
Why should a company with 90+% share support standards? There's no real advantage to them - all implementing better standards support would do is make it less painful for users to try another browser.
Because many customers are smart enough to see that as a trap. When I buy a printer I price ink, and check if the printer has user-hostile firmware.
If MS had built a solid OS instead of focusing on short-term profits from office lock-in they'd be what they wanted, the core of every new device.
Instead by forcing the core developers, API-shapers, and savvy users away by locking down their OS and mutilating public processes they essentially forced the development of the new alternatives.
That's not FUD, it's a realistic worldview. Whenever MS can do something to force people to upgrade, or buy an 'Ultimate' edition, they do.
For instance, instead of fixing Vista they released Windows 7, merely proving that if you bought Vista you're fucked. Similarly, hackers have proven time and again that these "can't be backported" issues are a total lie when they accomplish what MS itself "can't".
It's just good healthy skepticism about the claims of a known liar.
I'm one person out of ~309 million. For all practical purposes, I have no capacity to fight this zeitgeist.
No, you're one out of ~6.5B, some closer than others. If you admit that it's nobody else's problem either you're left with taking your share and encouraging others to do the same, you might even get some help.
It sounds like you're blaming this on entirely the U.S.
ACTA itself yes, perhaps, but you're right that it's larger than any given thing.
While I do hate the U.S.'s role in exporting antisocial policies, I'd like to point out that other countries are free to not adopt them.
Free, if they don't mind tariffs on all their products, fine, penalties, blockades, etc. Like I'm free not to pay taxes, if I don't mind being forcibly relocated to jail.
Free to, but powerless not to. Like you, but more.
Also consider that having a highly productive members of society "vote with their feat" can be influential as well.
Well, I am advocating for you voting with your feat. Dump the tea in the harbour, burn down RIAA headquarters, string up Diebold execs and politicians who buy their machines, etc. But I know that was a typo and won't happen...
But yes, vote with your feet. Leave. Pussy out and run away. After all, it is the way to live to fight another day.
Even if it works (for you) though it leaves the original problem for everyone else. Who knows what would have happened if people had been committed to keeping Germany sane post WW1 instead of fleeing - often just far enough to get caught once WW2 started.
Ask for help if you need it (foreign election advisors, etc) but if you leave you'll just find your problems followed you.
That assumes society is something though, other than just a collection of individuals. Any valid state is self-assembled by its citizens, anything else is a slave state.
Otherwise you've got the Chinese government message: "The state is a living entity and has absolute priority over its parts."
The only time society has any reasonable say is before the person themselves does (childhood) - my neighbor can do whatever he wants for himself but not necessarily to his kids.
The US and the shit they spread - ACTA/DMCA, Iraqi/Afghan war, torture mentality, killer cops, etc is covering the whole world, where do you hope to go?
Would it be too much to ask for you to stay there and fix the problem? Excessive lobbyists could catch a little "civilian lobbying", politicians who don't do what they say (or break the law) could be hung...
Not only would it help the world, but you'd be able to stay home and it wouldn't suck. Clean up your yard.
They KNOW what we're thinking. That's why they rush to pass ACTA.
All a "representative democracy" does is make a dictatorship look like you have some say. It combines the worst aspects of mob rule and tyranny.
How about this: "Dear Rep, I do not agree you have the power to sign treaties for me - in your dealing, please make clear that you do NOT speak for everyone."
No, with the people whose fixation is "friends" instead of reality or functionality. Doesn't matter how good your site is, if you tell people they have more friends they'll think you're the best.
And how FB has convinced everyone this is new. They've implemented ICQ in a webpage, wow. What innovators.
I don't block IE... If you can find a way to make it work, be my guest.
Seriously though, the issue is that they gave you the data. Like chopping ads out of a newpaper, rendering the bits you choose is perfectly legal. Copyright doesn't even come into play until you try to duplicate that newspaper/website. When you're just cutting out bits/compressing it you're working with the copy you were given.
Of course, what I said is only right, it does not necessarily reflect what a judge will think.
Anyways, by the very nature of using HTML they're sending the client data to render as it chooses. Facebook will lose, even if they win, and it will be funny.
Where were you when you developed your knee-jerk habits? Hopefully not in your mom's underwear drawer...
The gang/clique mentality is not in meeting people, or any of the human activities that facebook claims to have invented, but in the friends-list fixation where people act like elementary-school children concerned with making people swear to be Best-Friends-Forever.
In a useful social app instead of a friend's list you'd have something closer to GMail - a way to search for anyone you've dealt with and tags to mark people in groups, like "baseball team", "mom's family", etc.
FB and MySpace are a joke, they-re anti-social sites. The rest of the world saw the easily excitable, the very young, and the chronically needy pick the crappiest walled gardens to brick themselves into. They put you a click away from the last song I heard, the last meal I ate, my comment about how work sucks, and so on, but they wall it off behind an annoying reg-wall and in the end merely keep out anything important from the rest of the world.
Crap, you mean if people know that magicians use distraction, physical dexterity, and outright lies (blank rounds, sabotaged handcuffs, "This shuffled and unmarked deck", etc) that it will ruin magic? ehh... What of it?
Your upset colleagues are just jealous assholes who don't want to share the tricks they were given. If they could come up with their own they'd be happy because the lesser magicians would be gone.
As for web tricks, it's essentially all in the open - you can't really hide what you're doing, just make the annoyance bar high enough that the other side stops. (There's no way FB can afford the time to implement anti-adblock tech, and test it, well enough to compete with an army of annoyed users. And if they managed it, that's when FB would discover just how low the barrier to entry in their market is...)
The trick is to write a bot (like wow-glider that Blizzard freaked out about) in scripts for a disassembler, like ida. In other words, show how it's legal software that's doing this. The "crime", if any, is in the use.
It's easy for the court to freak out about an executable (a black box, containing demons they're assured) or source code (pages of incantations for summoning said demon) but a simple script of "find value 100 - label as health" commands is close enough to spoken language to probably not appear as magic (and thus, not a DMCA violation).
It's annoying when WoW (the AOL of gaming) and their minions of idiots fund totalitarian laws/precedents with far wider impact than their little grind-fest.
Enforce it. If the officer was in jail for 50-life for abusing a position of trust while carrying a deadly weapon, criminal conspiracy to hide evidence, etc, then a year or two for Watts might not be so thoroughly unreasonable.
After all, if an officer actually had any liability for illegal or unwarranted orders, uncalled for violence, etc, they might actually save their orders for important things. And then disobeying those orders might cause unwarranted risk to others and there'd be a reason for punishing you for failure to obey.
There's always something you can be charged with and with overly restrictive jury instructions there are never any mitigating factors. It's essentially SLAPP, but for criminal charges. Remove the prosecutor's immunity and let us charge them with conspiracy to cover up an assault by filing a nuisance charge against the victim.
Instead you want new rules, because obviously our problem now is not enough rules.
It seems a bit funny to talk about a legal case as if could provide any useful binding precedent to jury nullification, which is the intentional disregard for the letter of the law.
It's like Enron passing a rule on what auditors are allowed to look at.
This is the sign of the legal system's misunderstand of its/their place - as arbiter of societal justice, not keeper of the sacred book of conflicting rules.
Like a motion to adjourn, the question of the validity and usefulness of the law is never out of order.
Slashdot Mirror
Same lesson as bailing out Wall Street.
Let's see. Wall Street had done nothing wrong, pulled through a border stop, got out of its car at the "wrong" time, got beaten and charged with assault?
And this author guy, he conspired with thousands of himself to defraud the government and public to the tune of trillions. When caught he suffered no punishment and was actually given more money to prop up his ponzi schemes.
Yeah, I can sure see the similarity there...
No, actually, the issue is that cops shouldn't beat people. That's my issue.
This incident started when the border guard needlessly beat an unarmed person, wasting time, money, and trust in the government, as well as merely hurting an innocent.
I don't care what was done to disrespect this officer's authoritah. He's got a job and his temper isn't a valid excuse for beating customers.
Ever sat on a jury?
I've seen some jury selection, and read questions used in others. Without coming out and asking anything that'd give the rest of the jury any ideas they do their absolute best to weed out anyone who knows ANYTHING, especially about law.
After that the judge instructs the jury as to their specific role, always leaving out their ability to refuse to convict and usually specifically denying this.
Jurors know.
Some. Those who survive the cull, know which legal views of the judge to ignore, etc.
It needs to be part of the instructions though, and judges need to be fired/charged for lying about a jury's role. Because should-know obviously doesn't equal does-know and an uninformed jury is dangerous.
Really? So there are some 6+ billion people out there just waiting to help straighten out US government excess?
Many of whom already realize that they'll have to deal with the USA one way or another.
Yeah.. I'm sure if the GP sent out a call for help, he'd get credible responses.
Asking for what? Someone to solve his problem, unlikely. People to participate in port blockades and such around the world timed to coincide with his actions, etc, to put more economic weight behind them, likely.
The GP is right about being one of 300 million.
If we're talking only those willing to be inconvenienced then it's closer to 300 of those.
But this isn't just some local issue. The USA using treaties to force ruinous and stupid policies on the rest of the world will eventually touch everyone.
If he whines about poor zoning rules he's likely on his own, if he asks for help in ensuring better elections or protecting threatened voters he'd get it.
If its more important to have the US market available for your products, then perhaps your country needs to fix its domestic economy issues so as to support the political structure that suits you.
In other words: "If you don't want to be taxed, tariffed, and blockaded, merely force everyone in your country to live by these new laws."
Ah.. from "well sure, if I'm willing to go to jail" to "do things that will get you sent to jail."
From? To? No, just pointing out that the same penalties exist everywhere but he's at the source - the RIAA is lobbying his government, his government is threatening mine and by extension me. If he leaves he gains no safety, or choice, but merely loses whatever power he has.
Not only that, but massive destruction and murder are your suggestions. Brilliant!
To get your country back they seem like a perfectly fair, and small, price. Imagine how King George would have described the war for American independence?
Usually when politicians get hung for vote fraud it's treated as just and reasonable punishment for treason, not murder. And yes, you might find it an essential step to getting honest government, bastards rarely get voted out.
You're killing hundreds of thousands in Iraq, destroying so much it's unbelievable, and you're whining because I point out that you'll need to fight for change... Dumping some tea(DVDs?) in the harbour? Burning an office building? These are massive destruction? Your failure of scale amuses me. That doesn't even approach what they spend lobbying in a year.
Who's we?
I feel ACTA is being forced upon most people, despite what their country may say.
everyone [...] knows about jury nullification.
The same everyone who is always instructed by a judge that they do NOT have that right.
if Watts hadn't been such a passive-aggresive ass-hole
Sorry shithead, but cops/border guards/etc are OUR employees. Like starbucks clerks, this is what they're paid for.
If they hadn't been cops, just armed thugs pointing guns at him, he would have shit his pants, shut his mouth [...]
And if I made a credible threat to kill you, you'd stop posting. Which means what exactly? That you're an asshole for not shutting up without me having to?
It's not behaving like an asshole to question orders, get out of a car, etc. But even if it was, it's still not a justification for violence in a non-emergency.
There is no way I'm defending the police's subsequent actions
Bullshit, by talking about what he did you are justifying their actions. Why else do you think you're talking about it?
That's all I have to say on the topic.
Ohhh, a last word. I see.
You're very quick to sign me up for these things.
No, quick to explain that if you want sanity you can't just move - not only is no government great, but the crap the USA is pushing will follow you. If you want it to end you won't get results by hiding elsewhere and hoping the treaty can't find you.
How about you show us all how it's done?
Well, I assume you've expressed your displeasure and not had your concerns addressed by your representatives...
You're also presuming that pursuing this goal is most important thing for someone (in this case, me) to pursue.
It's important enough you'd consider moving half the world away from friends and family. I guess you do this lightly?
[...] whether or not me spending my life [...]
You get vacations.
[...] fighting for IP issues [...]
Well, I'd think a government that is able to impose laws/treaties against the popular will of the people would be a problem in one more than one area...
Yes actually, I think they're directly comparable. Both think they have a right to push their choice on others, even where the rules and voters wishes may directly say otherwise.
As for the Iraqi-9/11 link, the evidence against Saddam/Iraq was too convenient - it had been clear that Bush was trying to link them to 9/11 from the beginning. Even before the US/UK fabrications were made clear there was never any international agreement on this evidence. The rest of the world was rightfully skeptical because even if this out-of-the-blue evidence was true, and that looked really unlikely, there was still no evidence of an imminent threat and even if there was, the sanctions in place were expected to be enough.
Nope, the only people who fell for this were those blinded by fear/rage/revenge, in other words you and some of your countrymen.
Meanwhile, Guantanamo is still operational, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars are still raging, nobody has been punished for the wiretapping, allowing torture, etc...
Only the very naive think Obama is one of the worst. The rest of the world can see he's business as usual. Your partisan nonsense hides this and prevents us getting something better.
Why should a company with 90+% share support standards? There's no real advantage to them - all implementing better standards support would do is make it less painful for users to try another browser.
Because many customers are smart enough to see that as a trap. When I buy a printer I price ink, and check if the printer has user-hostile firmware.
If MS had built a solid OS instead of focusing on short-term profits from office lock-in they'd be what they wanted, the core of every new device.
Instead by forcing the core developers, API-shapers, and savvy users away by locking down their OS and mutilating public processes they essentially forced the development of the new alternatives.
[...] probably [...]
So much fucking FUD, people.
That's not FUD, it's a realistic worldview. Whenever MS can do something to force people to upgrade, or buy an 'Ultimate' edition, they do.
For instance, instead of fixing Vista they released Windows 7, merely proving that if you bought Vista you're fucked. Similarly, hackers have proven time and again that these "can't be backported" issues are a total lie when they accomplish what MS itself "can't".
It's just good healthy skepticism about the claims of a known liar.
I'm one person out of ~309 million. For all practical purposes, I have no capacity to fight this zeitgeist.
No, you're one out of ~6.5B, some closer than others. If you admit that it's nobody else's problem either you're left with taking your share and encouraging others to do the same, you might even get some help.
It sounds like you're blaming this on entirely the U.S.
ACTA itself yes, perhaps, but you're right that it's larger than any given thing.
While I do hate the U.S.'s role in exporting antisocial policies, I'd like to point out that other countries are free to not adopt them.
Free, if they don't mind tariffs on all their products, fine, penalties, blockades, etc. Like I'm free not to pay taxes, if I don't mind being forcibly relocated to jail.
Free to, but powerless not to. Like you, but more.
Also consider that having a highly productive members of society "vote with their feat" can be influential as well.
Well, I am advocating for you voting with your feat. Dump the tea in the harbour, burn down RIAA headquarters, string up Diebold execs and politicians who buy their machines, etc. But I know that was a typo and won't happen...
But yes, vote with your feet. Leave. Pussy out and run away. After all, it is the way to live to fight another day.
Even if it works (for you) though it leaves the original problem for everyone else. Who knows what would have happened if people had been committed to keeping Germany sane post WW1 instead of fleeing - often just far enough to get caught once WW2 started.
Ask for help if you need it (foreign election advisors, etc) but if you leave you'll just find your problems followed you.
That assumes society is something though, other than just a collection of individuals. Any valid state is self-assembled by its citizens, anything else is a slave state.
Otherwise you've got the Chinese government message: "The state is a living entity and has absolute priority over its parts."
The only time society has any reasonable say is before the person themselves does (childhood) - my neighbor can do whatever he wants for himself but not necessarily to his kids.
The US and the shit they spread - ACTA/DMCA, Iraqi/Afghan war, torture mentality, killer cops, etc is covering the whole world, where do you hope to go?
Would it be too much to ask for you to stay there and fix the problem? Excessive lobbyists could catch a little "civilian lobbying", politicians who don't do what they say (or break the law) could be hung...
Not only would it help the world, but you'd be able to stay home and it wouldn't suck. Clean up your yard.
They KNOW what we're thinking. That's why they rush to pass ACTA.
All a "representative democracy" does is make a dictatorship look like you have some say. It combines the worst aspects of mob rule and tyranny.
How about this: "Dear Rep, I do not agree you have the power to sign treaties for me - in your dealing, please make clear that you do NOT speak for everyone."
Funny how someone who didn't needlessly start a war over lies and waste trillions outside the country can be "one of the worst".
Somewhere in the bottom 50, you mean?
No, with the people whose fixation is "friends" instead of reality or functionality. Doesn't matter how good your site is, if you tell people they have more friends they'll think you're the best.
And how FB has convinced everyone this is new. They've implemented ICQ in a webpage, wow. What innovators.
I don't block IE... If you can find a way to make it work, be my guest.
Seriously though, the issue is that they gave you the data. Like chopping ads out of a newpaper, rendering the bits you choose is perfectly legal. Copyright doesn't even come into play until you try to duplicate that newspaper/website. When you're just cutting out bits/compressing it you're working with the copy you were given.
Of course, what I said is only right, it does not necessarily reflect what a judge will think.
Anyways, by the very nature of using HTML they're sending the client data to render as it chooses. Facebook will lose, even if they win, and it will be funny.
Where were you when you developed your knee-jerk habits? Hopefully not in your mom's underwear drawer...
The gang/clique mentality is not in meeting people, or any of the human activities that facebook claims to have invented, but in the friends-list fixation where people act like elementary-school children concerned with making people swear to be Best-Friends-Forever.
In a useful social app instead of a friend's list you'd have something closer to GMail - a way to search for anyone you've dealt with and tags to mark people in groups, like "baseball team", "mom's family", etc.
FB and MySpace are a joke, they-re anti-social sites. The rest of the world saw the easily excitable, the very young, and the chronically needy pick the crappiest walled gardens to brick themselves into. They put you a click away from the last song I heard, the last meal I ate, my comment about how work sucks, and so on, but they wall it off behind an annoying reg-wall and in the end merely keep out anything important from the rest of the world.
Crap, you mean if people know that magicians use distraction, physical dexterity, and outright lies (blank rounds, sabotaged handcuffs, "This shuffled and unmarked deck", etc) that it will ruin magic? ehh... What of it?
Your upset colleagues are just jealous assholes who don't want to share the tricks they were given. If they could come up with their own they'd be happy because the lesser magicians would be gone.
As for web tricks, it's essentially all in the open - you can't really hide what you're doing, just make the annoyance bar high enough that the other side stops. (There's no way FB can afford the time to implement anti-adblock tech, and test it, well enough to compete with an army of annoyed users. And if they managed it, that's when FB would discover just how low the barrier to entry in their market is...)
They always sue the party who isn't paying them.
The trick is to write a bot (like wow-glider that Blizzard freaked out about) in scripts for a disassembler, like ida. In other words, show how it's legal software that's doing this. The "crime", if any, is in the use.
It's easy for the court to freak out about an executable (a black box, containing demons they're assured) or source code (pages of incantations for summoning said demon) but a simple script of "find value 100 - label as health" commands is close enough to spoken language to probably not appear as magic (and thus, not a DMCA violation).
It's annoying when WoW (the AOL of gaming) and their minions of idiots fund totalitarian laws/precedents with far wider impact than their little grind-fest.
Enforce it. If the officer was in jail for 50-life for abusing a position of trust while carrying a deadly weapon, criminal conspiracy to hide evidence, etc, then a year or two for Watts might not be so thoroughly unreasonable.
After all, if an officer actually had any liability for illegal or unwarranted orders, uncalled for violence, etc, they might actually save their orders for important things. And then disobeying those orders might cause unwarranted risk to others and there'd be a reason for punishing you for failure to obey.
There's always something you can be charged with and with overly restrictive jury instructions there are never any mitigating factors. It's essentially SLAPP, but for criminal charges. Remove the prosecutor's immunity and let us charge them with conspiracy to cover up an assault by filing a nuisance charge against the victim.
Instead you want new rules, because obviously our problem now is not enough rules.
But don't try to dodge either, even if only to spare his knuckles.
the controlling case [...]
It seems a bit funny to talk about a legal case as if could provide any useful binding precedent to jury nullification, which is the intentional disregard for the letter of the law.
It's like Enron passing a rule on what auditors are allowed to look at.
This is the sign of the legal system's misunderstand of its/their place - as arbiter of societal justice, not keeper of the sacred book of conflicting rules.
Like a motion to adjourn, the question of the validity and usefulness of the law is never out of order.
and the jury should be ashamed of themselves
For listening to the judge's legal instructions.
Seriously though, I hope fewer people do that next time.
The people are the other arm in this balance of power. Simply refusing to go along with egregious cases of abuse would go a long way.
btw, is asking about whats going on, being a confrontational asshole?
Spray. Thump. Whack. Smack. Smack. Kick.
Yes. You never learn, do you, you fucking hippies?!
Now sit down or I'll be forced to defend myself again.