(08-04-2022, 09:03 PM)mikesez Wrote:

(08-04-2022, 08:49 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: Did I call you a simpleton after you posted that? No. I didn't. I pointed out the flaw in your argument, and you tried to twist it by dodging my point altogether by posting something nonsensical. There is zero possibility that you didn't understand the intent of my response.

---

Hi Cleatwood. Good to see you contributing nothing to a thread again. Not that it's worth my time to respond to you, but I like Mike. Do you like Ronster? Remember what I typed in that thread?

I totally buy that the prosecutor had a pro-establishment bias.  But the prosecutor and the defense team jointly selected the jury.  Maybe they were biased too, maybe all 12 of them were, but it's hard to imagine a defense lawyer being that incompetent.

(08-04-2022, 10:29 PM)Lucky2Last Wrote: It's not about incompetence. How do you even get an impartial jury? DC is extremely liberal. For the defense attorney, the best you can do is mitigation. They need reconsider how they conduct federal trials, because, like I said before, there is a long track record of criminal behavior going unpunished. And, don't sidestep prosecutorial discretion. That is a HUGE problem.

Most of these people have liberal lawyers and there are some that should have their lawyers disbarred over how their case was handled. It's basically 3 against 1 with the judge, prosecutor, and public defender or whoever they could manage to pay and would take the case.

There are harden, violent, repeat offenders that get better representation than most of these people have.

Sent from my SM-T970 using Tapatalk

---