VakAttack

Since this is a professional inquiry, I would need much more information on the case before being able to answer that. There are intricacies. The truth is that the judicial system itself is formatted in such a way that almost everybody pleads guilty eventually, especially at the federal level. Trials at the state level are somewhat rare, but not super rare. I've done 40 or so. At the federal level, they are much more rare because of the discovery rules being more favorable to the prosecutors and the sentencing being extremely harsh in general, plus prosecutor's offices have a lot more resources than individual defense attorneys for investigative purposes. Many cases that I would love to go to trial don't end up there because defendant's are scared of possible trial outcomes and sentencing from judge's being more harsh. The Federal system, in particular, is tough because there are no fully formed plea agreements. For example, in state cases, if I have a plea agreement worked out w/ a prosecutor and my client, everybody knows exactly what the sentence will be. In the Federal system, there is no full agreement so much as prosecutors agreeing to make a recommendation, or removing certain things from the sentencing guidelines in terms of the enhancements (basically a table is created where defendants get points added (which is bad) or removed (obviously good) to go into a final score that is converted to a recommended sentencing range. Then the judge gets to enter a sentence, and the guidelines are not particularly binding on the judges anyway, they can go above or below them depending on their feelings about the case.

You have to enter a plea at arraignment of charges, and 99.999% of criminal defendants plead not guilty to allow their lawyers time to examine their case and do investigations. Most of the time the plea is filed in writing (at the state court level) by the defense attorney without the defendant doing or saying anything on the record. Pleading not guilty at arraignment is perfunctory.

You just saying "the truth" without any evidence while also lecturing me on how things work in the FIELD THAT I WORK EVERY DAY is truly, truly incredible.

My side? Dude, I'm a defense attorney. WTF are you even talking about? I would be REPRESENTING Chansley in this scenario.

My understanding of the system, as a person who actually works in and deals with the system on a day to day basis, is incomplete, but yours is fully realized? Who are you? Collette Peters?

You have literally not linked to a single "report." You literally have his defense lawyer explaining to you that he's being released on schedule. You have me, a criminal defense attorney, trying to explain to you how the system works. If a person is falsely convicted, there is a process that goes into their release and getting them out of jail. Even in highly public, highly covered situations. Look at Adnan Syed who has way more name recognition than Jacob Chansley. If there is a Brady violation, there is even MORE red tape, because a case doesn't automatically get thrown out due to a Brady violation, there have to be hearings to determine the validity of the evidence, whether it was purposely withheld, whether it's truly exculpatory, etc. You're living in a fantasy land.

Empty words from an empty suit. Florida and New York are part of the same country. https://www.newsweek.com/no-ron-desantis-cant-stop-donald-trump-being-extradited-1791746 However, I'm glad my tax dollars can be used to fly asylum seeking immigrants from Texas to Maryland, but not to transport people charged with crimes. It's all a moot point, Trump has already said he will turn himself in thru his representatives. Like I said, just empty words to try to win political points.

Again, man, you are talking out of your ass. Even if everything you said was true, which I'm not agreeing to, it would not be resolvedi n the way you are claiming this was resolved. This would not be the first Brady violation in the history of criminal law.

I didn't say that, but there are strict mechanisms, especially in federal court. There have to be hearings, motions filed, etc. It's not just a judge watching Tucker Carlson and waving a hand. There are people with life sentences that EVERYBODY knows are in the process of being overturned that still stay in prison for months and months until all the t's are crossed and i's dotted.

Again. That's not how the system works.

Btw, if he was released due to a Brady violation, he would just go free. The halfway house is another dead giveaway that your "information" is false.

That's just not how the system works man. If there was a Brady violation, it requires a hearing to establish, and there would be a written court order releasing him from custody. This is an extremely high profile case. You are talking of of your ass.

Can confirm. At the State level here in FL ( I don't work in federal court currently), prison sentences are able to be reduced to about 85% of the original sentence (you would serve 8.5 years on a 10 year sentence) outside of sex offenses or minimum mandatory sentences. County jail sentences, everyone gets 1 day off their sentence per month for good behavior, and can earn an additional 5 days per month off by working as a trustee (custodial/maintenance/food service).

You: *makes completely contradictory statements* Also you: I could not have been more clear.

30 counts. Classic prosecutor technique that I effing hate.

You just claimed some wild stuff and were immediately contradicted by evidence, and then just doubled down with this nothing sandwich. Then you also did this: And followed it up with this: All that again without evidence.

As currently constituted, Desantis is going to get smoked. He's basically set himself up as a Xerox Trump, rather than anything that sets him as his own man. He even started using the same hand movements (well-worn discussion, I know). He's a weaker version of Trump, and there's a big swath of the party that responds to public displays of strength, no matter how inert or ineffectual, and Trump is just better at that, plus under his Presidency, they took control of the Supreme Court, something he gets a lot of credit for with the base.

The thread title is a comment. You asked a question, and I responded. I'm only allowed to respond to you if I respond to every question you asked? And just to be clear, now you're not saying that I'm trying to change the conversation, I'm just "pick[ing] out one sentence and respond[ing]" and I'm talking about "what I want to talk about" which...sure, fine? It's my thread? I'm sorry my answer didn't comport with your requirements for a response, but I'm glad we can acknowledge that I responded directly to one of your questions, in my own thread, and did not shift the conversation to some unrelated issue.

Again, Disney will not be ruined. I'm not going to debate with you about whatever your personal experience with trans issues might be (I have no idea, I'm not you nor living your life) nor the existence of trans people (they exist, I am not one of them and so have very little understanding of what their lived experience is). My experience with the couple of trans people I have personally met is that they, like most people, just want to be left alone to live their lives.

Disney will not be ruined. ^^^The actual subject.

You asked if there would be a thread about this if it was a different company. I, as the poster who started this thread, told you that yes, I would, and gave you my reasons. And you have now accused me of changing the subject.

Adorable.

Huh? You asked if there would be a thread about this if the company were different. I said I would be commenting regardless if the facts were the same, just with different names, because of the free speech issues along with governmental retribution/hilarous legal wranglings, which were the reasons I posted this thread originally. I'm not twisting anything.

There are so many funniest parts, but that may, in fact, be the best. As someone who lives about 1 hour away from the area...hooboy is it getting a lot of coverage, lol.

Potentially! Fortunately we have the below, which I thought the "small government" types that Republicans purport to be would love!