VakAttack

LOL. I live here. Not just people I abstractly know. I live here. Again, I am a lawyer. A person who deals with the law. A person who reads statutes.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/marjorie-taylor-greene-defends-calling-democrats-pedophiles-rcna77869 Leading with kindness.

Well, if Joe Concha says it...

I live here. He is doing all of these things. You can @ me by the way, rather than just tossing my name in. He's passed tons of legislation limiting people's ability to sue their insurer for failing to properly assess claims, he literally just signed a law restricting litigants ability to seek attorney's fees from the party they're suing, making them much less likely to get sued even further. All this while insurance companies in the State are making record profits and, after the initial legilsation aimed at property insurance, guess how much property insurance rates went down? Spoiler alert, they didn't. As to education, teachers here are terrified. Terrified of doing anything that might cost them their jobs if one parent decides they don't like something in their lesson. They're basically building towards totally demolishing public education and making it so that only the wealthiest citizen will have access to quality education for their children. Books are currently being removed from the shelves in my kid's schools because ONE parent complains about it, all based on the legislation passed. There was a book whose name escapes me right now that was removed for "review" because it described a gay couple kissing, and not in any particularly graphic terminology. Just because the law written doesn't say "book x is now banned' doesn't mean it isn't designed to have that same effect, similar to ho the enhanced sentencing for crack cocaine in the 70s and 80s didn't explicitly say they were targeting black people, but...it had that effect. And, by the way, that was part of the plan back then, too. You're just a bad faith arguer in this case. You say "show me evidence, but just not any mainstream articles" so what evidence do you want? I gave you some anecdotal evidence of my experience up there, plus the experiences of people I know in the teaching and legal worlds. Maybe that satisfies you?

I do not believe Desantis is going to stand up to national scrutiny, especially not w/ Trump pounding away on him. He doesn't do well with pushback, he's kind of an automaton. With Florida's shifting electorate, that's fine, but he's going to fall apart, Scott Walker style, on the national stage.

How is this salty?

Yes. Bragg was quoted in a couple of articles saying they haven't made any charging decisions yet. Thinking more on this, for the police to arrest him on scene (as opposed to later after an investigation) may indicate that there's more we the public don't know yet.

This incident just happened. Cops made the arrests, prosecutor hasn't done anything yet. Cops make arresting decisions based on probable cause (very low standard) and then prosecutors will look at evidence and see what charges, if any, the arrested person will face, i.e. what charges they think they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt. I would guess the parking lot attendant is not likely to be charged with anything unless there's evidence he shot the alleged thief when a reaspnable person wouldn't have, for example, if after wrestling the gun away, he had the thief at gunpoint and 5 minutes later, just shot him. Relatively standard.

https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/case-multi-defendant/file/1430996/download Based on the charge he entered a plea to, Obstruction of an Official Proceeding, I would probably recommend a plea, if he asked my opinion. There is no doubt Congress was in session and in an official proceeding, and that the entry onto Capital grounds was designed to impede that proceeding. Plus he gave media interviews where he proclaimed it win that Congress was force to retreat and hide. Those are uncontroverted facts as near as i can tell. Most of the other stuff is window dressing and/or mitigating/aggravating factors. The actual charge, though, is pretty clear cut violation by him, and his own statements display intent and lack of remorse.

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.