Comments by "Psiberzerker" (@Psiberzerker) on "LegalEagle"
channel.
-
28
-
26
-
19
-
9
-
7
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
2
-
Grabbing guns, and a cameraman is pretty solid evidence of Intent. You grab guns, and hop in your trucks to go hunting, or to kill someone. That's it. "We were trying to arrest him for running, and on suspicion of burglary" is not an affirmative defense for vigilante lynching. That's what the facts of this case point to: Conspiracy to public lynching. It was in public. If you have 3 guys, and 2 pickup trucks, you don't need guns to perform a "Citizen's arrest" of 1 unarmed man on foot. "He reached for his gun!" What gun? You're gun owners, have you ever tried running in cutoff sweatpants, and a teeshirt? As gun owners you should have a reasonable doubt that anyone, dressed like that is running with a stolen concealed handgun. Period, even with a Holster, he didn't have it tucked into his waistband with his shirt flapping where you couldn't see it. Law Enforcement Officers, on duty shouldn't be able to use the "I feared for my life" defense in any case of 2 armed men against 1 unarmed man. Regardless of race, that's not a fight, it's an execution. You can not GANG up on someone, and expect them not to fight for their life when threatened, then say "We feared for our lives" after you attack him, with guns, and pickup trucks. These aren't really arguable facts of the case. Even if you turn the camera away so you think it looks like the victim had a fighting chance. You chased someone 3-0n-1, and killed him. You can't do that on skates, with hockey sticks, regardless of whether or not he's got possession of the puck. If Arbury was running down the street with a VCR, yelling "I just stole this from that house" you do not have the right to assemble a posse to take the law into your own hands. Period.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
The thing is, this wasn't a Sexual Assault Trial. It wasn't a Civil Litigation. It was a job interview for the Supreme Court, and Justice Kavanaugh said some things that as a Judge, he would have thrown out of court, if not in jail for Contempt of court. "Answer the question." He's a judge. At the time, a Circuit Judge for the Court of Appeals. Prior misconduct proving he's a vile impulsive reprehensible person not withstanding, he used his knowledge of the Law, to circumvent the law, to lawmakers, in order to cheat his way into a job, as a Supreme Court Justice. (Also, political connections made the proceedings a sham, with the outcome already decided out of spite for the previous President.)
2
-
2
-
Okay, hypothetically, change the scratchoff to a Reeded Edge Penny. You tip your waitress a penny, to be a smartass, and then it turns out to be one of 7, worth over a million dollars. You did not enter into an agreement to share the proceeds with the waitress. You gave her a penny. You didn't know what it was worth when you gave it to her, but the important legal distinction is YOU GAVE IT TO HER. Of your free will. No strings attached. Thereafter, for what it's worth, 1 cent, or $1.7 million, that's her money. You can't attach strings to it ex post facto.
2
-
it's pretty damned easy to prove Tax Evasion for the purposes of an Indictment. There's only several weeks of footage of him and Sara Sanders outright refusing to comply with federal agents demanding his tax records, as is standard for a Presidential candidate, and has been for half a century. For a Conviction (that would be a regular Judge, and Jury) or Willful Tax fraud, that might be another story, but he's gotten a $75 Million tax return. Seventy Five Million Dollars, from the government, basically for losing a lot of money on a losing Casino. If it's a "Jury of his peers," they just might see it as business as usual. Pretty much like his co-conspirators deciding that an attempted coup wasn't really that bad AT THE SCENE OF THE CRIME. (On Capital Hill) If it's a Jury of regular people, they might not be as understanding of how he gets paid 75 million dollars for sucking at real estate, and partially crashing the market.
2
-
Since I can already hear somebody typing their objections to calling January 6th an "Attempted Coup," let me state my case: They had kill orders for The Vice President, and The Speaker of the House. While trying to overthrow an election, because in the event that the President is killed, or Impeached, the Vice President takes over the Oval Office. In the event that the President is Impeached, and the vice president is hung by a lynchmob? The job goes to Speaker of the House, Nancy Polosi. So, if it wasn't an Attempted Coup, they sure had a plan B, and a plan C as if the intent was actually overthrowing the election, and making teflon Don unimpeachable.
2
-
One of the problems with "Vigilante Justice" is that burglary isn't a capital offence. If something like this goes unpunished for long enough, then it also sets a precedent, and greases up the Slippery Slope. Citizens, without Probable Cause, Due Process, the assumption of Innocence until Proven Guilty, and Miranda Rights can skip right past the police, and the courts, to make suspicion of Burglary a capital offence. Or speeding, or driving while unarmed... "I feared for my life" becomes an Affirmative Defense for gangbanging. That's what they're obviously guilty of: Gangbanging. Get the gang, bang bang bang, we said he's dead, let's go grab a beer. At some point, we won't even need the courts any more. The cops got away with it for so long that now your neighbors can decide to play Cops & Robbers, because you don't look right.
2
-
@phoenixnoire2435 LOL, I live in Waco, and I've been arrested in like 6 states (Including Pima County AZ) Also for being Transgender, in North Carolina. You know that weirdo freak they warned you about in the girl's room? You're talking to her. (The restroom was upstairs, at Jesse O. Sanderson.) If you want to play the Privilege card, I'll see you, and raise you, all day. So no, it's not technically illegal to be poor in these United States. It's not technically illegal to be Black, either. They can just stop you, frisk you, and shoot you for matching the description, and "I feared for my life!" to plead down from murder to payed vacation.
2
-
By the same logic, you could argue that it's "Illegal to be female." Because we don't have access to due process, freedom, nor even the right to free speech, when it comes to something like Sexual Abuse Allegations. In that case, he's presumed innocent until proven guilty, so you can argue that formal charges would ruin his life, and ruin his reputation. (Even all the way up to the Supreme Court/Senate Confirmation Hearings.) She doesn't have such protections, especially in a "He said/she's dead" situation. So, they can literally get away with murder, in a court of law, and it's all perfectly legal.
2
-
@phoenixnoire2435 Oh, it's discrimination, all right. It's just Legal discrimination. They can't legally make Poverty "Illegal." So, they lock you up for life, for Possession of Marijuana, and then profit from it. Legally, even after they decriminalize possession (In say California) they can keep blacks, and Hispanics in prison for it, because releasing them would be ex-post-facto. We can't legally get them released without first proving that the Marijuana laws were illegal, and racist to begin with. Of course they were, but good luck Proving that!
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
Objection: In Egypt, Thuggery, Hooliganism, and Terrorizing by Intimidation are punishable by death, if preceded, accompanied, associated with or followed by aggravated or deliberate murder as outlined in Article 234 of the Penal Code. Meaning Indy was locally within his rights to Self Defense against the guy with the absurdly oversized Scimitar, waving it around in a public market, while the rest of the gang was in the act of Kidnapping Marion at knifepoint. Note the context here, he wasn't acting alone, he was acting in concert with thugs, and hooligans kidnapping Marion at knifepoint, and he was brandishing in public, with witnesses. So, if Indy hadn't shot him, he could have had any of the conspirators executed by the officials in Cairo for what basically amounts to attempted federal Murder, kidnapping, and terrorizing by Intimidation. I'm pretty sure that show of swordsmanship counts as "Threat of intimidation."
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
If there's gun owner's reading this, go to the Thunderwear website. If you haven't all ready, they start at $45.00. Even if you believe the good ole boys' story, think about it this way: He stole a handgun from a car, then bought a $50.00 (With Shipping and handling) Holster, so that he could go running with it, and defend himself, if he should need to. Right? That's the scenario that you're shopping for guns, and holsters for, right? Your right to Bear Arms? Arbury and everyone that looks like that don't have the right to go running, unarmed, without gangs hunting him, on suspicion of burglary. That's their defense. That's the fantasy of America they want you to live in. Every gun owner in America should be insulted, every time this happens. Every time they make you look like those stupid homicidal good ole' boys. Arbury Stood his Ground, because he had to. What other choice did he have? What else could he do, run?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
"Once is an instance, twice coincidence, 3 times a pattern." This is informally stated by some instructors at Quantico. The FBI Behavioral Science guidelines don't state it specifically for Profiling, but it's a good rule of thumb for "Connecting the dots" to establish a Pattern. For instance a Period and Escalation. If there's 2 murders a month apart, are they connected? You can't tell, because they're 2 murders, even if they're similar, you can't draw Conclusions from those similarities. If the first one got on the news, then there's every chance that somebody saw that and thought "That's really cool!" because they're psychopaths, and they think that sort of thing is cool. If there's another murder, exactly a month later, then you can say that there's a Period, a murder every month. RICO only requires a minimum of 2 acts to establish a Pattern. However, the more dots you can connect, the more detailed picture you can draw with them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
I would think you could Trademark "The Carlton." Carlton isn't a dancer, he's a fictional character,. The video in the Copyright claim is owned by the Company (Viacom? I honestly don't know.) Also, this is an Ex-Post-Facto claim. While it doesn't make it wrong on it's face, or dismiss it out of hand (Civil litigation, not Constitutional Legislation) it does further complicate the ownership of the "Carlton," because Alphonzo Ribiero didn't create the Character, either. However, he's a Singer, and a Dancer, so may have a claim for Trademark Infringement on his Intellectual property, because he created the "Carlton" as an Entertainer. (His Trade.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
While defenestration isn't specifically noted in NY law, it's such a nifty legal term, I just had to bring it up, and as you pointed out, it's still Attempted Murder. Also, at the party, Bruce Wayne would be able to justify the assaults, because it was provoked, on his property by invaders. That gets down to the legal question of Batman, his alter ego, acting as a vigilante. So, if he took exception as Bruce Wayne, he'd be on the hook for the crimes of Batman, but in this case, he could argue self defense, and defense of property, from the robbery in progress. Just like Fichtner in the bank. Even using Deadly Force, with joker threatening Rachael at knife-point. You said that if you have the opportunity to flee (In this case to the safe room to change) then you are obligated, but not leaving a potential victim of murder, mayhem, and sexual assault in the hands of a terrorist.
1
-
1
-
1
-
Someone has to come out, and state the difference between Malice Aforethought, and Self Defense. As in "I need this, this, this, this, and this, for Self Defense." Or honestly, YOU need this, this, this, and this... I fell down that rabbit hole recently. "Top 10 Self Defense handgun loads!" and "Is .22 Magnum powerful enough for self defense?"
1
-
1
-
Marion saves his life, twice, in their first scene together. Yeah, she gets captured, and need rescuin' later, but in her bar, she drinks a Sherpa under the table, calls the Nazi "Herr mack," and tells him to get lost. Then, she proceeds to fight along Indy, staggering drunk. Stops for a schwill from a bullethole in a cask, and saves Indiana Jones. Twice. "I'm your goddamned partner!" ~Marion Ravenwood.
1
-
What gets me isn't a National, or International Law, but a law of Physics. In the opening scene, Indy encounters a number of stone-age traps. Dartguns, and walls of spikes shooting out to impale you, that sort of thing. What gets me is the stone-age photosensor. If you stick your hand in a shaft of light, you get impaled on a wall of spears shooting out of the wall. How exactly did they rig that up, with wooden gears, vine ropes, and stone counterweights? The shaft of sunlight (Apparently, it's around noon) shines down on a featureless stone floor. Do the spikes shoot out again later in the day when the sunlight moves to a different spot on the floor, or is the whole thing somehow photosensitive?
1