You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

0
33

[–] muricasnexttopautist 0 points 33 points (+33|-0) ago 

Im really confused by this. WTF is going on here? Im confused why "criminal intent" needs to be present for this to be a crime? My understanding was ignorance was not an excuse.

0
22

[–] 8990798? 0 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago 

Rules for thee but not for me. It doesn't matter if a normal person doesn't have criminal intent when committing a crime, except perhaps in sentencing.

0
8

[–] muricasnexttopautist 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

I just don't understand how something so public gets let go. I know it's happened before will happen again Yama had a, but fuck. It's the opposite of everything natural. You fuck up like this and you go down. It's like she's getting off cause they have some child porn charges for him.

0
1

[–] go1dfish 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

0
2

[–] Durm 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Everyone knows, they already knew, most everyone in that room. That man asking questions is making a public point, and he knew already what Colmey would say. He asked so that someone like you would turn around and ask exactly what you did, so that more people can know so that one day it might stop. And of course to show his constituents that he is doing work to shine a light on it.

He could have just as easily argued that because they were told they should never do it, whether they ultimately understand why or not, that they were criminally negligent because they did it knowing it was wrong, and thus criminal intent. A murderer does not need to know why its wrong, just to be shown that it was willful disregard for the law and the intent was to break the law, no matter what the reasons were for doing so. Perhaps he is saying in other words that he would not have persued the criminal angle, and just the civil one, and thus is not "criminal intent", but that still is deceptive since the thing you are watching is for public consumption and intended to fool, or be disingenuous to, the public.

That being said, he could paint it any way he wants. And again its not supposed to be up to him to decide what gets prosecuted. Someone else takes those facts and decides.

0
1

[–] epsilona01 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

It's an excuse that almost sounds good enough for the average person (who just reads the headlines or the 11 o'clock news) to believe. Most people don't want to believe that the government is totally corrupt, so they won't if given an almost plausible excuse not to, and the major media outlets are compliant with both this wish and that of the corrupt government. They swallow the blue pill and get back to their sports/media/jobs.

Revolution is scary, cause it's a very nasty business.

0
1

[–] remedy4reality 0 points 1 point (+1|-0) ago 

' It seems my client had merely FOUND these drugs, and was on his way to turn them in when he was arrested '

  • Cheech & Chong