A judge's ruling - Totally Off Topic

C

CharlesW

The Rainmaker
The following paragraph is from a Yahoo news report. It is out of context, but I think it will be evident what I questioned.

"Before the start of testimony Monday, the military judge overseeing the case said he would not allow prosecutors to introduce evidence of a fight Akbar had with a military police officer in the court building last month. Akbar secreted a weapon in an office and stabbed the MP in the neck while in the restroom, but the judge said that "opportunistic stabbing" didn't show a pattern of violence."

And here dumb old me sits stupidly believing that any stabbing, oppotunistic or not, shows a pattern of violence. Boy, that MP was certainly lucky the guy only stabbed him in a non violent way.

Whether the evidence is admitted or not is of no concern to me, but for a judge to consider a stabbing anything other than a violent action really makes me wonder about the judicial system.

Charles
 
CharlesW said:
Whether the evidence is admitted or not is of no concern to me, but for a judge to consider a stabbing anything other than a violent action really makes me wonder about the judicial system.

Charles
Click to expand...

I absolutely agree. :nono
 
The answer is obvious isn't it? He based his ruling on that commonly used oxymoron ...

military intelligence :D .
 
I think it's hardly fair to worry about the whole judicial system over the actions of one judge. As you stated, the quote was taken out of context. We don't aknow all of the circumstances, charges, events, evidence, etc. Without that info, it seems very unreasonable to make a judgement call.

Our judicial system isn't 100 percent perfect. There are a lot of things that people don't understand. Without the facts, you can't make an educated decision.
 
Where I come from, if a brother (dude already on trial) stabs a dude (Military Police) in the neck, while in the bathroom, before the trial begins, that's ALL you need to know.


Stabbing people in the neck, especially someone in authority while you are on trial, should be admitted as evidence to accurately describe the type of person that is on trial and his willingness to commit violent crimes in the past and his ability to commit violent crimes in the future.

The "system" isn't perfect but what doesn't help are judges that won't get tough on criminals. Lately, down here in Florida we have sex offenders walking the streets and hurting little children. These ^#^#%@$@$ should be locked up tight but some judge lets them out way too early, without rehab and then the "system" doesn't keep track of them.
 
Scott P said:
I think it's hardly fair to worry about the whole judicial system over the actions of one judge. As you stated, the quote was taken out of context. We don't aknow all of the circumstances, charges, events, evidence, etc. Without that info, it seems very unreasonable to make a judgement call.

Our judicial system isn't 100 percent perfect. There are a lot of things that people don't understand. Without the facts, you can't make an educated decision.
Click to expand...
This will get you to the complete story.
My statement about out of context referred to the fact that I didn't post the entire news article. I left out the part where this guy managed to kill 2 of his comrades and wound an additional 11 of them.
Also the fact that he "secreted" the weapon used in the stabbing would seem to indicate a less than docile manner.
I guess I'm too old school because anytime someone stabs someone with a weapon that they have had hidden, I still consider that anti-social behavior. I would hope that a judge would allow a jury to consider those actions in the sentencing decision. Obviously, the judge did not feel the same way.

Charles
 
Back in 1995, I got jumped by 5 guys, robbed, and then with3 guys holding me, someone from behind stabbed me in the neck, then slit my throat from ear to ear. Long story short, I picked a guy out of a lineup, said "No, he didn't stab me, but he was one of the guys holding me and he could probably tell you who it was". The verdict? The DA didn't charge him with attempted murder because "I had a few drinks". Charged him with aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and the prosecutor was going to throw the book at him. In short, the only time he did was for jumping bail 3 times. No conviction, no restitution, no hard time. Makes you wonder sometimes..... :( :mad: :hurl You know what? Sometimes, I still get mad thinking about what happened. Yep, true story and yes it was that bad. I was read my last rites and they said it was a miracle that I didn't die. So at least I got that goin for me :dancin
 
Wow, crazy story.

I get fed up and flustered with the judicial system all the time as I'm trying to put people in it! It's frusterating because cops and prosecutors can charge people all they want, but it comes down to the judge to convict and up-hold the charge in most cases. Sometimes you just wanna... :ranton :ranton :ranton :ranton :ranton :ranton :ranton
 
Had it been the judge who was stabbed in the neck by this guy, you can bet it would have been evidence in the trial.

Unfortunately, such judges and their decisions like this affect all of us in society - to our detriment. One can only hope that such judges also pay the price they are requiring of the rest of us.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top