Support NeoGAF

[DragoonKain]

I think it's important to stress that if he was found incompetent to stand trial then he's not off the hook for the crime. They try to get him to a point where a psychiatric evaluation shows that he is fit to stand trial and then it resumes. And there are still the federal charges.

I understand why people are up in arms, but I saw some right wing provocateur accounts that make their grift off of acting like America is this place of surging crime and they disingenuously frame every story to generate maximum outrage. There are some stories that certainly do deserve it and are an injustice. This story as I see it is TBD. Don't even know the details of the evaluations yet and may still eventually stand trial on the state level eventually. I had a friend text me like "Can you believe this??? This guy is about to walk!" and it's faaaaaar from that point yet. We'll cross that bridge if and when it gets there.

 

[jason10mm]

I think it's important to stress that if he was found incompetent to stand trial then he's not off the hook for the crime. They try to get him to a point where a psychiatric evaluation shows that he is fit to stand trial and then it resumes. And there are still the federal charges.

I understand why people are up in arms, but I saw some right wing provocateur accounts that make their grift off of acting like America is this place of surging crime and they disingenuously frame every story to generate maximum outrage. There are some stories that certainly do deserve it and are an injustice. This story as I see it is TBD. Don't even know the details of the evaluations yet and may still eventually stand trial on the state level eventually. I had a friend text me like "Can you believe this??? This guy is about to walk!" and it's faaaaaar from that point yet. We'll cross that bridge if and when it gets there.

Really though, what does his mental state really have to do with trying him? Is it because he wouldn't be able to provide the best testimony? F' that, in this case the prosecutor doesn't need to question ANYONE, just play that video in a loop for a whole day and make a single final remark of "you know what to do".

 

[StreetsofBeige]

Really though, what does his mental state really have to do with trying him? Is it because he wouldn't be able to provide the best testimony? F' that, in this case the prosecutor doesn't need to question ANYONE, just play that video in a loop for a whole day and make a single final remark of "you know what to do".

I might be the only one with this opinion, but when it comes to mentally whacked people committing crimes they should actually be locked up more secure. That's because you never know when this guy will go ape shit and do something.

I'd assume most people who commit crime have a clear motive like robbing a bank or a messy divorce or something. There's actually a reason why he did it. And under normal circumstances he probably wouldnt had done it.

In this case, it's a crazy guy with a big track record of crime and roaming subways slashing people from behind.

Literally no different than dogs. You keep on a tight leash on the wild or unpredictable ones you never know will bite someone if let loose.

 

[DragoonKain]

Really though, what does his mental state really have to do with trying him? Is it because he wouldn't be able to provide the best testimony? F' that, in this case the prosecutor doesn't need to question ANYONE, just play that video in a loop for a whole day and make a single final remark of "you know what to do".

It's about a person's rights. A person has to understand what is going on at trial or what they're being charged with and I don't know the details of the ruling here because the stories I've read didn't have those details, but I'm assuming it's something in that realm where a psychiatric eval determined he is not in the state of mind to go to trial where his rights are fully respected.

It's kinda similar to insanity defenses during a trial where you have to try and sell that a perpetrator of a crime either wasn't in control of their own actions when they were committing a crime or didn't know what they were doing was wrong based on their state of mind. Very difficult to prove.

As a son of a retired detective and I come from a family with officers, you can't get more pro law enforcement or pro justice than me. At the same time I'm also very much a pro "the system needs to do its job" guy too. Sometimes that means that things happen in criminal cases you don't like, but the system must prevail because the system is what protects us and our rights. Of course bad faith actors can prevent a system from operation at peak capacity, but that's another story for another time, and one I can't expound on with this specific case because I have no idea the qualifications of those who evaluated this guy or how legitimate(or illegitimate) their determinations of the evaluation are.

If/when he's deemed able to understand his rights, what he did, and the nature of the trial the state trial should resume. If they never get to that point, then that's when things get hairy.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Throw in some obscure sexuality and pronouns and you're golden.

Fact Checked: True

Why Was a Trans Inmate Just Quietly Released From Prison Three Decades Early?

Trans inmate Jonathan Richardson was released 30 years early amid ACLU-backed transgender care lawsuit.

townhall.com

 

[DeepEnigma]

It's about a person's rights.

If only she was afforded her right to live.

 

[Idleyes]

Every time I think about people like Iryna Zarutska, my blood boils. It reminds me too much of uninvolved people getting caught up and killed in gang violence in Black neighborhoods. Anybody who really understands what's going on for example in places like Jacksonville here in Florida should be furious about what was done to her. I don't give a damn what that fucking asshole had going on with his life. Iryna had fuck all to do with any of that shit.

Sorry

 

[GymWolf]

Fact Checked: True

Why Was a Trans Inmate Just Quietly Released From Prison Three Decades Early?

Trans inmate Jonathan Richardson was released 30 years early amid ACLU-backed transgender care lawsuit.

townhall.com

Look like a future surgeon or university professor, maybe even an astronaut, she can look both at the moon and the ship commands at the same fucking time

 

[DragoonKain]

If only she was afforded her right to live.

One person's rights being violated doesn't cancel out another person's rights. Rights apply to all, even those of us who do terrible things. The good news here is he's not on the street to where he can harm others. Sometimes justice is a slow process. The important thing here is getting justice at the end of a day. Because let's say the evaluation was correct and he was not competent to stand trial. And he was never evaluated and went to trial and was convicted. Attorneys could file an appeal and show that he was and get the conviction thrown out and then they'd have to redo the entire process all over again. Gotta dot your i's and cross your t's or else it could end up getting in the way of justice even more in the long run.

I still have hope he will be tried and convicted. We shall see.

 

[DeepEnigma]

One person's rights being violated doesn't cancel out another person's rights.

I still have hope he will be tried and convicted. We shall see.

His rights aren't violated. He was on film.

Look, I understand the theory and philosophical intellectualism behind why those laws were written. Of course at a time where no film existed (and the like) which is an important caveat in current year. Sometimes justice needs to be swift.

Our most basic constitutional right is constantly being violated by these "judges," "lawmalers" and "DAs" when they kept releasing this man and thousands like him purposely into society with laundry lists of violent felonies. And that is the oath they take to protect our most basic right to "safety and pursuit of happiness."

Some would call that malicious and seditious at this point. I do.

 

[StreetsofBeige]

His rights aren't violated. He was on film.

Look, I understand the theory and philosophical intellectualism behind why those laws were written. Of course at a time with no film existed and the like which is an important caveat in current year. Sometimes justice needs to be swift.

Our most basic constitutional right is constantly being violated by these "judges," "lawmalers" and "DAs" when they kept releasing this man and thousands like him purposely into society with laundry lists of violent felonies. And that is the oath they take to protect our most basic right to "safety and pursuit of happiness." Some would call that malicious and seditious at this point.

Depending on the court case involved, it can be dragged out so long that a city could literally green light construction of a new stadium. And by the time it's finished blueprinting and construction the case might still not be finished. Insane.

 

[DragoonKain]

His rights aren't violated. He was on film.

Look, I understand the theory and philosophical intellectualism behind why those laws were written. Of course at a time where no film existed (and the like) which is an important caveat in current year. Sometimes justice needs to be swift.

Our most basic constitutional right is constantly being violated by these "judges," "lawmalers" and "DAs" when they kept releasing this man and thousands like him purposely into society with laundry lists of violent felonies. And that is the oath they take to protect our most basic right to "safety and pursuit of happiness."

Some would call that malicious and seditious at this point. I do.

I think criminals getting caught and released is a problem. It's hard to comment on the specifics with this guy because I don't know why he had been previously released so many times. But it's safe to say he shouldn't have been on the streets, the guy was a danger. But that's a different thing entirely from a person being found not competent to stand trial. People are understandably upset and when they see a heinous murder, any heinous murder, especially when it's captured on film and it makes it so visceral, they want an arrest immediately, the book thrown at the criminal immediately, go right to trial, conviction, and bury them under the prison. But it just doesn't work that way. Justice is rarely swift in America. The not competent to stand trial determination isn't a declaration that he didn't do the crime, so whether he was on video or not isn't super relevant to that specific determination. His mental competency is an entirely different thing and that's in the hands of the medical professionals and the courts now. If and when it does get to trial, that's where it will be determined if he is guilty and that's where the video then becomes relevant.

 

[DeepEnigma]

I think criminals getting caught and released is a problem. It's hard to comment on the specifics with this guy because I don't know why he had been previously released so many times. But it's safe to say he shouldn't have been on the streets, the guy was a danger. But that's a different thing entirely from a person being found not competent to stand trial. People are understandably upset and when they see a heinous murder, any heinous murder, especially when it's captured on film and it makes it so visceral, they want an arrest immediately, the book thrown at the criminal immediately, go right to trial, conviction, and bury them under the prison. But it just doesn't work that way. Justice is rarely swift in America. The not competent to stand trial determination isn't a declaration that he didn't do the crime, so whether he was on video or not isn't super relevant to that specific determination. His mental competency is an entirely different thing and that's in the hands of the medical professionals and the courts now. If and when it does get to trial, that's where it will be determined if he is guilty and that's where the video then becomes relevant.

He was competant to stand trial every other time.

These are corrupt people doing corrupt things they've been doing in current year. Judicial cartels, etc..

 

[Boo Who?]

This story has been opportunistically used by racists to spread bigotry against black people, and this is considered politically divisive. Choose to believe that statement or don't, but that's why some people are against the mural.

When do all the St. Floyd murals and statues come down? If I remember correctly, he was an absoulte piece of shit of a human. Iryna was not.

 

[DragoonKain]

He was competant to stand trial every other time.

These are corrupt people doing corrupt things they've been doing in current year. Judicial cartels, etc..

Impossible for me to say what went into the determination since I didn't see any information on it. And even then I'm not a psychologist. I don't think corruption is at play here. Corruption implies nefarious intent. If anything and he was wrongly declared not competent then I think incompetence by whoever evaluated him or the judge. A lot of conservative voices especially on social media have been trying to push this narrative that there is this coordinated effort by liberal judges, doctors, and politicians to keep criminals on the street and I don't believe that to be true at all. I believe that some people are more likely to be swayed by empathy, sometimes foolishly so. I think some people in the justice system are less harsh when it comes to punishments. But almost all of them do want justice, they just have different views on what constitutes the best and fairest justice. And sometimes rulings in cases are based strongly on the determination of experts. In this case, medical professionals.

I don't know this particular judge, their history, etc. But I can pretty much guarantee there is no secret motivation to keep a murderer from going to prison.

And when it comes to people being on the streets with a long criminal history, each is its own unique case. Sometimes they have served time previously and got out. Sometimes it is soft DAs who refuse to file charges unless the crime is serious enough. Sometimes it's toxic empathy. Sometimes they don't have enough evidence to file charges. Sometimes witnesses disappear, back down, or recant, and a case falls apart. There's lots of reasons.

DeCarlos Brown Jr's mother claims he has schizophrenia. Not sure if that has been proven true or not via medical records. If it his, his attorneys had something tangible to work with to get an evaluation rather than just randomly claiming their client is mentally ill. Ultimately he's a danger and he should not walk the streets again. I think/hope it the process will get to that point once it fully plays out.

 

[jason10mm]

Impossible for me to say what went into the determination since I didn't see any information on it. And even then I'm not a psychologist. I don't think corruption is at play here. Corruption implies nefarious intent. If anything and he was wrongly declared not competent then I think incompetence by whoever evaluated him or the judge. A lot of conservative voices especially on social media have been trying to push this narrative that there is this coordinated effort by liberal judges, doctors, and politicians to keep criminals on the street and I don't believe that to be true at all. I believe that some people are more likely to be swayed by empathy, sometimes foolishly so. I think some people in the justice system are less harsh when it comes to punishments. But almost all of them do want justice, they just have different views on what constitutes the best and fairest justice. And sometimes rulings in cases are based strongly on the determination of experts. In this case, medical professionals.

I don't know this particular judge, their history, etc. But I can pretty much guarantee there is no secret motivation to keep a murderer from going to prison.

And when it comes to people being on the streets with a long criminal history, each is its own unique case. Sometimes they have served time previously and got out. Sometimes it is soft DAs who refuse to file charges unless the crime is serious enough. Sometimes it's toxic empathy. Sometimes they don't have enough evidence to file charges. Sometimes witnesses disappear, back down, or recant, and a case falls apart. There's lots of reasons.

DeCarlos Brown Jr's mother claims he has schizophrenia. Not sure if that has been proven true or not via medical records. If it his, his attorneys had something tangible to work with to get an evaluation rather than just randomly claiming their client is mentally ill. Ultimately he's a danger and he should not walk the streets again. I think/hope it the process will get to that point once it fully plays out.

IMHO it's straight horseshit to use "mental incompetence" to avoid a murder trial. That's an irrevocable act and it's irrelevant if you could "get better and not do it again" in the future or whatever reasoning there is. If I get drunk, and therefore lose SIGNIFICANT decision making skills, and then plow into a family of 4 driving home, is my "temporary inebriation" any kind of justification and if I pinky promise to never drink again should that get me off a manslaughter/murder charge? A violent schizophrenic shouldn't be on the streets, PERIOD, and I think 99% of folks would agree, the other 1% apparently went to law school.

 

[DeepEnigma]

IMHO it's straight horseshit to use "mental incompetence" to avoid a murder trial. That's an irrevocable act and it's irrelevant if you could "get better and not do it again" in the future or whatever reasoning there is. If I get drunk, and therefore lose SIGNIFICANT decision making skills, and then plow into a family of 4 driving home, is my "temporary inebriation" any kind of justification and if I pinky promise to never drink again should that get me off a manslaughter/murder charge? A violent schizophrenic shouldn't be on the streets, PERIOD, and I think 99% of folks would agree, the other 1% apparently went to law school.

That reminds me. If a bartender can be held responsible for a drunk driver, or a dog owner for a violent dog...then so should DAs, Judges, etc., letting these violent repeat offenders out over and over again until they finally kill.

 

[DragoonKain]

IMHO it's straight horseshit to use "mental incompetence" to avoid a murder trial. That's an irrevocable act and it's irrelevant if you could "get better and not do it again" in the future or whatever reasoning there is. If I get drunk, and therefore lose SIGNIFICANT decision making skills, and then plow into a family of 4 driving home, is my "temporary inebriation" any kind of justification and if I pinky promise to never drink again should that get me off a manslaughter/murder charge? A violent schizophrenic shouldn't be on the streets, PERIOD, and I think 99% of folks would agree, the other 1% apparently went to law school.

Alcohol is different because you made a choice to consume alcohol. If someone is severely mentally ill then that is not of their choosing. I agree with you that dangerous people should not be on the street whether they are mentally ill or aren't. They should either be in a mental hospital or in prison. This trial is to determine whether he is guilty of a crime though and whether or not the accused is mentally competent is a factor and part of due process. I don't agree it's horseshit, I think it's very important and all due process is. And again, if it was not followed, it would further compromise the ability to put him away for good in the future, which doesn't work out well for anybody.

 

[jason10mm]

Alcohol is different because you made a choice to consume alcohol. If someone is severely mentally ill then that is not of their choosing. I agree with you that dangerous people should not be on the street whether they are mentally ill or aren't. They should either be in a mental hospital or in prison. This trial is to determine whether he is guilty of a crime though and whether or not the accused is mentally competent is a factor and part of due process. I don't agree it's horseshit, I think it's very important and all due process is. And again, if it was not followed, it would further compromise the ability to put him away for good in the future, which doesn't work out well for anybody.

I think it's liberal claptrap to humanize murderers on the basis of some mental impairment, ESPECIALLY when they show such a long, long pattern of violence. This isn't a "Of Mice and Men" situation, it's a raging savage that "the system" refuses to deal with but also protects from any kind of "Street justice".

My solution would PERMANENTLY deal with him, no need to bother oneself with "the future". Our society has been extensively detuned to accept all sorts of violence in daily life but then the perpetrators can immediately claim victimhood the instant the citizenry pushes back. F that noise, a reckoning is coming and these types of judges are hurrying it along.

 

[Idleyes]

Easier said than done.

Due to optics, everyone (including everyday joes, business, gov and politicians) have to gingerly skirt around the fire or else they'll be labeled an oppressive bigot. Like anything in life, one side often has expectations to do better while the other gets a free ride even if they screwed up.

For functional or technical kind of stuff like people pointing and helping each other out find jobs or fix a leaky pipe it's fair game for everyone to give an opinion.

But once you delve into culture, class and community, anyone can be perceived ragging or planting minefields. That's why a lot of people dont bother. It seems like a thankless job even if someone has best intentions. Not worth the risk and hassle to get involved.

I understand the concern about optics, but it's important to separate firsthand experience from how something might be perceived. Conversations tend to be far more productive when they're grounded in what people are actually dealing with day to day. What doesn't get enough attention are the people in these communities doing real work, mentoring, guiding, and creating positive change, with or without government involvement. That's what should be getting recognition, not just the negative behavior that dominates headlines.

That's what frustrates me about the news. It's not about who they show, it's about what they emphasize. There are organizations out here actively trying to make things better, and that kind of visibility could help reduce problems by connecting people to real support. Instead, the coverage often amplifies the worst elements, making them seem more representative than they are. For example, in my area we have Big Brothers Big Sisters of Central Florida and Wake Up Mentoring, Inc., and most people don't even know they exist until I bring them up. That's crazy, considering how long they've been doing good work.

But I digress, I don't want to steer this conversation away from Iryna Zarutska. I feel like she, along with many others, was let down by all of us. We spend too much time arguing over our differences instead of working through them and coming together, so tragedies like what happened to her are less likely to happen in the first place. Because at the end of the day, it comes down to all of us taking action, not just relying on the government.

 

[DragoonKain]

I think it's liberal claptrap to humanize murderers on the basis of some mental impairment, ESPECIALLY when they show such a long, long pattern of violence. This isn't a "Of Mice and Men" situation, it's a raging savage that "the system" refuses to deal with but also protects from any kind of "Street justice".

My solution would PERMANENTLY deal with him, no need to bother oneself with "the future". Our society has been extensively detuned to accept all sorts of violence in daily life but then the perpetrators can immediately claim victimhood the instant the citizenry pushes back. F that noise, a reckoning is coming and these types of judges are hurrying it along.

I don't look at to it as humanizing him in the sense that you need to have empathy for the guy. I have no empathy for him. He killed an innocent woman and he should never see the light of day again. To me it's that we have a system in place and it needs to be applied to all people and applied fairly. If we break that, you can see what type of road that leads to. I remember when George Floyd was killed I saw a lot of "It's on video! Fuck a trial, just send Chauvin to prison or kill him"

But I'm very confident this isn't about the judge feeling sympathy or sadness for Dejuan Brown Jr having a mental illness. This is the judge following the recommendation and expertise of the medical opinion of his psychiatric evaluations. Failure to do this could have a boat load of future negative consequences. Could potentially have the judge removed from this case for not following due process. Could compromise the trial and a conviction if it were to continue because his attorneys would be well equipped with that medical evaluation information for appeals. Which would mean the family and loved ones would have to endure the pain of a trial all over again. This is about the judge upholding the constitution and trying to protect the legal process of the trial and the outcome of it. Not as much to do with humanizing him and feeling sorry for him and stuff like that. I'm telling you, if those evaluations definitively deemed him unable to stand trial and the judge pushed it through anyway, it would have been just as terrible for the prosecution as anything that would've happened after that would have been highly compromised. And I think it would have actually increased Dejuan Brown Jr's chances of getting off.

 

[DeepEnigma]

To me it's that we have a system in place and it needs to be applied to all people and applied fairly. If we break that, you can see what type of road that leads to.

This part has been broken for a long, long time. Which is why we are headed down these roads now.

 

[jason10mm]

I don't look at to it as humanizing him in the sense that you need to have empathy for the guy. I have no empathy for him. He killed an innocent woman and he should never see the light of day again. To me it's that we have a system in place and it needs to be applied to all people and applied fairly. If we break that, you can see what type of road that leads to. I remember when George Floyd was killed I saw a lot of "It's on video! Fuck a trial, just send Chauvin to prison or kill him"

Funny, I saw the same video and came to a different conclusion that we probably can't really debate here.

But I'm very confident this isn't about the judge feeling sympathy or sadness for Dejuan Brown Jr having a mental illness. This is the judge following the recommendation and expertise of the medical opinion of his psychiatric evaluations. Failure to do this could have a boat load of future negative consequences. Could potentially have the judge removed from this case for not following due process. Could compromise the trial and a conviction if it were to continue because his attorneys would be well equipped with that medical evaluation information for appeals. Which would mean the family and loved ones would have to endure the pain of a trial all over again. This is about the judge upholding the constitution and trying to protect the legal process of the trial and the outcome of it. Not as much to do with humanizing him and feeling sorry for him and stuff like that. I'm telling you, if those evaluations definitively deemed him unable to stand trial and the judge pushed it through anyway, it would have been just as terrible for the prosecution as anything that would've happened after that would have been highly compromised. And I think it would have actually increased Dejuan Brown Jr's chances of getting off.

If the judge is just blindly following a prescripted pathway, then why involve a judge AT ALL? Seems to me the point of having an autonomous human in this decision loop is to determine when to NOT follow "the script", and this case seems to be a pretty good example of when that might be an appropriate use of human intellect instead of just being a burger eating rubber stamping machine.

Falling back to blame "the system", which is just a series of words on an ever growing stack of paper, for lack of common sense and logical processes is what is killing us under weight of red tape. There isn't much better of a "take him out back and put a .38 in his head" case in modern society than this yet we will undergo a multi-million dollar circus in the name of (but not the spirit of) "justice" that exposes all the corrupt nature of the proceedings and none of the value of what it is supposed to bring. But I'm not even arguing to just summarily execute this savage, but damn it, at least put him on trial so the life in prison sentence he has earned can be levied on him instead of wasting a few years so spongeheaded academics can weigh in on his mental fitness.

 

[DragoonKain]

Funny, I saw the same video and came to a different conclusion that we probably can't really debate here.


If the judge is just blindly following a prescripted pathway, then why involve a judge AT ALL? Seems to me the point of having an autonomous human in this decision loop is to determine when to NOT follow "the script", and this case seems to be a pretty good example of when that might be an appropriate use of human intellect instead of just being a burger eating rubber stamping machine.

Falling back to blame "the system", which is just a series of words on an ever growing stack of paper, for lack of common sense and logical processes is what is killing us under weight of red tape. There isn't much better of a "take him out back and put a .38 in his head" case in modern society than this yet we will undergo a multi-million dollar circus in the name of (but not the spirit of) "justice" that exposes all the corrupt nature of the proceedings and none of the value of what it is supposed to bring. But I'm not even arguing to just summarily execute this savage, but damn it, at least put him on trial so the life in prison sentence he has earned can be levied on him instead of wasting a few years so spongeheaded academics can weigh in on his mental fitness.

Well judges are legal experts, but they are not experts in everything. So they make rulings based on information received during the trial process, and in this case it makes sense to value the evaluation of medical professionals since this judge is likely no expert on mental health. The judge's job is to determine its importance and relevance of the mental evaluation in a legal sense and what is best for a fair trial that won't meet any roadblocks going forward. That's where the judge's legal expertise comes in. That's where the medical professionals don't have expertise. They don't have to always agree the evaluation makes someone incompetent to stand trial.

Everyone has their role in a trial. Juries do too. Say you are in a jury for a murder case and during the trial the prosecution's experts come in and show that DNA or fingerprints are a perfect match and the defense can't really adequately refute it. Sure, you could deliberate as a jury and randomly decide not to trust the experts and decide you don't believe the evidence or whatever, but most likely you are going to trust the opinions of the experts.

The judge is overseeing a trial and making legal determinations based on the information given to him or her that best allows for a smooth trial that doesn't violate anyone's rights, follows legal standards.

 

[Idleyes]

Mental health care in the U.S. is falling short. It's not for lack of spending, billions go into it, but the system is so fragmented that it doesn't consistently translate into effective support at the community level. Iryna came here to escape war, only to lose her life after multiple opportunities, across family, community, healthcare, and law enforcement, appear to have been missed. I've seen this shit one to many fucking times, many of which had nothing to do with a mental health issue.

 

[jason10mm]

The judge is overseeing a trial and making legal determinations based on the information given to him or her that best allows for a smooth trial that doesn't violate anyone's rights, follows legal standards.

Well, that is certainly a rose colored glasses way of looking at it. Or the judge is trying to delay any trial in the hopes that the outrage will fade and the event will be memory holed (they entire purpose of the murals is to keep this tragic and senseless event in the publics consciousness) so the brute killer can be given a slap on the wrist and the judge can prance away to cash them Soros checks and get a round of golf claps at the next BLM dinner they are paid mid-6 figures to give a 20 second speech at.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Well judges are legal experts, but they are not experts in everything.

Not all judges are either. We literally have thousands of judges whom are appointed by ideological political flip flopping in counties that don't require passing the Bar exam, let alone any legal experience to be a judge. Just a HS diploma or GED. And we see how well current schooling standards (or lack there of) are now.

Like I said...

This part has been broken for a long, long time. Which is why we are headed down these roads now.

---

Yes, this is accurate; thousands of non-lawyer judges operate in lower-level state courts across the U.S. without having passed a bar exam. Roughly 32 states allow non-lawyer judges, primarily in town, village, or magistrate courts, where they handle bail, arraignments, and minor offenses, often requiring only a high school diploma and local training.

Key details regarding judges without bar exams:

• Widespread Practice: In New York, hundreds of town and village judges are not lawyers. Similarly, in Pennsylvania, over half of the 495 magisterial district judges are not attorneys.
• Requirements: These positions typically require a high school diploma, residency, and a short training course with a basic test, rather than a J.D. or bar passage.
• Court Type: These roles are almost exclusively in lower-level or specialized, local courts, not state superior or supreme courts.
• Context: While controversial due to potential lack of legal expertise, supporters argue they provide localized, accessible justice, as highlighted by discussions on Reddit.

Conversely, in some states like Illinois and at the federal level, being a licensed lawyer is a requirement for judges, as noted on Quora.

---

Just remember, DAs will plea more serious charges down to "minor offenses" and they do this quite often. Then they're sent to these lackeys whom slacktivist via the bench and/or operate via emotion.

 

[drotahorror]

And dont forget to slump your shoulders and fake a tear or two. Got to put up the somber face of lesson learned hoping the judge bites.

All you need is a compassionate judge and a crook will probably get punishment half as much vs a different judge. Goes to show how stupid it can be where judgements can be wild swings from one to another.

Man sentenced for decapitating seagull after it tried to take fries from daughter

A man was sentenced for decapitating a seagull after it attempted to take fries from daughter on the boardwalk.

abc7chicago.com

Kill a seagull and get 8 months which apparently was a "light sentence".

Quote from Thomas Sowell:

"The honest man fears the jail while the criminal fears only the revolving door."

 

[DragoonKain]

Well, that is certainly a rose colored glasses way of looking at it. Or the judge is trying to delay any trial in the hopes that the outrage will fade and the event will be memory holed (they entire purpose of the murals is to keep this tragic and senseless event in the publics consciousness) so the brute killer can be given a slap on the wrist and the judge can prance away to cash them Soros checks and get a round of golf claps at the next BLM dinner they are paid mid-6 figures to give a 20 second speech at.

I wouldn't worry about that, I don't think this judge is trying to get a murderer off, it doesn't really work that way. The Jack Posobiec nutters of the world on social media will try to poison your mind with that stuff, be careful not to fall for it if indeed you've been seeing those accounts. Spend a few weeks on social media following people like that and they'll have you believe there's this army of liberal activistjudges out there trying to prevent murder convictions and it simply isn't true.

Generally, how we've dealt with crime as a country over the recent decades is one of the things I'm most proud of as an American. We've made as many strides in that aspect of our society as anywhere. Every decade homicides drop, crime lowers. Judges and law enforcement are for the most part doing their jobs well. And I think it'll only get better and the trends will continue after that short-term spike following the George Floyd riots. Could it still improve? Sure, it always can and I wish there were fewer lenient judges and DAs in the criminal justice system, but letting brutal murderers get off is another animal entirely. He'll get his day in court at some point and he'll have to answer to a jury.

 

[DeafTourette]

Every time I think about people like Iryna Zarutska, my blood boils. It reminds me too much of uninvolved people getting caught up and killed in gang violence in Black neighborhoods. Anybody who really understands what's going on for example in places like Jacksonville here in Florida should be furious about what was done to her. I don't give a damn what that fucking asshole had going on with his life. Iryna had fuck all to do with any of that shit.

Sorry

Ok, you're black. Right? You know there's not rampant violence in every black neighborhood, right?

And there's tons of activism to try and change things in the neighborhoods where violence is a problem, right?

Because this post and the one before it reeks of respectability politics and trying to seem like "one of the good ones"

We can be mad about what happened to this young woman without doing a "whataboutism" on "black on black crime" (what-about white on white crime?)

 

[DeafTourette]

Well, that is certainly a rose colored glasses way of looking at it. Or the judge is trying to delay any trial in the hopes that the outrage will fade and the event will be memory holed (they entire purpose of the murals is to keep this tragic and senseless event in the publics consciousness) so the brute killer can be given a slap on the wrist and the judge can prance away to cash them Soros checks and get a round of golf claps at the next BLM dinner they are paid mid-6 figures to give a 20 second speech at.

We're either a nation of laws or we're not. You can't thirst for revenge in this country... Our history is chock full of bloodthirst and extrajudicial killings of people

 

[Idleyes]

Ok, you're black. Right? You know there's not rampant violence in every black neighborhood, right?

And there's tons of activism to try and change things in the neighborhoods where violence is a problem, right?

Because this post and the one before it reeks of respectability politics and trying to seem like "one of the good ones"

We can be mad about what happened to this young woman without doing a "whataboutism" on "black on black crime" (what-about white on white crime?)

Edit: I over reacted. I'll just ignore this shit.
Edit 2: Let's just say I've lost people in my life for no good reason. I'm not here to cater to anyone, especially not someone who can't even bother to understand what they're reading.

 

[jason10mm]

We're either a nation of laws or we're not. You can't thirst for revenge in this country... Our history is chock full of bloodthirst and extrajudicial killings of people

Laws are not rigid, inflexible, immutable. The ENTIRE point of judges is to INTERPRET the law and render....judgements. If there was a 100% proscribed guide path with no room for questions then there would be no need for judges as there would be no decisions to be made. So in this case, with this defendant, with this crime, seems like the decision to proceed to trial is an obvious common sense one, rather than defer to some incompetent plea that just drags out the case. If this is just a month delay for some additional evaluation to block a possible avenue the defense could use for a mistrial or something, then that's one thing, but I suspect this is a delay tactic to try to wait out the public interest and it's not in the PUBLICS best interest at all, and ultimately will probably cost the life of someone else.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Because this post and the one before it reeks of respectability politics and trying to seem like "one of the good ones"

Explain your newfound bullshit, race hustler.

Is this some sort of passive aggressive "coon" or "Uncle Tom" type clown shit?

 

[Idleyes]

Explain your newfound bullshit, race hustler.

Is this some sort of passive aggressive "coon" or "Uncle Tom" type clown shit?

I wouldn't bother. That user seems to like arguing with a version of comments people didn't make. I wasn't generalizing Black neighborhoods or doing "whataboutism." I was talking about innocent people getting killed that have nothing to do with the people who killed them, because that's what happened here. That's how I've identified with her. I lost someone the way she was taken away from the world. But this fuckwit thinks I'm posting to impress people. The fuck?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Man sentenced for decapitating seagull after it tried to take fries from daughter

A man was sentenced for decapitating a seagull after it attempted to take fries from daughter on the boardwalk.

abc7chicago.com

Kill a seagull and get 8 months which apparently was a "light sentence".

Quote from Thomas Sowell:

"The honest man fears the jail while the criminal fears only the revolving door."

Better is this one:

"Mercy for the guilty is cruelty to the innocent"

 

[DeepEnigma]

I'll add more from earlier about bartenders and dog owners. If a doctor releases a patient too soon and they die, the doctor can get in trouble by losing their license or at the very least faces massive malpractice lawsuits.

The DAs and judges do not.

The mere fact that these people committing these violent crimes run away after, shows they're cognitive of knowing right from wrong.

 

[DeafTourette]

Explain your newfound bullshit, race hustler.

Is this some sort of passive aggressive "coon" or "Uncle Tom" type clown shit?

Race hustler? LMBO! I needed that laugh!

 

[Idleyes]

Race hustler? LMBO! I needed that laugh!

I can tell you save that energy for the internet. People who carry themselves like that in real life don't get the luxury of racking up 12k posts on GAF.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Race hustler? LMBO! I needed that laugh!

At you, not with you.

 

[jason10mm]

Race hustler? LMBO! I needed that laugh!

You are a booty hustler, for sure

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Since this seems to be what this thread is about right now

 

[Bojji]

"Justice" system is a fucking joke if verdicts are dictated by modern day politics (and it started with OJ Simpson).

 

[StreetsofBeige]

"Justice" system is a fucking joke if verdicts are dictated by modern day politics (and it started with OJ Simpson).

That entire OJ thing event was a farce. From the highway chase to the trials, a big circus. But you can see how crazy courts can be. But that's what you get when a court system has 12 people juries. You got a big court case on the line and somehow 12 morons can decide anyone's fate.

Just imagine in anything in life you need advice or something fixed. Instead of leaving it in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, you just wing it and let a group of 12 nobodies who can be biased idiots tell you what to do.

Makes no sense. But some reason in law with guilty/innocent verdicts on the line it does. Figure that out.

 

[LordCBH]

Literally no different than dogs. You keep on a tight leash on the wild or unpredictable ones you never know will bite someone if let loose.

We Old Yeller the ones that do bite, though. So it's definitely different than dogs.

 

[DeepEnigma]

Since this seems to be what this thread is about right now

"They don't know any better" says the class racists looking down on a specific race.

Sad part is, you got bozos of said race cheering it on masquerading as some romanticized "freedom fighter."

It's all by design. To demoralize and divide a nation and its people and culture even further. While they sit in their ivory towers watching us misguided minions being at each others throats.

 

[Bojji]

That entire OJ thing event was a farce. From the highway chase to the trials, a big circus. But you can see how crazy courts can be. But that's what you get when a court system has 12 people juries. You got a big court case on the line and somehow 12 morons can decide anyone's fate.

Just imagine in anything in life you need advice or something fixed. Instead of leaving it in the hands of someone who knows what they are doing, you just wing it and let a group of 12 nobodies who can be biased idiots tell you what to do.

Makes no sense. But some reason in law with guilty/innocent verdicts on the line it does. Figure that out.

I never understood the US system where random people decide if someone is guilty or not. Looks like this system is common in former British colonies

While I was analyzing the differences between US system and Polish system using Ai...

This explains why someone "not guilty" in America is pretty much immune to justice system. Here, we have multiple tiers trying to prove guilty/not guilty for years. It's very rare for murderers to get away with with zero jail/prison time (unless Police do an absolute shit job collecting evidence, which happens sometimes).

And of course... we don't have any influence from racial minorities, they are super tiny and don't hold much power (over media for example) - most of the crimes are done by natives anyway.

 

[Donald mac Ronald]

I never understood the US system where random people decide if someone is guilty or not. Looks like this system is common in former British colonies

While I was analyzing the differences between US system and Polish system using Ai...

This explains why someone "not guilty" in America is pretty much immune to justice system. Here, we have multiple tiers trying to prove guilty/not guilty for years. It's very rare for murderers to get away with with zero jail/prison time (unless Police do an absolute shit job collecting evidence, which happens sometimes).

And of course... we don't have any influence from racial minorities, they are super tiny and don't hold much power (over media for example) - most of the crimes are done by natives anyway.

Ah I could think nothing worse than the civil system.

Imagine you've been arrested for saying something mean on Facebook and you're not braindead enough to admit guilt or whatever crap deal the police offer.
Instesd you go to a jury. Everytime one of these cases gets to a jury the acquit because they don't buy into the bullshit.

Take that away and a left leaning judge gets to decide your fate.. no thanks

 

[Coconutt]

 

[jason10mm]

I never understood the US system where random people decide if someone is guilty or not. Looks like this system is common in former British colonies

While I was analyzing the differences between US system and Polish system using Ai...

This explains why someone "not guilty" in America is pretty much immune to justice system. Here, we have multiple tiers trying to prove guilty/not guilty for years. It's very rare for murderers to get away with with zero jail/prison time (unless Police do an absolute shit job collecting evidence, which happens sometimes).

And of course... we don't have any influence from racial minorities, they are super tiny and don't hold much power (over media for example) - most of the crimes are done by natives anyway.

Well, it worked better when the jury pool was relatively educated and the trial took just a few days so more folks wanted to do it.

But shit like the OJ trial, which took, IIRC, a DAMNED YEAR, just ruined it. Now you get 12 of the dumbest motherfuckers around.