Home
Artists
Search Recent Random
Posts
Search DMs Popular Hash Lookup Tags Random
Importer
Import FAQ
Register
Partychan Matrix ThePornDude
Home Artists Posts Import Register
The Offical Matrix Groupchat is online! >>CLICK HERE<<

OA551: Trump May Be Out of Office but His Federal Judges Are Not (Patreon)

Published:
2021-12-13 05:26:58
Edited:
2021-12-15 22:56:34
Imported:
2022-10

Downloads

Content

They're busy at work making a complete mockery of the law. To call them howler monkeys is an insult to howler monkeys, who I'm sure would at least try their best. Andrew takes us through a couple recent opinions by Trump Judges that remind us why it was so goddamn important both to elect Biden AND to win those two Georgia Senate seats. Let this episode be a motivator! These are the people who end up deciding the most important cases when we let Republicans back in power.
Links: VanDyke ABA rating, Duncan v Bolta, Terry A. Doughty, Louisiana v Becerra, Who Are the Scientists Behind the Great Barrington Declaration?, Peter A. McCullough

Appearances

None. Invite us on!

-Support us on Patreon at: patreon.com/law

-Subscribe to the YouTube Channel and share our videos!

-Follow us on Twitter:  @Openargs

-Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/openargs/, and don’t forget the OA Facebook Community!

-For show-related questions, check out the Opening Arguments Wiki, which now has its own Twitter feed!  @oawiki

-And finally, remember that you can email us at openarguments@gmail.com!

Files

Comments

Anonymous

I need to brush up on my negligence standards... 😵

Anonymous

A random question When someone who is guilty pleads "not guilty", aren't they effectively perjuring themselves by lying to the court? If so, if a jury finds them guilty, why are they not automatically also charged perjury? Or is that an implied charge that is built into the original offence? Also, related to this is it compulsory for somebody to enter a plea? Can you just assert the right to remain silent, and refuse to plead either way? If so, would it not be preferable to do this? Can you be compelled to enter a plea?

Anonymous
>>73624323

I get why this seems counter-intuitive, but my best shot at an explanation: "Guilty" and "Not guilty" is more nuanced than "did it" and "didn't do it" when it comes to criminal charges. When someone pleads "not guilty," they are essentially stating "I intend to fight the charge and make the state present a case demonstrating my criminal liability beyond a reasonable doubt." Everyone has a constitutional right to elect this route. A person who is found "not guilty" of a crime hasn't been deemed "innocent" by the jury - and similarly - a person who has been found "guilty" isn't found so based on an absolute certainty - only beyond a reasonable doubt. It is compulsory to enter a plea. In another life - prosecuting traffic infractions and lower-level misdemeanors where 99% of people show up without an attorney , many people are shocked to learn this. People will hem and haw, and the judge will do their best to stop them short of saying "I did the thing but I want to fight the ticket" by explaining exactly what it means to plead "guilty," "not guilty," or make an Alford plea/ plead nolo contendre. In short: The burden of proof for criminal charges rests with the state. Although it sounds like a person is speaking to their own culpability when they make a plea, they are more realistically speaking to the perceived ability of the state to make the requisite case against them on all elements of the charge (including the availability of defenses, constitutional challenges to the evidence, etc.).