• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Richardson Probe 'Was Killed in Washington'

RightinNYC said:
Again, you obviously don't have much experience with criminal investigations.
Click to expand...

And you obviously know nothing about me or my experience. Small factoid for you to consider: I worked daily and directly with the best lawyers in California for four years (Administrator of the Certified Specialist program).

RightinNYC said:
It's routine for parties to settle regardless of whether they are guilty of what they're being charged with.
Click to expand...

Please reread my statement again, slowly. Carefully.

Maybe you'd settle and leave your reputation in question, but those of us who have nothing to hide would fight for what's right.
Click to expand...

See there? No mention of what's "routine;" I'm telling you what MY reaction to being falsely charged would be. Clearly, your issue here is that I wouldn't just roll over as easily as, say, you might. :roll:
 
Glinda said:
And you obviously know nothing about me or my experience. Small factoid for you to consider: I worked daily and directly with the best lawyers in California for four years (Administrator of the Certified Specialist program).
Click to expand...

Then maybe you should ask a few of them for their thoughts on this issue. You might be surprised.

Please reread my statement again, slowly. Carefully.

See there? No mention of what's "routine;" I'm telling you what MY reaction to being falsely charged would be. Clearly, your issue here is that I wouldn't just roll over as easily as, say, you might. :roll:
Click to expand...

No, my "issue" is that you're making misleading statements. Here's what you said.

Glinda said:
In the Blankenship/Albo case, DeLay settled out of court. You don't generally do that when you're squeaky clean and eager to defend your "honor" to the bitter end.
Click to expand...

Glinda said:
Maybe you'd settle and leave your reputation in question, but those of us who have nothing to hide would fight for what's right.
Click to expand...

The obvious implication of your statement is not that you would choose to fight, but that those who are innocent would choose to fight and that if someone chose to settle, they were probably guilty. That's false.
 
Glinda doesn't know anything. Forget her.
 
RightinNYC said:
The obvious implication of your statement is not that you would choose to fight, but that those who are innocent would choose to fight and that if someone chose to settle, they were probably guilty. That's false.
Click to expand...

Let's say you were misidentified by an eyewitness as the rapist of an 8-yr old girl. The prosecution has a convincing case against you, regardless of the fact that you didn't do it. The mother of the rape victim wishes to keep her child out of the glare of the media, so offers you a plea bargain - privately admit your guilt to her and pay her $750,000 to make the case go away (even though the taint on your name will remain forever).

Do you do it?
 
Glinda said:
Let's say you were misidentified by an eyewitness as the rapist of an 8-yr old girl. The prosecution has a convincing case against you, regardless of the fact that you didn't do it. The mother of the rape victim wishes to keep her child out of the glare of the media, so offers you a plea bargain - privately admit your guilt to her and pay her $750,000 to make the case go away (even though the taint on your name will remain forever).

Do you do it?
Click to expand...

Depends. Not sure why you think that's relevant to this issue, as it's not even remotely similar to what we're talking about. Nevertheless, the fact remains that for most people with competent counsel, it would certainly be an option worth considering.
 
30 Posts and counting and not one single legal argument as to why the investigaton should continue.

They have an unnamed source that relays it was "killed in Washington".

Why was it "killed in Washington" assuming that is correct?

Partisan poltics? Or not enough evidence? .............It doesn't say.

I know! Lets just pick sides according to our own ideology and pretend that we do have knowledge of why it was killed in Washington!
 
RightinNYC said:
Again, you obviously don't have much experience with criminal investigations. It's routine for parties to settle regardless of whether they are guilty of what they're being charged with.
Click to expand...

Glinda said:
Let's say you were misidentified by an eyewitness as the rapist of an 8-yr old girl. The prosecution has a convincing case against you, regardless of the fact that you didn't do it. The mother of the rape victim wishes to keep her child out of the glare of the media, so offers you a plea bargain - privately admit your guilt to her and pay her $750,000 to make the case go away (even though the taint on your name will remain forever).

Do you do it?
Click to expand...

RightinNYC said:
Depends.
Click to expand...

Just as I thought. :rofl
 
Glinda said:
Just as I thought. :rofl
Click to expand...

I'm looking and looking and the only way that your post makes any sense is if you don't know what the word "routine" means. I don't think that's the case, so please enlighten me as to what you think you've proven.
 
Glinda said:
Let's say you were misidentified by an eyewitness as the rapist of an 8-yr old girl. The prosecution has a convincing case against you, regardless of the fact that you didn't do it. The mother of the rape victim wishes to keep her child out of the glare of the media, so offers you a plea bargain - privately admit your guilt to her and pay her $750,000 to make the case go away (even though the taint on your name will remain forever).

Do you do it?
Click to expand...

.


With all that expertise you garnered with those California lawyers, would have thought the difference between a Civil case and a Criminal case would have come up sometime. :doh

The Delay/Albo case was a Civil case. (which was settled out of court as many/most are) No charges were ever filed against Tom Delay in that case.....



.
 
Cole said:
.


With all that expertise you garnered with those California lawyers, would have thought the difference between a Civil case and a Criminal case would have come up sometime. :doh

The Delay/Albo case was a Civil case. (which was settled out of court as many/most are) No charges were ever filed against Tom Delay in that case.....



.
Click to expand...

Way to ruin it, I was looking forward to hearing more about how some random mother was going to offer me a plea bargain while simultaneously extorting me. :lol:
 
Glinda said:
As for the rest of your post, I have to laugh at your source (FOX? Are you effin' kidding!?) but will not waste my time pointing out the partisanship within it. It's obvious to all but the Kook-Aid drinkers.
Click to expand...
May 2009 :roll:
 
Cole said:
The Delay/Albo case was a Civil case.
Click to expand...

Very good! :thumbs:

Cole said:
With all that expertise you garnered with those California lawyers, would have thought the difference between a Civil case and a Criminal case would have come up sometime.
Click to expand...

I do know the difference. My hypothetical was in response to RiNYC's comment:

RightinNYC said:
Again, you obviously don't have much experience with criminal investigations. It's routine for parties to settle regardless of whether they are guilty of what they're being charged with.
Click to expand...

Which is why I posited a hypothetical about, y'know, a criminal case where someone who was innocent was given the option to settle the case by privately admitting guilt and paying damages.

And his dishwater response tells me everything I need to know - he'd be willing to lie (falsely admit he raped a child) because... well, I honestly can't fathom why, just that he'd be willing to do so.
 
Last edited:
Glinda said:
Guess you didn't notice that my complaint about your source was taken from a direct quote from YOU, when you attacked MY source in a previous post. :doh

Idiot.
Click to expand...

What irony reading the above: there is a vast difference between your poo pooing a source as if it were a joke without providing a shred of effort to show why, and my post which clearly pointed out the bias in your source and the fact that it contained very little in substance or facts; much like your arguments.

Backatchya. :2wave:
 
Truth Detector said:
What irony reading the above: there is a vast difference between your poo pooing a source as if it were a joke without providing a shred of effort to show why, and my post which clearly pointed out the bias in your source and the fact that it contained very little in substance or facts; much like your arguments.
Click to expand...

You stick with that, pal. I'm sure your "FEMA camp" wetdreams will keep you warm at night. :lamo
 
Glinda said:
Very good! :thumbs:

I do know the difference. My hypothetical was in response to RiNYC's comment:

Which is why I posited a hypothetical about, y'know, a criminal case where someone who was innocent was given the option to settle the case by privately admitting guilt and paying damages.
Click to expand...

The point that you keep glossing over is that there's a difference between settling a case with the government and settling a case with a private party.

And his dishwater response tells me everything I need to know - he'd be willing to lie (falsely admit he raped a child) because... well, I honestly can't fathom why, just that he'd be willing to do so.
Click to expand...

And the fact that you wouldn't even be willing to entertain all available options and would instead volunteer for prison to defend some abstract principle tells me something as well.
 
RightinNYC said:
The point that you keep glossing over is that there's a difference between settling a case with the government and settling a case with a private party.
Click to expand...

This difference you speak of has never been a part of this discussion. The question at hand is: Would you be willing to settle a lawsuit out of court when you're not guilty of what you'd been accused?

My answer is an unequivocal "NO!" Yours is ... "Well, maybe. What kind of deal are you offering?"

RightinNYC said:
And the fact that you wouldn't even be willing to entertain all available options and would instead volunteer for prison to defend some abstract principle tells me something as well.
Click to expand...

I guess you're confused. I've never said I'd "volunteer for prison." I said I'd fight tooth and nail any false accusations made against me.

Our judicial system is based on the premise that I am innocent walking in the door. When I'm innocent and I refuse to settle or cop a plea, I am not "volunteering for prison." I'm just willing to take my chances that the judge/jury are more insightful and honest than... well, you.
 
Glinda said:
This difference you speak of has never been a part of this discussion. The question at hand is: Would you be willing to settle a lawsuit out of court when you're not guilty of what you'd been accused?

My answer is an unequivocal "NO!" Yours is ... "Well, maybe. What kind of deal are you offering?"
Click to expand...

By all means, do whatever you want. For your sake, I hope you don't ever get accused of anything.

I guess you're confused. I've never said I'd "volunteer for prison." I said I'd fight tooth and nail any false accusations made against me.

Our judicial system is based on the premise that I am innocent walking in the door. When I'm innocent and I refuse to settle or cop a plea, I am not "volunteering for prison."
Click to expand...

No, you're just taking a foolish gamble.

I'm just willing to take my chances that the judge/jury are more insightful and honest than... well, you.
Click to expand...

I guess you don't value your freedom as much as I do.

See, I have the capacity to think logically and separate my irrational desires from a rational cost-benefit analysis.

In your admittedly ****ty hypothetical, I am choosing between two options:

1) Refuse the plea and face prosecution for the rape of an 8 year old child in a case with "convincing" evidence, or
2) Pay $750k and apologize.

Since I have some familiarity with the law, I know that a "convincing" case against a male accused of raping an 8 year old child has a very high probability of resulting in a conviction. Since that's a class B violent felony in NY, I'd expect something like 15 or 20 years.

When you calculate for lost earnings, the value I place on loss of freedom and career damage, the cost of such a penalty would be well into the millions already.

Since I am a rational human being, I can take an objective look at my two options:

1) Losses in the millions, prison rape, and total loss of reputation, or
2) Losses of $750k, bruised sense of justice

I'd probably pick choice 2. Guess I'm just not as principled as you.
 
Glinda said:
Very good! :thumbs:



I do know the difference. My hypothetical was in response to RiNYC's comment:



Which is why I posited a hypothetical about, y'know, a criminal case where someone who was innocent was given the option to settle the case by privately admitting guilt and paying damages.

And his dishwater response tells me everything I need to know - he'd be willing to lie (falsely admit he raped a child) because... well, I honestly can't fathom why, just that he'd be willing to do so.
Click to expand...

.


Attempting to equate a civil suit in a small business conflict between partners with your mythical rape of an 8 year old child really seems to blow any credability you may have had right out of the water.

As a starting point, can we at least agree on that? eh....??



.
 
Cole said:
Attempting to equate a civil suit in a small business conflict between partners with your mythical rape of an 8 year old child really seems to blow any credability you may have had right out of the water.

As a starting point, can we at least agree on that? eh....??
Click to expand...

See post 38.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom