Fitznimitz

Gamer - Father - Bibliophile

[The Critical Drinker @TheCriticalDri2]

Shit. Get well soon, sir!

[Smu The DJ @DJSmu]

How to Fix Dr. Who @Nerdrotics @disparutoo

[The Critical Drinker @TheCriticalDri2]

Because Clarkson's Farm actually has likeable characters.

[ClarksonsFarm @ClarksonsFarm1]

And on that bombshell…

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@FartSneaky55390 @shoe0nhead No/low reading comprehension. Got it.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@FartSneaky55390 @shoe0nhead I don't thing he legally defended himself. It was unlawful.

I also didn't like how the judge handled the trial and Constitutional rights may have been infringed during witness questioning.

These are not mutually exclusive.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@TheContraire @shoe0nhead Got it, no matter what I say you are going to attribute to me things you can't know bc you don't know me. Same play book the left uses when they call everyone they don't like racists.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@TheContraire @shoe0nhead I want to believe you're not a moron but you're making it tough. I agree with the verdict. What side does that put me on?

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@TheContraire @shoe0nhead The wrong side? I don't know what part of "I think the right call was made" y'all are having a problem with, I mean this is beyond ridiculous.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

None of my argument was in bad faith, I clearly articulated what I find to be odd and the line of questioning I have a problem with is a Constitutional issue which supersedes any "this is how we do it here" reasoning.

All I see is a bunch of people who think Karmelo belongs in prison (I do too) but they are completely unable to put that aside and ask themselves if they think putting aggressive time limits on a murder trial and possibly breaking someone's Constitutional rights are acceptable as long as we reach the correct outcome.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@lilyofurvalley @jebtard89 @shoe0nhead I've said more than once that I feel the correct judgement was made.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@ShadowFan52 @shoe0nhead Thanks for engaging, proving the point.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@Yeetlethebeetl2 @SlickFrog83 @shoe0nhead No, that's not what I said. I said it's a weak argument, IMO, to dismiss those particular jurors bc they are educators AND it open you up to scrutiny bc they were the only black witnesses available that stated they could be impartial.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

I get that most of this is standard procedure, I just don't like the procedure. But the questioning of the witnesses on law and defendant's state of mind might lead to Constitutional questions which supersede any "that's the way we do it here" procedures. Of all the issues that one baffled me the most, especially when there was no objection.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@SlickFrog83 @shoe0nhead Isn't there supposed to be a 3-step process to Batson? Challenge, retort, challenge the retort. They stopped at 2-steps.

Small issue probably, but it's there.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

Oh there are always oddities. Some large, some small, sometimes just a few, sometimes a lot.

If we quit calling them out cause "they always happen" then we're fucked. Even in this case, where I think the right decision was made, I don't want it made in a shitty way that may come back to fuck us later.

Specifically in this case I don't like the "rocket docket" approach of the judge. It offends me in every way to do a time limit approach when someone has lost their life and another may go to prison forever.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@nipnipchips @shoe0nhead Thanks

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@MF77881 @shoe0nhead Thanks for making my point.

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@CivicSemblance @shoe0nhead

[Fitznimitz @fitznimitz]

@BaconDust1 @shoe0nhead Excuses for what? I think the correct decision was made. Does that mean I can't point out things I don't like?