Ryan Manatee℠

Something for everyone to hate, politics, tech and porn. follow me on my journey to get 0 followers

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

I believe #x incentivizes people to be retarded

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@layneashley222 Only if the theories are reasonable under the evidence , like if one was aliens abducted here and made her do it under remote control. Or she had a secret clone. You can have plenty of theories about parts of it and not have reasonable doubt

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

An affirmative defense requires admitting to the fact of killing

Eg. For self defense you can’t both say ‘it was self defense’ and ‘I didn’t kill them’

[i. Sciarra @ICONOCLASTIAE]

Without a verdict Americans are presumed innocent until proven guilty. Just fyi.

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@Becky7pd She pled not guilty by reason of insanity, the state gave adequate evidence she was criminally sane a knew she was killing her kids and she knew it was wrong (even altruistic theory she thought it was less wrong than leaving them alive, but knew it was wrong). Most jurors ignored

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

Notably 2004 occurred before any major social media, when people overwhelmingly got info from corp media

Why would corp media call for the criminal prosecution of corp media? They wouldn’t

Juror intimidation and retaliation undermine the entire jury system…

[Andrea Burkhart 🐟🐟🐟🐟🏴‍☠️ @aburkhartlaw]

In 2004, the Wall Street Journal published the name of a holdout juror (for acquittal) while deliberations in the case were still ongoing. The juror reported being threatened, and a mistrial was declared. On retrial, the defendants were convicted.

The decision to publish the juror's name was highly criticized and led to exactly the same debates about discouraging jurors from serving versus the First Amendment interests in transparent court proceedings.

What noticeably didn't happen in 2004 was any suggestion that anybody should be criminally prosecuted (i.e. crushed under the bootheel of the State) for publishing lawfully obtained information in the public record about a government proceeding or for raising funds for a former juror affected by publication of their identity.

As the saying goes, you don't have to agree with what someone says to defend their right to say it.

I support everyone's right to share lawfully-obtained information about criminal prosecutions, to raise money for whoever they feel like, and to criticize each other for doing it. That's what the First Amendment requires and expects of us as a free society.

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@thenew_atharpe @DevinWade05 Just sad all that extra money goes to food…

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

They uncover that paying to try to get public support and talking to people ‘could help’ get you a pardon

So… how it’s always worked???

[unusual_whales @unusual_whales]

BREAKING: 60 Minutes has shown people saying they can get pardons from Trump for a price.

Pardon brokers Jack Burkman and Jacob Wohl said that for $300,000, they could help a felon get a pardon from the president.

They said their services included working with influencers to advocate for his case.

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@CAMELCASTOff I think this would just create more second jobs, which I think might be a good thing, workers become less dependent on a single job

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@oortcloudfilms @SamsaraSings That’s not how that works, they would just reschedule the rental hearing

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@Heather26989960 This is what’s called confirmation bias

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@BobMurphyEcon At least for criminal trials, some states allow split verdicts in civil cases. It makes sense because the stakes are so high, both for the victims and the accused that you want to force the jury to consider the evidence from every angle and hopefully form a consensus

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@DPrello Many people’s time is worth less than that, in fact many have negative value

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@MxVivianWulf Literally don’t care as long as they clean up the mess afterwards. They’re free to be retarded, not free to litter

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

It’s amazing how little people know about trials

Imagine thinking that an attorney would not try to know everything they can about the people deciding their clients fate

It’s beyond ignorant, it’s just dumb

[GlammaSooz @GlammaSooz]

@ryanmanatee Wow are you ignorant AF.
The defense does not run background checks on jurors.

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@GlammaSooz Lmfao, they absolutely fucking do. Do you know there is an entire jury consulting industry?

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@IsraeliAbortion Would have flipped the jury from 11-1 to 1-11 for ng

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@Adriana19Flower She’s a dumb kid, she got a dose of reality. Have some grace, be the example of what you want her to be

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@ShootingBean82 Well her defense attorney for one… quite literally defending her in every definition of the word

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@Lillyin_London So a violent woman wanted to let a violent woman go free? Interesting

[Ryan Manatee℠ @ryanmanatee]

@BenMcCombe @DerekPederson3 They absolutely can run a check fast, the couple I know have someone in the room running it during voir dire. Additionally, if the juror lied, they can also make a motion for removal after the jury is seated. That’s one of the reasons there are alternatives