Are conditions on pretrial release unconstitutional?

Damocles said:
I'm not arguing, seriously, I'm not. If the defendant has crazies who follow him that can take that image he posted and stalk the crap out of them, and who have done something like that in the past, I get it.

I'm just noting that is where the questions emerge from. I don't think anyone is shocked by a gag during a criminal trial where there is a jury, we even understand why those happen. The legal argument offered by the law professor in the dude's original post emerged from that same question.

Now do we have any evidence that this employee has had any issues since he posted that statement?
Click to expand...

Do we need evidence of that, considering others have had such issues? I suspect she can keep private about that and still get the Gag order.
 
Damocles said:
Correct. Jarod says "People are saying this," links to nothing showing who said it and because it is Jarod saying they are saying this some folks here decide to come in and defend it regardless of nobody having said it here before.

I get that, y'all want to knee-jerk defend against anything Jarod says, however Jarod tends to like to troll nonsense like this. Some fringe weirdo (possibly) got on TV and said this, it isn't something that any mainstream folks are saying anywhere that I've seen. I haven't even seen Fox News set of Trump bathwater drinkers saying it...

Reality: Gag orders during trials are a regular thing when the press can be used to taint juries/results. Both the State and the defendant have a right to a fair trial.
Click to expand...

I thought it was common knowledge that people were saying it...

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...l-gag-order-unconstitutional-s-not-rcna120754
 
ExpressLane said:
Yes on prosecutors who represent the government.

SCOTUS:
“profound national commitment to the principle that debate on public issues should be uninhibited, robust, and wide-open, and that it may well include vehement, caustic, and sometimes unpleasantly sharp attacks on government and public officials.
https://www.latimes.com/opinion/sto...nya-chutkan-jan-6-first-amendment-free-speech
Click to expand...

Again, you are misstating what has been said.

The gag isn't to protect an individual from what is said about them, it is done to protect the state's right to a fair trail, basically the victims right to seek justice. One is not allowed to taint the jury pool in either direction during a criminal trial. One is also not allowed to threaten jury members, etc. or even suggest to followers that they should pay any attention to them, you do not get to put people in danger during even civil trials, it really isn't okay. First Amendment protections also do not allow you to put others in danger. If you know you have some nutjob followers that will stalk the crap out of folks you say are bad, then you won't be allowed to go to the press and declare who is good or bad during your trial any more than you would be allowed to use the press to order someone to stalk someone else when you weren't on trial...
 
Damocles said:
Again, you are misstating what has been said.

The gag isn't to protect an individual from what is said about them, it is done to protect the state's right to a fair trail, basically the victims right to seek justice. One is not allowed to taint the jury pool in either direction during a criminal trial. One is also not allowed to threaten jury members, etc. or even suggest to followers that they should pay any attention to them, you do not get to put people in danger during even civil trials, it really isn't okay. First Amendment protections also do not allow you to put others in danger. If you know you have some nutjob followers that will stalk the crap out of folks you say are bad, then you won't be allowed to go to the press and declare who is good or bad during your trial any more than you would be allowed to use the press to order someone to stalk someone else when you weren't on trial...
Click to expand...

The DEFENDANT has a Constitutional right to a fair trial the government does not.
 
Last edited:
Jarod said:
Do we need evidence of that, considering others have had such issues? I suspect she can keep private about that and still get the Gag order.
Click to expand...

Not what I asked. The cat was out of the bag. Nobody can call back what was already cast into the universe. Has there been any issues?
 
SmarterthanYou said:
cherry picking specifics in an effort to show your point doesn't work. It should be looked at as generically as possible. Damocles explained this very clearly in his post
Click to expand...

Its it fun fighting your lie addled idiots huh



At least you and Damo are beginning to seek reality for a second



Until your shit bag masters create a new slate of lies for you
 
Damocles said:
Not what I asked. The cat was out of the bag. Nobody can call back what was already cast into the universe. Has there been any issues?
Click to expand...

Kinda like all intel your trump god told our enemies

Like the Israeli intel he spilled before this attack
 
ExpressLane said:
The DEFENDANT has a Constitutional right to a fair trial the government does not.
Click to expand...

The state does... not as a "right" per se, but tainting the pool can go either way, if the defendant can gag the prosecutor from using their soap box, the state can as well because the jury must be impartial and untainted. The trial rights come into play, the gags result from that.

Other reasons for gags. Scenario 1: If the defendant was like Charlie Manson and the press allowed him a soapbox during a trial to order his followers to do something... (this is the one that applies to the civil trial, if they believe that some of Trump's followers could use his post to find the target of his ire and "make them pay" by protesting outside their house, following them around, chanting, screaming, etc. then a gag would be reasonable).

Scenario 2: The defendant is famous and is using their fame to try to taint the pool of jurists before the trial starts while they are out on bail. (Gags have often been set in place because of this, the jury must be impartial for it to be a fair trial).

Scenario 3: The prosecutor could use their position to get interviews, using that ready made soap box they could taint the jury pool by using the "trial by press"...
 
Trumpet said:
Trump has incited the Jan 6 Riot,
Click to expand...

More fucking lies from the Stalinists.

and Trump is attempting to intimidate witnesses by posting lies to encourage violence against witnesses by his violent extremist followers. So a gag order is not unreasonable considering how ruthless Trump is.
Click to expand...

And yet more lies.

I'd ask for you to support your lies, but we know you can't and never do, Trumpette.
 
Uncensored2008 said:
I know we are in new territory - being that we have transitioned to a banana republic. But is there precedent for putting people in jail in cases where an administration arrests the opposition candidate and uses the government to tamper with elections?
Click to expand...

Your fuck clearly is a criminal



The facts are obvious to all real Americans not in a trump cult


You do violence for this criminal and you will die


Good thing you are merely a foreign disinformation programmed bot hole



You will merely get unplugged
 
Jarod said:
I thought it was common knowledge that people were saying it...

https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow...l-gag-order-unconstitutional-s-not-rcna120754
Click to expand...

Every single one of the stories you've linked to has one person saying it. This one stems from the same statement your first two links pointed to. So, from what I can see, leftists do not like that Trump said something we don't agree with him on and while nobody in the mainstream (even the guys on Fox, though there are a few on this site posting in anonymity) are also saying it you thought you'd post with no links to anybody at all saying it and get a reaction. I'm cool with that, I'm just surprised how many folks will knee-jerk a "nuh-uh!" out there because you said it. LOL

I still say they react because it is you saying it. I honestly think you agree.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top