Are conditions on pretrial release unconstitutional?

evince said:
Yes the system of justice has rights you dick nose


It’s the people


You just want free criming for the Republican party
Click to expand...

Truthy, do yourself a favor and just remain silent. You are so out of your depth you will do nothing but make a fool of yourself.
 
Yakuda said:
Is he violent? Please dont try the, he said he could shoot someone bullshit, answer the question. The constitution is becoming increasingly irrelevant.
Click to expand...

So, let's get you down for the record.

YOU ARE SAYIN' that you are now in favor of ignoring the Constitution when it does not meet your personal political objectives and narratives?

Life is all about you and Donald Trumptard now huh?

Thanks for sharing!
 
Uncensored2008 said:
I agree that this will be overturned on appeal by the SCOTUS.

Yet the impact will be over a billion dollars spent by Trump to defend against spurious charges.

The primary reason the democrats are going after Trump is to make it clear to the commoners that any resistance to the party will be utter ruin, financially, socially, and professionally. Garland seeks to create an environment of fear where no one dare challenge or oppose the party. Our system of jurisprudence has been destroyed by judicial and prosecutorial terrorism.
Click to expand...

He has no case for an unfair trial idiot



He is in fact getting preferential treatment over a regular defendant


And will still be convicted



All his minions are now testifying against trump and his evil plan and lies
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
So, let's get you down for the record.

YOU ARE SAYIN' that you are now in favor of ignoring the Constitution when it does not meet your personal political objectives and narratives?

Life is all about you and Donald Trumptard now huh?

Thanks for sharing!
Click to expand...


If you were to ever put up an honest post, would you burst into flames or something? Or would you just be expelled from the party?
 
Geeko Sportivo said:
So, let's get you down for the record.

YOU ARE SAYIN' that you are now in favor of ignoring the Constitution when it does not meet your personal political objectives and narratives?

Life is all about you and Donald Trumptard now huh?

Thanks for sharing!
Click to expand...
So for the record you are against the Constitution as long as it hurts Donald Trump!

BTW: GO RANGERS!!!
 
Uncensored2008 said:
Truthy, do yourself a favor and just remain silent. You are so out of your depth you will do nothing but make a fool of yourself.
Click to expand...

Who told the people on this site Bush was lying us to war before we went to war?


Me


Who warned the people on this site that the economy was being destroyed by Bush and his corporate whores right when it began?


Me



Who told you Sarah Palin was a two bit con woman before you idiot Republicans picked her?



Me



Who told you Bush was using white phosphorous in Fallughia?



Me



Who told the people on this site foreign nations were playing Americans on the internets Before the FBI told you that fact?



Me



Your fucking problem is you are always wrong in the end


Me


I’m right most of the time



You are never correct


Because you use lies instead of facts
 
Damocles said:
So you think you should ignore that the prediction was false and pretend that it was real regardless of evidence at hand. I get that, introspection can get you uncomfortable at times.

I already noted that I can see where the gag order came from, but I am also willing to admit I thought poorly of folks that acted better than I expected even so.
Click to expand...

No, I think we should gag such information being released about the Clerk because the clear possibility of danger is there. No predictions were made, I would have said the danger is small, but real. The danger does not have to be realized for the order to have been reasonable. That is just silly talk.
 
evince said:
Who told the people on this site Bush was lying us to war before we went to war?


Me


Who warned the people on this site that the economy was being destroyed by Bush and his corporate whores right when it began?


Me



Who told you Sarah Palin was a two bit con woman before you idiot Republicans picked her?



Me



Who told you Bush was using white phosphorous in Fallughia?



Me



Who told the people on this site foreign nations were playing Americans on the internets Before the FBI told you that fact?



Me



Your fucking problem is you are always wrong in the end


Me


I’m right most of the time



You are never correct


Because you use lies instead of facts
Click to expand...


LOL

All you do is mindlessly bleat shit from the Marxist hate sites.
 
Damocles said:
They are not allowed to besmirch the defendant at will", mistrials are constantly called when the prosecutor/state does such things. Do I think they will call one here... hayul no, the Judge would not rule against the trial they are presiding over. LOL. However, such things have been known to get rulings overturned, etc. and some lawyers have been disbarred for legal ethics issues.
Click to expand...
So the prosecutor accusing a defendant who is exonerated isn't besmirching them? Have you ever heard the phrase "Where do I go to get my reputation back?"
 
Jarod said:
No, I think we should gag such information being released about the Clerk because the clear possibility of danger is there. No predictions were made, I would have said the danger is small, but real. The danger does not have to be realized for the order to have been reasonable. That is just silly talk.
Click to expand...

I don't think gag orders apply to information being released. The media can print any information they find. The gag order applies to statements made by the individuals involved in the trial.
 
Flash said:
I don't think gag orders apply to information being released. The media can print any information they find. The gag order applies to statements made by the individuals involved in the trial.
Click to expand...

The media is an extension of the ruling democrat party.

Quite convenient that the opposition is silenced while the party is free to slander and defame at will.
 
Flash said:
I don't think gag orders apply to information being released. The media can print any information they find. The gag order applies to statements made by the individuals involved in the trial.
Click to expand...

True
 
ExpressLane said:
So the prosecutor accusing a defendant who is exonerated isn't besmirching them? Have you ever heard the phrase "Where do I go to get my reputation back?"
Click to expand...

No, they aren't. They would be if after they were exonerated they continued to say they were guilty, but showing evidence in court? No. Sometimes you win in court and it has to suffice, otherwise no trial would ever be possible.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top