Originally posted by lioyankSpammer, I have no reason to visit the Clan Forum and I couldn't care less what you "think"; get a job and pony up $30 to subscribe before you call other people "losers". This thread was supposed to be an intelligent discussion about the comparative merits of the jury system vs. a judge only system, but two spammers have totally disrupted it STANG-style. Maybe you guys need a banning.
By the way no1, when are you going to address us "losers" in the Clans' Forum. You know, that thread that you started back in September? Where you say you're leaving us. What happened to that? Golf didn't suit you? Nothing better to do than waste your time on nitwits and "f****** idiots/morons"? Guess not.... loser.
Back to the debate:
If you are a professional juror you will need to be paid a professional wage. This therefore means the defendant will be judged by professional people.
Whilst for complicated white collar crime this might of benefit, for your average day to day delinquent this might not be very fair.
Who pays the wages of Jurists? if you are a career juror you may want to do what your employer wants you to do in cases where the state has a vested interest.
Originally posted by invigorateTrue. And now we're in a position where pro jurists would have to recuse themselves from certain cases for a variety of reasons. This then leads to more rules being written, by the judiciary I suppose, for defining recusals. More complications.
Back to the debate:
If you are a professional juror you will need to be paid a professional wage. This therefore means the defendant will be judged by professional people.
Whilst for complicated white collar crime this might of benefit, for your average day to day delinquent this might not be very fair.
Who pays the wages of Jurists? if you are a c ...[text shortened]... ay want to do what your employer wants you to do in cases where the state has a vested interest.
I guess I still just see this whole professional jurist issue as lending itself to big problems later on. Basically the same problems we see with professional politics. 🙂
Originally posted by no1marauderSo typical. Such a hypocrite. You don't like what someone says, so you try and silence them. I see you in your true light, marauder. A few may be fooled, but even that number is diminishing. You are more like McCarthy then any of our founding fathers.
Spammer, I have no reason to visit the Clan Forum and I couldn't care less what you "think"; get a job and pony up $30 to subscribe before you call other people "losers". This thread was supposed to be an intelligent discussion about the comparative merits of the jury system vs. a judge only system, but two spammers have totally disrupted it STANG-style. Maybe you guys need a banning.
And it's 3 spammers. "Get a life" adds nothing to the thread and only detracts from its original purpose. Remember to give yourself a ban as well.
Originally posted by lioyankLearn how to read, loser. A "Touched by an Angel" synopsis was completely off-topic and superfluous by a clown who constantly posts rubbish like that in threads but thinks STANG should get banned for "spamming". But at least he can come up with $30 a year.
So typical. Such a hypocrite. You don't like what someone says, so you try and silence them. I see you in your true light, marauder. A few may be fooled, but even that number is diminishing. You are more like McCarthy then any of our founding fathers.
And it's 3 spammers. "Get a life" adds nothing to the thread and only detracts from its original purpose. Remember to give yourself a ban as well.
You can say whatever you want; start a thread entitled "I Hate no1Marauder" and write whatever crap you want. But this thread was actually meant to discuss a serious topic of interest not "Touched by an Angel" or your pathetic dislike of me. Play by the rules even though you don't pay for the privilege, mooch.
Originally posted by invigorateI'm still waiting for LH to give a description of what a "professional jurist" system that would be superior to the present jury system would be in his view. I can't comment on a system when I have no idea what it's characteristics would be. I personally think it doesn't require any particular expertise to evaluate facts, so I think a jury system is fine. I also think that judges are at least as likely to be influenced by extraneous factors as juries, but how the jurists are selected and the composition of the panel would affect that.
Back to the debate:
If you are a professional juror you will need to be paid a professional wage. This therefore means the defendant will be judged by professional people.
Whilst for complicated white collar crime this might of benefit, for your average day to day delinquent this might not be very fair.
Who pays the wages of Jurists? if you are a c ...[text shortened]... ay want to do what your employer wants you to do in cases where the state has a vested interest.
Originally posted by no1marauderI think that certain cases should be judged by qualified impartial jurors. Fraud is the obvious example. Medical negligance may be another. These jury's would be made up of people working or retired from these fields of work or related fields of work.
I'm still waiting for LH to give a description of what a "professional jurist" system that would be superior to the present jury system would be in his view. I can't comment on a system when I have no idea what it's characteristics would be. I personally think it doesn't require any particular expertise to evaluate facts, so I think a jury system i ...[text shortened]... as juries, but how the jurists are selected and the composition of the panel would affect that.
In long drawn out complicated cases securing a conviction is hard if the jury fails to understand the evidence.
Originally posted by no1marauder"Registration is completely free!" Right on the main page.
Learn how to read, loser. A "Touched by an Angel" synopsis was completely off-topic and superfluous by a clown who constantly posts rubbish like that in threads but thinks STANG should get banned for "spamming". But at least he can come up with $30 a year.
You can say whatever you want; start a thread entitled "I Hate no1Marauder" and writ ...[text shortened]... r pathetic dislike of me. Play by the rules even though you don't pay for the privilege, mooch.
Payment is not mandatory. It's optional. Unless you want more than 6 games at a time, or to participate in clans. Then you pay to play. But I have no need for them. In fact, I only have 3 games running right now. You can pay if that's what you want to do. And believe it or not, I don't care what you "think" about me either. If you want the added privileges of being a subscriber, go right ahead. But don't be intolerant to those of us that don't play chess as much as others do. Don't discriminate. That's kinda hard for an elitist like you, though, isn't it? A true conservative dressed in liberal clothing.
Originally posted by lioyankIs it soooooooooo hard for you to understand that EVERY post you've made in this thread is off-topic? It's not "elitist" to expect even non-subs to play by the forum rules and not spam. Since you have nothing to say about the subject of the thread, move on.
"Registration is completely free!" Right on the main page.
Payment is not mandatory. It's optional. Unless you want more than 6 games at a time, or to participate in clans. Then you pay to play. But I have no need for them. In fact, I only have 3 games running right now. You can pay if that's what you want to do. And believe it or not, I don't care wha ...[text shortened]... ard for an elitist like you, though, isn't it? A true conservative dressed in liberal clothing.
Originally posted by lioyankwell, actually only one spammer ... no1m ...
So typical. Such a hypocrite. You don't like what someone says, so you try and silence them. I see you in your true light, marauder. A few may be fooled, but even that number is diminishing. You are more like McCarthy then any of our founding fathers.
And it's 3 spammers. "Get a life" adds nothing to the thread and only detracts from its original purpose. Remember to give yourself a ban as well.
1 edit
Originally posted by lioyanki think his new home was not as hospitable as RHP ... wonder how long it took him to call them all morons 🙂 ...
By the way no1, when are you going to address us "losers" in the Clans' Forum. You know, that thread that you started back in September? Where you say you're leaving us. What happened to that? Golf didn't suit you? Nothing better to do than waste your time on nitwits and "f****** idiots/morons"? Guess not.... loser.
Originally posted by no1marauderit was not off-topic at all, nor were the other related posts, the only thing off topic is this quit-spamming subthread that YOU started ...
Learn how to read, loser. A "Touched by an Angel" synopsis was completely off-topic and superfluous by a clown who constantly posts rubbish like that in threads but thinks STANG should get banned for "spamming". But at least he can come up with $30 a year.
You can say whatever you want; start a thread entitled "I Hate no1Marauder" and writ ...[text shortened]... r pathetic dislike of me. Play by the rules even though you don't pay for the privilege, mooch.
1 edit
Originally posted by zeeblebotThe topic is which system is preferable: A Lay Jury or a panel of jurists (please read thread title). You have now made 14 posts in this thread and not a single one has addressed that subject. So stop SPAMMING!
it was not off-topic at all, nor were the other related posts, the only thing off topic is this quit-spamming subthread that YOU started ...