*The average sentence for a person convicted of rape. The average sentence for every person who commits rape is very low, as is the average sentence for most crimes
*The average sentence for a person convicted of rape. The average sentence for every person who commits rape is very low, as is the average sentence for most crimes
They’re not. The average rape sentence is 11 years, but the media usually talks about the outliers, because it’s not newsworthy (and doesn’t promote outrage) to say “convicted criminal gets the usual sentence.” The other thing to remember is that criminal sentences increase DRAMATICALLY when you have prior felonies.…
That’s why the case is weak. The murder charge has all those problems plus issues of proximate cause. That’s why the murder charge was weaker
I think there’s pretty much a 0% chance the sexual assault stuff can be admitted in this trial, but is it possible that the other fraud claims and his many lies during this campaign could be admitted under Rule 608(b) on cross-examination if Trump’s legal team decides to put him on the stand?
Alleging that she said she wanted to leave and the guy refused would constitute a deprivation of liberty if (as you pointed out) locking her out there was unlawful. Obviously, the prosecutor would have had to argue that, and would lose if the judge still decided that locking her out there was lawful.
I see nothing in the deprivation of liberty statute that says how long someone needs to be detained. If the prosecutor had been able to prove that he locked her out on the balcony, it doesn’t matter how long she was out there before she tried to escape
From the guardian article: Wright repeatedly screamed “No, just let me go home” but Tostee told her, “I would but you have been a bad girl.” This is after he locked her on the balcony.
The prosecution alleges that she told him she wanted to go home, and he refused to unlock the balcony door. That’s detaining her against her will
The article says the incident took place in Gold Coast, which is in Queensland, not New South Wales. The crime I was thinking of is called Deprivation of Liberty in the Queensland criminal code (chapter 33 section 355).
Did they only bring a murder charge? Locking her on the balcony sounds like an easy kidnapping case
Anybody here know a lot about Australian criminal law? Does Australia have a felony-murder rule under which this could have been prosecuted?
Complaints about the election being rigged are going to lead to violence and tear the country apart in the same way they did way back in 2000.
It seems likely to me he’ll spend the rest of his life locked up one way or another. He’ll stay locked up until he’s found competent to stand trial (if that ever happens). In theory, the state might eventually give up the criminal prosecution, at which point they’ll have him civillay committed to a mental hospital,…
He faces a maximum of six months if convicted (trial starts after the election). I’d still prefer to vote him out of office and avoid the national embarrassment/political crisis that would result from having our sheriff sent to prison during his term.
They could/should, but most voters don’t show up to vote in down ballot elections (even if the down a ballot election is as big a deal as Maricopa County Sheriff)
Just had a sobering thought: there’s a bunch of republicans in Maricopa County who hate Joe Arpaio AND Trump. But they probably aren’t willing to cast a ballot for Clinton either, so they might not vote at all. We have a chance to vote out Sheriff Joe but GODDAMMIT TRUMP RUINS EVERYTHING
I don’t think they’re blocking traffic. They’re not on the road, and I assume that the cop is standing on an open pathway into the NAACP building.
On what content-neutral grounds could the permit have been denied?
It’s a charter school, which I think is private for First Amendment purposes? I’m actually not sure. Even if the school were public, this is still probably expulsion-worthy, as a high school has much more authority to discipline students for speech than the government otherwise can
The difference is that there is a law that says you can’t sue firearms manufacturers or sellers just because a gun that is lawfully sold is used to commit a crime (you can sue if the gun is defective, or if the seller should have known the gun would be used to commit a crime).