Posts: 1,406
Threads: 25
Joined: Jun 2013
What kind of criminal wouldn't be charged because they hadn't made a statement to the Police yet?
Why a Not Guilty one, obviously. If the Police had enough evidence to bring charges, They surely would have. Then the accused has an opportunity to answer. Then if there's enough evidence, it goes to trial. Then if the accused is found guilty, they pay the consequence.
Otherwise;
Any public Forum speculation is just that. Tiffany has made some enemies here; I don't know who is going to win this tight race for District 5, but I'm pretty sure most of the voting public hasn't drunk from the poison well. We'll see soon.
As I said, the police have to deal with her attorney. I don't see any reason for them to jump to such measures. She is probably just waiting for the election.
I've heard the police are rather busy right now .... [  ]
Kathy
quote:
Originally posted by snorkle
What kind of criminal wouldn't be charged because they hadn't made a statement to the Police yet?
Why a Not Guilty one, obviously. If the Police had enough evidence to bring charges, They surely would have. Then the accused has an opportunity to answer. Then if there's enough evidence, it goes to trial. Then if the accused is found guilty, they pay the consequence.
Wrong.
Kathy
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
As I said, the police have to deal with her attorney. I don't see any reason for them to jump to such measures. She is probably just waiting for the election.
I've heard the police are rather busy right now
Kathy
So, "probably" is your supposition here.
And as such, she is just automatically guilty.
And dealing with an attorney on any legal matter of a potential charge of violation of the law would result is expedient charges being filed or outright dismissal.
But no, not good enough for you.
"Probably" and "supposition" are your points.
"when the rule of law is bastardized to allow anyone to offer up rumors, innuendo, opinions, outright lies and intentional deception to replace the rule of law, well, then when do the "witch trials" begin?"
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
quote:
Originally posted by snorkle
What kind of criminal wouldn't be charged because they hadn't made a statement to the Police yet?
Why a Not Guilty one, obviously. If the Police had enough evidence to bring charges, They surely would have. Then the accused has an opportunity to answer. Then if there's enough evidence, it goes to trial. Then if the accused is found guilty, they pay the consequence.
Wrong.
Kathy
What is possibly wrong with the rules of how "law" works?
Just because you don't agree with the law, does not make your point valid.
"WRONG" is simply an incorrect answer when the law is quoted verbatim to you.
"when the rule of law is bastardized to allow anyone to offer up rumors, innuendo, opinions, outright lies and intentional deception to replace the rule of law, well, then when do the "witch trials" begin?"
Posts: 4,937
Threads: 83
Joined: Feb 2009
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
quote:
Originally posted by snorkle
What kind of criminal wouldn't be charged because they hadn't made a statement to the Police yet?
Why a Not Guilty one, obviously. If the Police had enough evidence to bring charges, They surely would have. Then the accused has an opportunity to answer. Then if there's enough evidence, it goes to trial. Then if the accused is found guilty, they pay the consequence.
Wrong.
Kathy
KathyH
JUDGE,JURY,EXECUTIONER !!!
quote:
Originally posted by joshkaiquote:
Originally posted by snorkle
What kind of criminal wouldn't be charged because they hadn't made a statement to the Police yet?
Why a Not Guilty one, obviously. If the Police had enough evidence to bring charges, They surely would have. Then the accused has an opportunity to answer. Then if there's enough evidence, it goes to trial. Then if the accused is found guilty, they pay the consequence.
What is possibly wrong with the rules of how "law" works?
Just because you don't agree with the law, does not make your point valid.
"WRONG" is simply an incorrect answer when the law is quoted verbatim to you.
Part of snorkle's post was right but part was incorrect, so in its sum -- wrong. He did not quote any actual law. I do agree with the law. That is why I think she should be charged, because of affidavits she signed under penalty of law that furnished false information.
Honestly, I certainly don't know if she will be charged or not. The process is not certain, and the office here only charges cases they are certain they can win, and that requires a lot. Plenty of guilty people are not charged here because of that.
However, what is certain is that the investigation is currently active and that she has retained defense counsel, Steve Strauss.
I am curious whether Rob ever got a response from the police or the Trib.
I have heard that Stephen's Media is waiting for the lava to do something and for the election to be over, but they have plans for more coverage.
ed to fix formatting
Kathy
Obie's response is reliable as a compass. As long as he is in disagreement with me, I feel pretty good about my position.[ ]
Kathy
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
Part of snorkle's post was right but part was incorrect, so in it's sum -- wrong.
Kathy
Considering his post could have been used for a synopsis of "Introduction to Civic Law 101" what is wrong with his post?
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
Honestly, I certainly don't know if she will be charged or not. The process is not certain, and the office here only charges cases they are certain they can win, and that requires a lot. Plenty of guilty people are not charged here because of that.
However, what is certain is that the investigation is currently active and that she has retained defense counsel, Steve Strauss.
Kathy
So, in the meantime, you just wish to spread rumors, innuendo, opinion, outright lies and intentional deception to the truth of the matter.
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
I am curious whether Rob ever got a response from the police or the Trib.
Kathy
I believe Rob said he would post a response if and when he gets one. In as much as some may not agree with Rob on various opinions, I believe he would post a response if and when he gets one.
quote:
Originally posted by KathyH
I have heard that Stephen's Media is waiting for the lava to do something and for the election to be over, but they have plans for more coverage.
Kathy
Again, "I have heard"
Your trademark
"when the rule of law is bastardized to allow anyone to offer up rumors, innuendo, opinions, outright lies and intentional deception to replace the rule of law, well, then when do the "witch trials" begin?"
Posts: 72
Threads: 2
Joined: Jan 2014
Agreed!
If anything, let the investigation run it course, foolish people only speculate and waste their energy on the unknown, especially when it is out of there hands and not in their control! No need to show your hand, and place the blame on others if it is not resolved as you expect it to be!
|
