Governor Whitmer Kidnapping Plot

[RickeyM]

Originally Posted by Oerets

No, I personally just do not believe in entrapment for a defense.

The ...."but someone talked me into it" BS....


Could someone really talk you into a bank robbery? A rape, child abuse....

This was a the worst a murder attempt.

So were talked easily into committing it.... GEZZZ!

So that is my point.

To me it seems like entrapment is a useful excuse when you did whatever it is they said you did and you have no other defense. When they've got you dead to rights what have you got to lose. Sorta' like throw it against the wall and see if it sticks.

[donquixote99]

You can't say they hadn't committed any crimes. Trials don't necessarily indicate that. The presumption of innocence is an institutional feature, not a finding. The jury didn't not find that it was proven they committed any crime, whether they did or not.

[BigElCat]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

You can't say they hadn't committed any crimes. Trials don't necessarily indicate that. The presumption of innocence is an institutional feature, not a finding. The jury didn't not find that it was proven they committed any crime, whether they did or not.

Yes sir, and I was being sort of sarcastic or sardonic when I said "no faith in our judicial system".

That would be me, that has that. I'm not sure I can explain my current world view accurately.

IMHO, the world is ruled by Satan. All true power comes from the devil (except when God intervenes). Worldly justice is nothing more than 'power-brokerage' of evil power. This is why power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

I was a Mike Pence fan until he pulled that stunt with the conservative "Christians". Give him money, give him votes, pray with him for the aborted souls. Combine church and state. Gag me with spoon.

[donquixote99]

"Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat." Donald Regan

Never ascribe to unseen powers what is adequately explained by human malice. DQ, after Napoleon

[BigElCat]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

DQ, after Napoleon

Explain 'DQ, after Napoleon' if you would please.

[donquixote99]

Originally Posted by BigElCat

Explain 'DQ, after Napoleon' if you would please.

I was riffing on this quote attributed to Napoleon: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

In fact, I just researched and find the quote dates to 1980, and comes from computer programmer Robert J. Hanlon. Napoleon not involved. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2016/12/30/not-malice/

[BigElCat]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

I was riffing on this quote attributed to Napoleon: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity."

In fact, I just researched and find the quote dates to 1980, and comes from computer programmer Robert J. Hanlon. Napoleon not involved. https://quoteinvestigator.com/2016/12/30/not-malice/

Ah so. It's DQ, after Hanlon then.

Just an update; five out of seven defendants have been acquitted using the entrapment defense. (heh...I thought so).

Two defendants have yet to go to trial; one is an admitted FBI informant in the case, the other one looks like a descendant of the retard that burn down the Reichstag.

[donquixote99]

Hey Cat, welcome back.

[BigElCat]

Originally Posted by donquixote99

Hey Cat, welcome back.

Thank you. (Whatever you're talking about).

[BigElCat]

I forgot to reference my statements.

The entrapment defense was used by their lawyers (if I can find the pre-trial news).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_ZHCxYxuF0Y


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f-rZT-w8emo

It was 13 charged, charges were dropped for some,

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDMWtg88fGM

At least two were re-tried after hung juries.

My blurp about the retard and Reichstag was my own spin.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZzpOsfhtmIk&t=1s

My bad, these two were found quilty. One is an FBI informant (who most likely won't serve his whole sentence).