rich white guy rapes his son and 3 year old daugther... gets probation.

24

Comments

  • KingFreeman
    KingFreeman Members Posts: 13,731 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Judge must've been paid off.
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    Because they play a part in the ? . I'm sure the lawyer has a moral compass that says 'This man ? an infant and a toddler. He needs to be in prison.'. But that trust fund money made him turn against that and make a case for leniency.
  • Stew
    Stew Members, Moderators, Writer Posts: 52,234 Regulator
    Where the uncles at. They shouldve beat this ? with a bat by now.
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    s.free wrote: »
    Judge must've been paid off.

    Doubt it.
  • 7figz
    7figz Members Posts: 15,294 ✭✭✭✭✭
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    Because they play a part in the ? . I'm sure the lawyer has a moral compass that says 'This man ? an infant and a toddler. He needs to be in prison.'. But that trust fund money made him turn against that and make a case for leniency.

    All lawyers are doing is presenting the best defense they can for their client, they don't have any power at all. What would the ? be like if there weren't lawyers ?

    You wouldn't want a MF to defend you if you were going to court ?

    Judgement, in the court system, is supposed to be delegated - to only the judges and jury. If you had every other person along the pipeline passing their own moral judgement on the accused - the system would be even less effective.

    Picture the cop saying "Hey I think you're a ? , so I'll just ...." or the bailiff, or C.O., court reporter, etc....

    The lawyer is supposed to use the law (and evidence), not his morals, to do his job.

  • Black_Privilege
    Black_Privilege Members Posts: 72
    It's his kids let him raise them how he wants
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    Because they play a part in the ? . I'm sure the lawyer has a moral compass that says 'This man ? an infant and a toddler. He needs to be in prison.'. But that trust fund money made him turn against that and make a case for leniency.

    All lawyers are doing is presenting the best defense they can for their client, they don't have any power at all. What would the ? be like if there weren't lawyers ?

    You wouldn't want a MF to defend you if you were going to court ?

    Judgement, in the court system, is supposed to be delegated - to only the judges and jury. If you had every other person along the pipeline passing their own moral judgement on the accused - the system would be even less effective.

    Picture the cop saying "Hey I think you're a ? , so I'll just ...." or the bailiff, or C.O., court reporter, etc....

    The lawyer is supposed to use the law (and evidence), not his morals, to do his job.

    But I didn't say that there should be lawyers, B. My point is that lawyers should have a moral compass and follow that moral compass, regardless of the payday, career advancement, etc.

    I know it's not like that and will never be like that, so this ain't not fairy tell ? , but that's how it SHOULD be. That's all. *shrugs*
  • SneakDZA
    SneakDZA Members Posts: 11,223 ✭✭✭✭✭
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    There is absolutely nothing vague about this...
    Richards was initially indicted on two counts of second-degree child ? , felonies that translate to a 10-year mandatory jail sentence per count. He was released on $60,000 bail while awaiting his charges.

    As mryounggun pointed out... it's past tense.
  • 7figz
    7figz Members Posts: 15,294 ✭✭✭✭✭
    @SneakDZA‌ - so what do you understand from that quote ?

    Was he convicted or not ?
  • cainvelasquez
    cainvelasquez Members Posts: 1,156 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Murica, baby! Ya'll idiots keep waving that good old stars and stripes. But me, i'm good in Europe.
  • Dupac
    Dupac Members, Writer Posts: 68,365 ✭✭✭✭✭
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    you ever see the movie devil's advocate?

    sometimes you gotta just say no
  • Melqart
    Melqart Guests, Members Posts: 3,679 ✭✭✭✭✭
    well.. i guess this is what happens when you're the descendant of an industrial "illuminati" family. sad.
  • 7figz
    7figz Members Posts: 15,294 ✭✭✭✭✭
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    you ever see the movie devil's advocate?

    sometimes you gotta just say no

    I hate to argue this point in a thread as despicable as this (based on those charges), but I think blaming lawyers is displaced.

    Judges stay ? up and ? up laws keep getting made, BUT we don't blame those people - instead we point fingers at lawyers for taking a case ?

    Just seems like people falling for the smokescreen.
  • mryounggun
    mryounggun Members Posts: 13,451 ✭✭✭✭✭
    7figz wrote: »
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    you ever see the movie devil's advocate?

    sometimes you gotta just say no

    I hate to argue this point in a thread as despicable as this (based on those charges), but I think blaming lawyers is displaced.

    Judges stay ? up and ? up laws keep getting made, BUT we don't blame those people - instead we point fingers at lawyers for taking a case ?

    Just seems like people falling for the smokescreen.

    No one said that judges are not to blame. They are MORE to blame. But that doesn't absolve lawyers.
  • 5th Letter
    5th Letter Members, Moderators, Writer Posts: 37,068 Regulator
    They play by a different set of rules than everybody else.
  • Dupac
    Dupac Members, Writer Posts: 68,365 ✭✭✭✭✭
    7figz wrote: »
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    you ever see the movie devil's advocate?

    sometimes you gotta just say no

    I hate to argue this point in a thread as despicable as this (based on those charges), but I think blaming lawyers is displaced.

    Judges stay ? up and ? up laws keep getting made, BUT we don't blame those people - instead we point fingers at lawyers for taking a case ?

    Just seems like people falling for the smokescreen.

    lawyers and judges are in the same boat....

    i get the fact that they have a job to do, and i get that for some people it's about the money....

    but in some cases they should make a judgement call to the greater good....

    this is one of those cases
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Vybz kartel is still in prison
  • Copper
    Copper Members Posts: 49,532 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Superior Court judge ruled he "will not fare well" in prison.

    never stopped them from locking up ?
  • 7figz
    7figz Members Posts: 15,294 ✭✭✭✭✭
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    you ever see the movie devil's advocate?

    sometimes you gotta just say no

    I hate to argue this point in a thread as despicable as this (based on those charges), but I think blaming lawyers is displaced.

    Judges stay ? up and ? up laws keep getting made, BUT we don't blame those people - instead we point fingers at lawyers for taking a case ?

    Just seems like people falling for the smokescreen.

    lawyers and judges are in the same boat....

    i get the fact that they have a job to do, and i get that for some people it's about the money....

    but in some cases they should make a judgement call to the greater good....

    this is one of those cases

    So the greater good would be for this man to not have any defense in court ?
  • zombie
    zombie Members Posts: 13,450 ✭✭✭✭✭
    Lawyers are like samurai they serve their lord their honor is in that service
  • Dupac
    Dupac Members, Writer Posts: 68,365 ✭✭✭✭✭
    7figz wrote: »
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    you ever see the movie devil's advocate?

    sometimes you gotta just say no

    I hate to argue this point in a thread as despicable as this (based on those charges), but I think blaming lawyers is displaced.

    Judges stay ? up and ? up laws keep getting made, BUT we don't blame those people - instead we point fingers at lawyers for taking a case ?

    Just seems like people falling for the smokescreen.

    lawyers and judges are in the same boat....

    i get the fact that they have a job to do, and i get that for some people it's about the money....

    but in some cases they should make a judgement call to the greater good....

    this is one of those cases

    So the greater good would be for this man to not have any defense in court ?

    it wouldn't be no damn probation.......

    dude needa be in prision
  • _Lefty
    _Lefty Members Posts: 6,564 ✭✭✭✭✭
    I'll keep my sanity if it comes out that she got cashed out. Even then, money before justice for children? Man, I don't know. What kind of world we live in.
  • 7figz
    7figz Members Posts: 15,294 ✭✭✭✭✭
    edited March 2014
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    DWO wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    mryounggun wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    Wow, this ? is sick.

    But why does the article say "convicted" then says he is "awaiting charges" ?

    Who's to say these aren't accusations just to build up the divorce case ?


    The 'awaiting charges' is in reference to past tense ? . He was INITIALLY charged with XYZ and was released on bail while awaiting different charges. At this point, he got those charges and has been found guilty. Is the way I read it anyway.

    You might be right but that ? is vague at best.
    DWO wrote: »
    lawyers can really be the devil sometimes....

    this another reason why people don't respect the system

    I don't really understand why people fault lawyers. They don't make the decisions, they're job is to put up the best case for their client.

    you ever see the movie devil's advocate?

    sometimes you gotta just say no

    I hate to argue this point in a thread as despicable as this (based on those charges), but I think blaming lawyers is displaced.

    Judges stay ? up and ? up laws keep getting made, BUT we don't blame those people - instead we point fingers at lawyers for taking a case ?

    Just seems like people falling for the smokescreen.

    lawyers and judges are in the same boat....

    i get the fact that they have a job to do, and i get that for some people it's about the money....

    but in some cases they should make a judgement call to the greater good....

    this is one of those cases

    So the greater good would be for this man to not have any defense in court ?

    it wouldn't be no damn probation.......

    dude needa be in prision

    The judge is the one that decides the sentence, not the lawyer.

    I just don't see the culpability of the lawyer in this instance.

    Blame the dude (if he did it).

    Blame the judge for not punishing him for it.

    But how do you blame the lawyer ? I don't get that ? .

    I don't know about y'all MFs but if I got accused of some ? , I don't give a ? how heinous it sounds, I want a lawyer to prove I didn't do that ? .
  • SneakDZA
    SneakDZA Members Posts: 11,223 ✭✭✭✭✭
    7figz wrote: »
    @SneakDZA‌ - so what do you understand from that quote ?

    Was he convicted or not ?

    lmao - you gots to be trollin.

    Dude was initially indicted on 2 counts of second-degree child ? and released on bail white awaiting formal charges. Due to a plea he was eventually charged with 4th degree ? and pleaded guilty and had his sentence suspended to probation.

    If this is tough to grasp don't ever watch 12 Monkeys - that ? might make your head explode.
  • 7figz
    7figz Members Posts: 15,294 ✭✭✭✭✭
    SneakDZA wrote: »
    7figz wrote: »
    @SneakDZA‌ - so what do you understand from that quote ?

    Was he convicted or not ?

    lmao - you gots to be trollin.

    Dude was initially indicted on 2 counts of second-degree child ? and released on bail white awaiting formal charges. Due to a plea he was eventually charged with 4th degree ? and pleaded guilty and had his sentence suspended to probation.

    If this is tough to grasp don't ever watch 12 Monkeys - that ? might make your head explode.

    Nah, wasn't trolling. My reading comprehension game must be off. I missed the part about "pleading guilty".

    That ? seems to only be in the comments of the article you linked to.

    ? , even the quote you posted didn't say he pleaded guilty, just that his was "indicted" and "awaiting charges".

    I'm good now, dude's a sicko like I already said.

    Now I'm just trying to understand why ? fault lawyers over this ? instead of the judge who ultimately delivered the sentence.