What's your opinion of the Duke lacrosse team scandal?

Discussion in '2006 Archive' started by stanleyg, Oct 20, 2006.

?

Who has the right to sign an affidavit with the DA?

Poll closed Jan 18, 2007.
  1. [A] Plaintiff

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. [B] Defendant

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. [C] Both A & B

    1 vote(s)
    100.0%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. stanleyg

    stanleyg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    The 2006 Duke lacrosse team scandal demonstrates the hazard of our criminal justice system. Let's leave race out of the picture. No matter the outcome of the criminal trial, the lives of each young man and/or their parents will be forever shattered by the word of the alleged victim to accuse them of the infamous charge of rape.

    Each Defendant is entitled to the same equality of treatment as the Plaintiff. The DA has granted the Plaintiff's Civil Rights to petition our government for a redress of grievances. Yet, the DA has deprived each Defendant's Civil Rights of due process to petition our government for a redress of grievances against the Plaintiff for filing a false complaint.

    If the DA had followed due process to carryout our First Amendment, then each Defendant would have benefited from a fair and impartial legal process. Our First Amendment grants each civilian his or her Civil Right to petition our government for a redress of grievances by virtue of signing an affidavit of complaint to the DA.

    Consider the parents of each of the 3 Defendants. How do you think they may feel that the Plaintiff has exercised her Civil Rights to petition our government for a redress of her grievances, yet their sons can't exercise their Civil Rights? Let me tell you if you don't already know. They feel betrayed by the DA and are miserable suffering the nightmare of a lifetime.

    One day it may be your dear son or grandson standing trial. Do you wish for his Civil Rights to be deprived to petition our government for a redress of grievances, same as the Duke lacrosse team players?

    Think about it and let me hear your opinion. It may save the career of three young men.
     
  2. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    If the DNA tests don't match up, there's no way they can get a conviction.

    Seems an outrage to contine the process under those circumstances.
     
  3. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
    The merits of the case aside, I'm not sure why you want to make this into a First Amendment question; the amendment preserves the right to petition for redress of grievances, but it doesn't demand that the petitions be considered or followed.

    The 14th Amendment does require due process, but that does not force a prosecutor to accept an affadavit; that is a matter of prosecutorial discretion, which is almost unlimited.

    The defendants are entitled to hearings, bail, trial by jury, the right to confront their accusers. Beyond that, the matter is left to voters and -- if malicious prosecution can be proved -- to a civil action.

    As to the merits of the case -- it seems to have an odd odor. We shall see what we shall see.
     
  4. gb93433

    gb93433
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 26, 2003
    Messages:
    15,496
    Likes Received:
    6
    What I found interesting is the idea that the other stripper claimed she saw nothing and the accuser appeared to have something wrong that made her impaired.
     
  5. Hope of Glory

    Hope of Glory
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 29, 2005
    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    0
    From everything I've seen, they're not guilty of what they are charged, and the woman is trying to get something for nothing.

    However, if the players had not been doing something that was immoral, they wouldn't even be able to be charged, would they?
     
  6. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    Neither, two wrongs never make a right.

    I think they all need to find Jesus while there is time. I heard one young man say his life was ruined because of this mess. I hate to tell him, his life was ruined when they planned this kind of night and the mess is just a side effect. No different than the girls that get drunk and wind up on a GGW video.

    Man had many choices in life, Jesus is the only permanent solution.

    Sorry to thread crap but I don't usualy post in Wiki's I mean Stanley's threads.
     
  7. Joseph_Botwinick

    Joseph_Botwinick
    Expand Collapse
    <img src=/532.jpg>Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2000
    Messages:
    17,527
    Likes Received:
    0
    Here is my opinion: It was a miscarriage of justice and a political stunt perpetrated by a DA looking to get re-elected.

    Joseph Botwinick
     
  8. stanleyg

    stanleyg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Under civil law it is the duty of the grand jury to view evidence to decide probable cause for an indictiment. The affidavit is the first piece of evidence that initiates due process. Each affiant signs his or her affidavit under the penalty of perjury. Civil law mandates that a Notary Public witness the signature of each affiant. Each signature serves as a signature bond (i.e. surety bond).

    Criminal Court is bound by civil law to acknowlege each signature bond as legal tender to burden the cost of a criminal trial. If the judge or jury renders a final verdict that the affiant signed an affidavit to make a false complaint, then the Judge is bound to revoke the signature bond and charge the Court cost back to the affiant.

    Prosecutory discretion is a concocted legal term. Any lawful American civilian (i.e. of legal age or sound mind etc.) owns the Civil Right to act as an affiant. As a civil servant, the DA doesn't own the legal power to intimidate (i.e. discriminate or oppress) any civilian from exercising his or her constitutional or Civil Rights.

    Defendants, who respond to the complaints of the affiants, have been misconstrued by the Judiciary as personal property of the affiants and are ordered to pay bailment (i.e. bail bond or chattel bond) which is relegated for slavery.

    Dred Scott v. Sandford 1857 had ruled that property can't bring suit in court (i.e. act as an affiant to petition the court for a redress of grievances). Irene Sandford Emerson could sue Dred Scott, but he couldn't sue her back.

    The DA is handling the three young men from DuKe as if each were Dred Scott and treating the stripper Crystal Mangum as if she were Irene Emerson.
     
    #8 stanleyg, Oct 21, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 21, 2006
  9. stanleyg

    stanleyg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    I presume that Crystal dosen't report the money she earned on her tax returns. She was acting both immorally and illegally. Plus, she initiated the actions that led to the immoral conduct of the young men. Sex is a temptation that victimizes many males, young or old, in our society. Boys are going to be boys. You should know that.
     
  10. stanleyg

    stanleyg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    Whether or not the DNA matches, these three young men will be traumatized for the rest of their lives. The financial burden will devestate their parents.

    The latter could have been averted had the DA followed due process to grant each young man to act as affiant against Crystal. She would have dropped her charges and the Court would have dismissed her case.
     
  11. mcdirector

    mcdirector
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    8,292
    Likes Received:
    10
    I wholeheartedly agree.

    I wholeheartedly agree with this too.
     
    #11 mcdirector, Oct 21, 2006
    Last edited by a moderator: Oct 21, 2006
  12. The Galatian

    The Galatian
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2001
    Messages:
    9,687
    Likes Received:
    0
    The lifestyle they chose does have some consequences, yes.
     
  13. Not_hard_to_find

    Not_hard_to_find
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 1, 2006
    Messages:
    713
    Likes Received:
    0

    1Co 10:13 There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it.

    What do you mean by "Boys are going to be boys"? The boy I married, the boy I raised and the boys my daughters raised were never found in situations that vaguely resembled this one, so I have no point of reference.
     
  14. mcdirector

    mcdirector
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 11, 2005
    Messages:
    8,292
    Likes Received:
    10
    They hired her to perform. They were wrong. She was wrong. It sounds like you are using this "Boys will be boys" strategy as an excuse for their sin. She is responsible for her sin. Each of the young men is responsible for his sin.
     
  15. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree, immoral conduct has no innocent participatant's. Wrong is the word I use to describe everyone involved.
     
  16. rsr

    rsr
    Expand Collapse
    <b> 7,000 posts club</b>
    Administrator

    Joined:
    Dec 11, 2001
    Messages:
    10,073
    Likes Received:
    101
    Stanley said:
    This is all notional and is not standard criminal law procedure. Grand juries are the province of the prosecutor and are not obligated to consider other evidence. (Some grand juries called to investigative, not prosecutorial, purposes may in fact operate differerently, but that is not the case here.)

    Concocted or not, it is real. Prosecutors exercise discretion every day in every jurisdiction.

    This is gobblydegook. The defendants may defend themselves in criminal court and may file in civil court if they believe the prosecutor's actions rise to the level of a tort.
     
  17. rbell

    rbell
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jan 16, 2006
    Messages:
    11,103
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well howdy doody! Then it's fine for these guys to fondle and grope these strippers. Ya'll just breed like rabbits...boys will be boys, you know...

    This case stinks...they're probably not guilty of rape.

    But they are guilty before God for immorality. And stanley, you should be ashamed of yourself for insinuating that this behavior is somehow acceptable.
     
  18. dispen4ever

    dispen4ever
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 10, 2006
    Messages:
    264
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well-written posts, Stanley. Happy to see that!
     
  19. LeBuick

    LeBuick
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 8, 2006
    Messages:
    11,537
    Likes Received:
    0
    :confused: :confused: Not sure I've ever seen those two words used in the same sentence before...
     
  20. stanleyg

    stanleyg
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jul 15, 2006
    Messages:
    70
    Likes Received:
    0
    I am never ashamed to help save anyone. If you recall Jesus saved the wife from being stoned, who had committed adultry. He didn't argue whether she had sinned or not. Rather, he posed the issue of who was worthy to judge her.

    You point your finger at the boys for their sin. What about yours?
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

Loading...