United We Stand - uwsboard.com

Virginia Tech fans discussing politics, religion, and football
It is currently Mon Nov 20, 2017 8:55 am

Time zone: America/New_York


UWS DWF UWS Lunch UWS Sports UWS Help TSL Football TSL Lounge TSL MBB Acronyms Top 25 Topics


Forum rules


Please be civil.



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ] 
Author Message
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:18 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:58 pm
Posts: 18843
Location: Fake Dossier Writing Center
Party: Draintheswamp
Seriously though, if the facts are as suggested, people should have been able to understand what he meant.

Quote:
The suspect told police ‘give me a lawyer dog.’ The court says he wasn’t asking for a lawyer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/tru ... -a-lawyer/

_________________
"Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants."
- Gen. Omar Bradley


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:19 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:10 pm
Posts: 30525
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Party: After 10
Duplicate

_________________
You losers lost, take off the vagina suit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:21 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 10:50 pm
Posts: 2332
Location: Virginia Beach, VA
Alma Mater: Norfolk Academy to Virginia Tech
Party: I reject your party
No effing way that holds up under appeal. You don't speak with commas. If a suspect says, "Give me a lawyer, dog," the interview is over and he has invoked his right to counsel.

_________________
I don't care if you're a Democrat or a Republican... if you refuse to consider alternatives to the two parties, you support the Status Quo and you are a major part of the problem.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:23 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 3:10 pm
Posts: 30525
Location: Plastic Flotilla:Location Classified
Party: After 10
Hokie CPA wrote:
No effing way that holds up under appeal. You don't speak with commas. If a suspect says, "Give me a lawyer, dog," the interview is over and he has invoked his right to counsel.
I have it under "play stupid games, win stupid prizes".

Dog should be first word anyway for it to interpreted as the police are. I agree he wins, I'm saying he put himself in this situation by being a moron.

_________________
You losers lost, take off the vagina suit.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:38 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 9531
Location: New York, NY
USN_Hokie wrote:
Seriously though, if the facts are as suggested, people should have been able to understand what he meant.

Quote:
The suspect told police ‘give me a lawyer dog.’ The court says he wasn’t asking for a lawyer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/tru ... -a-lawyer/


Louisiana.

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:41 am 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 7:20 pm
Posts: 5392
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Republican
awesome guy wrote:
Duplicate


Duplicate post dog

Attachment:
Post-dog-e1382258323232.jpg
Post-dog-e1382258323232.jpg [ 28.92 KiB | Viewed 274 times ]

_________________
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:42 am 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 9531
Location: New York, NY
BigDave wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
Duplicate


Duplicate post dog

Attachment:
Post-dog-e1382258323232.jpg


Good work.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:45 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:58 pm
Posts: 18843
Location: Fake Dossier Writing Center
Party: Draintheswamp
awesome guy wrote:
Duplicate


Link? I completely missed it

_________________
"Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants."
- Gen. Omar Bradley


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 12:55 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 9531
Location: New York, NY
USN_Hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
Duplicate


Link? I completely missed it


It's there if you look. In a (not) shocking development, cwtcr refers to our bill of rights as a "weak technicality."

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 1:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:57 pm
Posts: 8238
ip_law-hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
Seriously though, if the facts are as suggested, people should have been able to understand what he meant.

Quote:
The suspect told police ‘give me a lawyer dog.’ The court says he wasn’t asking for a lawyer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/tru ... -a-lawyer/


Louisiana.


Yep. Louisiana and proper English do not really go together, for anyone.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:51 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 9531
Location: New York, NY
Neither does Louisiana and constitutional rights go together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:20 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:25 am
Posts: 8445
ip_law-hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
Duplicate


Link? I completely missed it


It's there if you look. In a (not) shocking development, cwtcr refers to our bill of rights as a "weak technicality."


Again for the slow, the issue was wether the guys confession was valid in court due to the lawyer dawg issue, the court case can still go on without his confession, just makes it inadmissable, does not stop the whole case against him unless they have nothing else and decide to drop the charges. But again, my lament was letting a guy go that confesses to assaulting a minor for sex... if you re for that then why even discuss it with you. I know if I did not do anything I would never confess to it, would you?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 5:32 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 9531
Location: New York, NY
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
Duplicate


Link? I completely missed it


It's there if you look. In a (not) shocking development, cwtcr refers to our bill of rights as a "weak technicality."


Again for the slow, the issue was wether the guys confession was valid in court due to the lawyer dawg issue, the court case can still go on without his confession, just makes it inadmissable, does not stop the whole case against him unless they have nothing else and decide to drop the charges. But again, my lament was letting a guy go that confesses to assaulting a minor for sex... if you re for that then why even discuss it with you. I know if I did not do anything I would never confess to it, would you?


First, the appeal court will allow whatever statements were made after the defendant asked for a lawyer, dawg. That is what the article was about.

I don't know what the statements were, but your narrative does not fit the facts that have been published.

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon Nov 06, 2017 11:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:58 pm
Posts: 18843
Location: Fake Dossier Writing Center
Party: Draintheswamp
ip_law-hokie wrote:
Neither does Louisiana and constitutional rights go together.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Napoleonic code for the win...

_________________
"Ours is a world of nuclear giants and ethical infants."
- Gen. Omar Bradley


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 11:35 am 
Offline

Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 4:57 pm
Posts: 8238
[/youtube]
USN_Hokie wrote:
Seriously though, if the facts are as suggested, people should have been able to understand what he meant.

Quote:
The suspect told police ‘give me a lawyer dog.’ The court says he wasn’t asking for a lawyer.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/tru ... -a-lawyer/





Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:17 pm 
Offline

Joined: Thu Aug 22, 2013 9:25 am
Posts: 8445
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
Duplicate


Link? I completely missed it


It's there if you look. In a (not) shocking development, cwtcr refers to our bill of rights as a "weak technicality."


Again for the slow, the issue was wether the guys confession was valid in court due to the lawyer dawg issue, the court case can still go on without his confession, just makes it inadmissable, does not stop the whole case against him unless they have nothing else and decide to drop the charges. But again, my lament was letting a guy go that confesses to assaulting a minor for sex... if you re for that then why even discuss it with you. I know if I did not do anything I would never confess to it, would you?


First, the appeal court will allow whatever statements were made after the defendant asked for a lawyer, dawg. That is what the article was about.

I don't know what the statements were, but your narrative does not fit the facts that have been published.


correct, you were bitching about the courts ruling, my point was even if they disallow whatever he said that does not mean the guy is not going to trial is all. But again, if he is confessing to assaulting a minor in a sexual way I am not really worried if he asked for a lawyer or lawyer dawg. Would you confess to that if you did not do it, I sure would not. Now if he was tortured and then confessed I would have a problem with that confession, but he was not. But it would be great if he gets off and moves in next to you I bet, great neighbor for you


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:21 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 9531
Location: New York, NY
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
cwtcr hokie wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
USN_Hokie wrote:
awesome guy wrote:
Duplicate


Link? I completely missed it


It's there if you look. In a (not) shocking development, cwtcr refers to our bill of rights as a "weak technicality."


Again for the slow, the issue was wether the guys confession was valid in court due to the lawyer dawg issue, the court case can still go on without his confession, just makes it inadmissable, does not stop the whole case against him unless they have nothing else and decide to drop the charges. But again, my lament was letting a guy go that confesses to assaulting a minor for sex... if you re for that then why even discuss it with you. I know if I did not do anything I would never confess to it, would you?


First, the appeal court will allow whatever statements were made after the defendant asked for a lawyer, dawg. That is what the article was about.

I don't know what the statements were, but your narrative does not fit the facts that have been published.


correct, you were bitching about the courts ruling, my point was even if they disallow whatever he said that does not mean the guy is not going to trial is all. But again, if he is confessing to assaulting a minor in a sexual way I am not really worried if he asked for a lawyer or lawyer dawg. Would you confess to that if you did not do it, I sure would not. Now if he was tortured and then confessed I would have a problem with that confession, but he was not. But it would be great if he gets off and moves in next to you I bet, great neighbor for you


You really shouldn’t be calling people slow.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:30 pm
Posts: 9316
No way this stands


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 19, 2013 7:20 pm
Posts: 5392
Alma Mater: Virginia Tech
Party: Republican
RiverguyVT wrote:
No way this stands


It's going to be overturned dog

Attachment:
images.jpg
images.jpg [ 7.28 KiB | Viewed 106 times ]

_________________
Posted from my Commodore 64 using Tapatalk


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 12:54 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 9531
Location: New York, NY
RiverguyVT wrote:
No way this stands


It was the highest court in La that issued the ruling to allow the evidence to be entered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:30 pm
Posts: 9316
ip_law-hokie wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
No way this stands


It was the highest court in La that issued the ruling to allow the evidence to be entered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yowza. Did not read the article, just scanned these posts.
:o


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Tue Nov 07, 2017 4:17 pm 
Online
User avatar

Joined: Wed Aug 21, 2013 5:20 pm
Posts: 9531
Location: New York, NY
RiverguyVT wrote:
ip_law-hokie wrote:
RiverguyVT wrote:
No way this stands


It was the highest court in La that issued the ruling to allow the evidence to be entered.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Yowza. Did not read the article, just scanned these posts.
:o


Louisiana.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

_________________
"Leadership: Whatever happens, you're responsible. If it doesn't happen, you're responsible." - DT(2013)

"We're not going to own it. I'm not going to own it. I can tell you the Republicans are not going to own it." - DT(2017)


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 22 posts ] 

Time zone: America/New_York


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group Color scheme by ColorizeIt!