Andy9o8 2 #1 April 12, 2013 I suppose I could have put this in any one of a few forums, but I want people to have the most leeway to speak their minds, so I put it here. I'm not saying Go or Don't Go; just keep this information in mind when making the decision. P.S.- Don't just read the article; the readers' comments following the text are quite enlightening, too. http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/12/world/middleeast/united-arab-emirates-laws-ensnare-a-doctor.html?hp&_r=0 Excerpt: QuoteEmirates’ Laws Trap a Doctor Just Passing Through By LYDIA POLGREEN Published: April 11, 2013 [NY Times] JOHANNESBURG — For Dr. Cyril Karabus, it was a routine job, albeit in an exotic location. For six weeks in 2002, he filled in for another doctor in Abu Dhabi, lured like many other foreign professionals by the big paychecks that doctors, bankers, lawyers and architects can earn in the United Arab Emirates and other Persian Gulf nations. A decade later, while Dr. Karabus was passing through Dubai on his way home to South Africa after attending his son’s wedding in Canada, officials abruptly arrested him, calling him a murderer and hauling him away from his stunned wife. For more than seven months, Dr. Karabus, 78, a pediatric oncologist, has been trapped in the United Arab Emirates, fighting charges of manslaughter and forgery linked to his treatment of a 3-year-old patient with a severe form of leukemia who had died under his care. Unbeknown to him, Dr. Karabus had been convicted in absentia in 2003 and sentenced to three years in prison, a stark example of foreign professionals who are drawn to the gulf only to get caught up in Emirati justice. He would be tried again, the authorities told him, according to his daughter, Dr. Sarah Karabus, this time facing the charges in person. Even after a medical committee concluded that he had done nothing wrong and a judge acquitted him of all charges on March 21, Dr. Karabus remains in the emirates, unable to fly home because the prosecution has decided to appeal the judge’s decision. Foreigners have long faced unexpected legal trouble in the emirates, where the legal system often differs considerably from what they expect at home. [continued....] Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #2 April 12, 2013 QuoteThe judge acquitted Dr. Karabus of the charges. An official in the prosecution’s office said the nine-member panel of medical experts had absolved Dr. Karabus because there was not enough evidence to support the charges. Still, Dr. Karabus’s ordeal is not over. On March 28, the prosecution said it would appeal the decision. Er, what? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,587 #3 April 12, 2013 Different rules for different countries. In some, the prosecution gets to keep trying. Wendy P.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skydiver30960 0 #4 April 12, 2013 QuoteQuoteThe judge acquitted Dr. Karabus of the charges. An official in the prosecution’s office said the nine-member panel of medical experts had absolved Dr. Karabus because there was not enough evidence to support the charges. Still, Dr. Karabus’s ordeal is not over. On March 28, the prosecution said it would appeal the decision. Er, what? The gist, as I take it, is that the prosecution is admitting they lost the case, but has right to appeal. AND, it seems that (probably due to his being a foreign national or just an element of UAE law) that the MD is being held pending appeal rather than released on bond. Elvisio "big money, big risks" Rodriguez Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #5 April 12, 2013 QuoteQuoteThe judge acquitted Dr. Karabus of the charges. An official in the prosecution’s office said the nine-member panel of medical experts had absolved Dr. Karabus because there was not enough evidence to support the charges. Still, Dr. Karabus’s ordeal is not over. On March 28, the prosecution said it would appeal the decision. Er, what? Well, I've only excerpted part of the article; per the link, it goes on for some time after that sentence. Re: how it is that the prosecution can appeal, that occurs in many countries outside the US. Yep, it's double jeopardy. Aren't you glad you have the US Constitution? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,111 #6 April 12, 2013 How is that unique to Dubai? The same thing can happen here. Leaving the country does not defend one against a criminal charge incurred while here, and such cases can be prosecuted years later. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
NWFlyer 2 #7 April 12, 2013 Quote Re: how it is that the prosecution can appeal, that occurs in many countries outside the US. Yep, it's double jeopardy. Aren't you glad you have the US Constitution? Me personally? Yes. But judging by some of the "death penalty only costs so much because we coddle scumbags with multiple appeals" crowd on here, I'd guess not everyone feels the same. "There is only one basic human right, the right to do as you damn well please. And with it comes the only basic human duty, the duty to take the consequences." -P.J. O'Rourke Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #8 April 12, 2013 QuoteHow is that unique to Dubai? The same thing can happen here. Leaving the country does not defend one against a criminal charge incurred while here, and such cases can be prosecuted years later. I think the gist and upshot of the article (as well as the readers' comments) are a good deal more expansive than that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #9 April 12, 2013 Quote Quote Re: how it is that the prosecution can appeal, that occurs in many countries outside the US. Yep, it's double jeopardy. Aren't you glad you have the US Constitution? Me personally? Yes. But judging by some of the "death penalty only costs so much because we coddle scumbags with multiple appeals" crowd on here, I'd guess not everyone feels the same. Perhaps not; although I'd predict that agreement among Americans on the prohibition of double jeopardy is probably a good deal broader than that for the death penalty. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
champu 1 #10 April 12, 2013 QuoteDifferent rules for different countries. In some, the prosecution gets to keep trying. Wendy P. Thanks. I gathered that, I was just trying to be a little light-hearted in pointing out what I see as the biggest concern* in the story. First they tried him in absentia and convicted him. Then he shows up and they go, "okay okay, you weren't here, we're going to do it again." and then he's acquitted (whatever that translates to in arabic, something might be lost...) and they say, "crud, we were hoping for 'guilty'... okay okay, best of three?" /edited to add: * I say this is the "biggest concern" not being a Jew, others' milage may vary. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #11 April 12, 2013 Note the reader commentary on what might happen to you if you're a foreigner in an auto accident in a Gulf country where someone gets hurt or killed. Why couldn't that happen if you're a tourist in Dubai, too (or, for that matter, a foreigner working at Dubai's DZ or wind tunnel), and you're in an accident, or you're on a jump where someone is badly hurt or killed, or you're the tunnel coach for some bigwig's kid who gets injured? Who you gonna call? (Cuz it won't be F. Lee Bailey...) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,146 #12 April 12, 2013 Quote Quote Quote Re: how it is that the prosecution can appeal, that occurs in many countries outside the US. Yep, it's double jeopardy. Aren't you glad you have the US Constitution? Me personally? Yes. But judging by some of the "death penalty only costs so much because we coddle scumbags with multiple appeals" crowd on here, I'd guess not everyone feels the same. Perhaps not; although I'd predict that agreement among Americans on the prohibition of double jeopardy is probably a good deal broader than that for the death penalty. Let's see, so never in US history has someone been acquitted of a murder and then been retried for the same event on the grounds of violating the civil rights of the victim.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #13 April 12, 2013 Quote Quote Quote Quote Re: how it is that the prosecution can appeal, that occurs in many countries outside the US. Yep, it's double jeopardy. Aren't you glad you have the US Constitution? Me personally? Yes. But judging by some of the "death penalty only costs so much because we coddle scumbags with multiple appeals" crowd on here, I'd guess not everyone feels the same. Perhaps not; although I'd predict that agreement among Americans on the prohibition of double jeopardy is probably a good deal broader than that for the death penalty. Let's see, so never in US history has someone been acquitted of a murder and then been retried for the same event on the grounds of violating the civil rights of the victim. Ah, good point. I'll be the first to say that I've always been troubled by that, on double jeopardy grounds. What John's talking about, folks, is people who've been acquitted on, for example, state charges of assault or murder, only to be prosecuted (and convicted) on Federal charges of violating the (same) victim's civil rights by, for example, deliberately injuring them or depriving them of their life. Federal courts have generally upheld those convictions on appeal (challenges on double jeopardy grounds) on the grounds that the offenses are different because the requisite factual elements of the offense are different. I have more than a little trouble with the intellectual honesty (and, thus, the Constitutionality) of that. John, you get a star in the book for class participation. ETA: Still, I'd much rather be in a country where double jeopardy generally is formally prohibited than in one where it is permitted. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jakee 1,594 #14 April 12, 2013 QuoteHow is that unique to Dubai? The same thing can happen here. Leaving the country does not defend one against a criminal charge incurred while here, and such cases can be prosecuted years later. Well, by the sound of it, he was convicted in absentia, aquitted in person and he's still being held pending a possible third trial on the same charges.Do you want to have an ideagasm? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
BillyVance 35 #15 April 12, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Let's see, so never in US history has someone been acquitted of a murder and then been retried for the same event on the grounds of violating the civil rights of the victim. Ah, good point. I'll be the first to say that I've always been troubled by that, on double jeopardy grounds. What John's talking about, folks, is people who've been acquitted on, for example, state charges of assault or murder, only to be prosecuted (and convicted) on Federal charges of violating the (same) victim's civil rights by, for example, deliberately injuring them or depriving them of their life. I'm trying to remember the circumstances but IIRC, for example - O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murder. Then the family of his deceased ex-wife successfully sued him in civil court and won a judgement for wrongful death? Isn't that a form of double jeopardy?"Mediocre people don't like high achievers, and high achievers don't like mediocre people." - SIX TIME National Champion coach Nick Saban Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #16 April 12, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Let's see, so never in US history has someone been acquitted of a murder and then been retried for the same event on the grounds of violating the civil rights of the victim. Ah, good point. I'll be the first to say that I've always been troubled by that, on double jeopardy grounds. What John's talking about, folks, is people who've been acquitted on, for example, state charges of assault or murder, only to be prosecuted (and convicted) on Federal charges of violating the (same) victim's civil rights by, for example, deliberately injuring them or depriving them of their life. I'm trying to remember the circumstances but IIRC, for example - O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murder. Then the family of his deceased ex-wife successfully sued him in civil court and won a judgement for wrongful death? Isn't that a form of double jeopardy? We're getting off topic, but.... no. The constitutional prohibition on double jeopardy only applies to criminal prosecution, not civil lawsuits. Plus, civil lawsuits use a lower standard of proof than criminal cases do, so an acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude a civil lawsuit arising out of the same facts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #17 April 12, 2013 Quote Plus, civil lawsuits use a lower standard of proof than criminal cases do, so an acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude a civil lawsuit arising out of the same facts. A civil case can 'arise' for pretty much anything but the idea that the verdict can be in complete opposition just sucks and makes no sense at all... The defense should be able to come right in and provide the verdict from the criminal case and have the civil case dismissed immediately (my assumption is that the civil case is based completely upon the opposite verdict of the criminal case - not some peripheral thing or unrelated items) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #18 April 12, 2013 QuoteQuote Plus, civil lawsuits use a lower standard of proof than criminal cases do, so an acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude a civil lawsuit arising out of the same facts. A civil case can 'arise' for pretty much anything but the idea that the verdict can be in complete opposition just sucks and makes no sense at all... The defense should be able to come right in and provide the verdict from the criminal case and have the civil case dismissed immediately (my assumption is that the civil case is based completely upon the opposite verdict of the criminal case - not some peripheral thing or unrelated items) The reason why a criminal acquittal does not preclude a civil lawsuit is because it only means the government has failed to prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" - that is actually a very high standard of proof. "Percentages" are never (officially) used to define that term, but on a practical level, depending on the individual juror, I think most lawyers would probably agree it's somewhere in the roughly 91% to 99% certainty that the defendant is guilty. So an acquittal simply means the govt hasn't met that high standard; it is not a judicial declaration of "the defendant didn't do it". A civil case, on the other hand, only requires proof "to a preponderance of the evidence", which means any slightest amount greater than 50% certainty of the civil defendant's liability, culpability, etc. Which, thus, can still be met in a civil trial, even with a criminal acquittal having previously been handed down. Put another way, if a jury was, say, 70% certain that a defendant had committed the accused wrongful act, that would NOT be enough to convict him criminally -and so he'd be acquitted of the criminal charge - but it WOULD be enough to find him civilly liable, and so he still could be found liable for the civil claim. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #19 April 12, 2013 Now back to Dubai - know your risks before you plan that trip. Read the article, and the readers' comments - what do you think? How do you assess the risk versus reward? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #20 April 12, 2013 Quote Note the reader commentary on what might happen to you if you're a foreigner in an auto accident in a Gulf country where someone gets hurt or killed. Why couldn't that happen if you're a tourist in Dubai, too (or, for that matter, a foreigner working at Dubai's DZ or wind tunnel), and you're in an accident, or you're on a jump where someone is badly hurt or killed, or you're the tunnel coach for some bigwig's kid who gets injured? Who you gonna call? (Cuz it won't be F. Lee Bailey...) Only visit Dubai once. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bignugget 0 #21 April 12, 2013 QuoteNote the reader commentary on what might happen to you if you're a foreigner in an auto accident in a Gulf country where someone gets hurt or killed. Why couldn't that happen if you're a tourist in Dubai, too (or, for that matter, a foreigner working at Dubai's DZ or wind tunnel), and you're in an accident, or you're on a jump where someone is badly hurt or killed, or you're the tunnel coach for some bigwig's kid who gets injured? Who you gonna call? (Cuz it won't be F. Lee Bailey...) Id call you. You sold me, nice marketing scheme. Sneaky ass lawyers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rifleman 70 #22 April 12, 2013 And don't visit their embassy or get on their national airline ever again Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #23 April 13, 2013 i get that, I think it's stupid. IMO - you're guilty, or you're not guilty, ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #24 May 2, 2013 Here's another Dubai horror story: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/28/world/meast/uae-uk-abuse-claims/index.html?hpt=imi_c2 Verdict near for imprisoned Britons allegedly tortured in UAE By Leone Lakhani and Mark Morgenstein updated 8:39 PM EDT, Sun April 28, 2013 (CNN) -- Three British citizens held on drug charges in the United Arab Emirates since July could face a verdict as early as Monday. Grant Cameron, Karl Williams, and Suneet Jeerh, all in their mid-20s, have pleaded not guilty to charges of consumption and possession of the synthetic cannabis product known as "spice." The consumption charge holds a minimum sentence of four years. Possession with intent to distribute could lead to 15 years in prison. And if they are charged with trafficking, they could face the death penalty, their lawyers say. But the case has earned notoriety for a different reason. The men allege that police beat them and subjected them to electric shocks after their July 10 arrest, according to Reprieve, a UK-based organization that provides legal support to prisoners. Williams and Cameron were visiting Dubai on vacation. Jeerh had moved to Dubai from Britain about six weeks earlier in hopes of getting a job in media, said Kate Higham, a lawyer for Reprieve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterblaster72 0 #25 May 2, 2013 Interesting coincidence -- I was watching a documentary yesterday on the exploitation of foreign workers constructing buildings in Dubai. It amounts to modern-day slavery. Panorama - Slumdogs and Millionaires (this, after the ABC News piece from 2007 where the King's spokesperson acknowledged there are problems and said he intended to do something about them: Dubai's Dirty Little Secret) Also, I read this in BBC News today. Yikes. 'Towering inferno' fears for Gulf's high-rise blocks No way in hell would I give Dubai a penny of my business. Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing × Sign In Sign Up Forums Dropzones Classifieds Gear Indoor Articles Photos Videos Calendar Stolen Fatalities Subscriptions Leaderboard Activity Back Activity All Activity My Activity Streams Unread Content Content I Started
Andy9o8 2 #16 April 12, 2013 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuote Let's see, so never in US history has someone been acquitted of a murder and then been retried for the same event on the grounds of violating the civil rights of the victim. Ah, good point. I'll be the first to say that I've always been troubled by that, on double jeopardy grounds. What John's talking about, folks, is people who've been acquitted on, for example, state charges of assault or murder, only to be prosecuted (and convicted) on Federal charges of violating the (same) victim's civil rights by, for example, deliberately injuring them or depriving them of their life. I'm trying to remember the circumstances but IIRC, for example - O.J. Simpson was acquitted of murder. Then the family of his deceased ex-wife successfully sued him in civil court and won a judgement for wrongful death? Isn't that a form of double jeopardy? We're getting off topic, but.... no. The constitutional prohibition on double jeopardy only applies to criminal prosecution, not civil lawsuits. Plus, civil lawsuits use a lower standard of proof than criminal cases do, so an acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude a civil lawsuit arising out of the same facts. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #17 April 12, 2013 Quote Plus, civil lawsuits use a lower standard of proof than criminal cases do, so an acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude a civil lawsuit arising out of the same facts. A civil case can 'arise' for pretty much anything but the idea that the verdict can be in complete opposition just sucks and makes no sense at all... The defense should be able to come right in and provide the verdict from the criminal case and have the civil case dismissed immediately (my assumption is that the civil case is based completely upon the opposite verdict of the criminal case - not some peripheral thing or unrelated items) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #18 April 12, 2013 QuoteQuote Plus, civil lawsuits use a lower standard of proof than criminal cases do, so an acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude a civil lawsuit arising out of the same facts. A civil case can 'arise' for pretty much anything but the idea that the verdict can be in complete opposition just sucks and makes no sense at all... The defense should be able to come right in and provide the verdict from the criminal case and have the civil case dismissed immediately (my assumption is that the civil case is based completely upon the opposite verdict of the criminal case - not some peripheral thing or unrelated items) The reason why a criminal acquittal does not preclude a civil lawsuit is because it only means the government has failed to prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" - that is actually a very high standard of proof. "Percentages" are never (officially) used to define that term, but on a practical level, depending on the individual juror, I think most lawyers would probably agree it's somewhere in the roughly 91% to 99% certainty that the defendant is guilty. So an acquittal simply means the govt hasn't met that high standard; it is not a judicial declaration of "the defendant didn't do it". A civil case, on the other hand, only requires proof "to a preponderance of the evidence", which means any slightest amount greater than 50% certainty of the civil defendant's liability, culpability, etc. Which, thus, can still be met in a civil trial, even with a criminal acquittal having previously been handed down. Put another way, if a jury was, say, 70% certain that a defendant had committed the accused wrongful act, that would NOT be enough to convict him criminally -and so he'd be acquitted of the criminal charge - but it WOULD be enough to find him civilly liable, and so he still could be found liable for the civil claim. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #19 April 12, 2013 Now back to Dubai - know your risks before you plan that trip. Read the article, and the readers' comments - what do you think? How do you assess the risk versus reward? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bolas 5 #20 April 12, 2013 Quote Note the reader commentary on what might happen to you if you're a foreigner in an auto accident in a Gulf country where someone gets hurt or killed. Why couldn't that happen if you're a tourist in Dubai, too (or, for that matter, a foreigner working at Dubai's DZ or wind tunnel), and you're in an accident, or you're on a jump where someone is badly hurt or killed, or you're the tunnel coach for some bigwig's kid who gets injured? Who you gonna call? (Cuz it won't be F. Lee Bailey...) Only visit Dubai once. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Bignugget 0 #21 April 12, 2013 QuoteNote the reader commentary on what might happen to you if you're a foreigner in an auto accident in a Gulf country where someone gets hurt or killed. Why couldn't that happen if you're a tourist in Dubai, too (or, for that matter, a foreigner working at Dubai's DZ or wind tunnel), and you're in an accident, or you're on a jump where someone is badly hurt or killed, or you're the tunnel coach for some bigwig's kid who gets injured? Who you gonna call? (Cuz it won't be F. Lee Bailey...) Id call you. You sold me, nice marketing scheme. Sneaky ass lawyers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rifleman 70 #22 April 12, 2013 And don't visit their embassy or get on their national airline ever again Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rehmwa 2 #23 April 13, 2013 i get that, I think it's stupid. IMO - you're guilty, or you're not guilty, ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 2 #24 May 2, 2013 Here's another Dubai horror story: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/28/world/meast/uae-uk-abuse-claims/index.html?hpt=imi_c2 Verdict near for imprisoned Britons allegedly tortured in UAE By Leone Lakhani and Mark Morgenstein updated 8:39 PM EDT, Sun April 28, 2013 (CNN) -- Three British citizens held on drug charges in the United Arab Emirates since July could face a verdict as early as Monday. Grant Cameron, Karl Williams, and Suneet Jeerh, all in their mid-20s, have pleaded not guilty to charges of consumption and possession of the synthetic cannabis product known as "spice." The consumption charge holds a minimum sentence of four years. Possession with intent to distribute could lead to 15 years in prison. And if they are charged with trafficking, they could face the death penalty, their lawyers say. But the case has earned notoriety for a different reason. The men allege that police beat them and subjected them to electric shocks after their July 10 arrest, according to Reprieve, a UK-based organization that provides legal support to prisoners. Williams and Cameron were visiting Dubai on vacation. Jeerh had moved to Dubai from Britain about six weeks earlier in hopes of getting a job in media, said Kate Higham, a lawyer for Reprieve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites masterblaster72 0 #25 May 2, 2013 Interesting coincidence -- I was watching a documentary yesterday on the exploitation of foreign workers constructing buildings in Dubai. It amounts to modern-day slavery. Panorama - Slumdogs and Millionaires (this, after the ABC News piece from 2007 where the King's spokesperson acknowledged there are problems and said he intended to do something about them: Dubai's Dirty Little Secret) Also, I read this in BBC News today. Yikes. 'Towering inferno' fears for Gulf's high-rise blocks No way in hell would I give Dubai a penny of my business. Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 1 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0 Go To Topic Listing
rehmwa 2 #17 April 12, 2013 Quote Plus, civil lawsuits use a lower standard of proof than criminal cases do, so an acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude a civil lawsuit arising out of the same facts. A civil case can 'arise' for pretty much anything but the idea that the verdict can be in complete opposition just sucks and makes no sense at all... The defense should be able to come right in and provide the verdict from the criminal case and have the civil case dismissed immediately (my assumption is that the civil case is based completely upon the opposite verdict of the criminal case - not some peripheral thing or unrelated items) ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #18 April 12, 2013 QuoteQuote Plus, civil lawsuits use a lower standard of proof than criminal cases do, so an acquittal in a criminal case does not preclude a civil lawsuit arising out of the same facts. A civil case can 'arise' for pretty much anything but the idea that the verdict can be in complete opposition just sucks and makes no sense at all... The defense should be able to come right in and provide the verdict from the criminal case and have the civil case dismissed immediately (my assumption is that the civil case is based completely upon the opposite verdict of the criminal case - not some peripheral thing or unrelated items) The reason why a criminal acquittal does not preclude a civil lawsuit is because it only means the government has failed to prove guilt "beyond a reasonable doubt" - that is actually a very high standard of proof. "Percentages" are never (officially) used to define that term, but on a practical level, depending on the individual juror, I think most lawyers would probably agree it's somewhere in the roughly 91% to 99% certainty that the defendant is guilty. So an acquittal simply means the govt hasn't met that high standard; it is not a judicial declaration of "the defendant didn't do it". A civil case, on the other hand, only requires proof "to a preponderance of the evidence", which means any slightest amount greater than 50% certainty of the civil defendant's liability, culpability, etc. Which, thus, can still be met in a civil trial, even with a criminal acquittal having previously been handed down. Put another way, if a jury was, say, 70% certain that a defendant had committed the accused wrongful act, that would NOT be enough to convict him criminally -and so he'd be acquitted of the criminal charge - but it WOULD be enough to find him civilly liable, and so he still could be found liable for the civil claim. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #19 April 12, 2013 Now back to Dubai - know your risks before you plan that trip. Read the article, and the readers' comments - what do you think? How do you assess the risk versus reward? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #20 April 12, 2013 Quote Note the reader commentary on what might happen to you if you're a foreigner in an auto accident in a Gulf country where someone gets hurt or killed. Why couldn't that happen if you're a tourist in Dubai, too (or, for that matter, a foreigner working at Dubai's DZ or wind tunnel), and you're in an accident, or you're on a jump where someone is badly hurt or killed, or you're the tunnel coach for some bigwig's kid who gets injured? Who you gonna call? (Cuz it won't be F. Lee Bailey...) Only visit Dubai once. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bignugget 0 #21 April 12, 2013 QuoteNote the reader commentary on what might happen to you if you're a foreigner in an auto accident in a Gulf country where someone gets hurt or killed. Why couldn't that happen if you're a tourist in Dubai, too (or, for that matter, a foreigner working at Dubai's DZ or wind tunnel), and you're in an accident, or you're on a jump where someone is badly hurt or killed, or you're the tunnel coach for some bigwig's kid who gets injured? Who you gonna call? (Cuz it won't be F. Lee Bailey...) Id call you. You sold me, nice marketing scheme. Sneaky ass lawyers. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rifleman 70 #22 April 12, 2013 And don't visit their embassy or get on their national airline ever again Atheism is a Non-Prophet Organisation Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #23 April 13, 2013 i get that, I think it's stupid. IMO - you're guilty, or you're not guilty, ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 2 #24 May 2, 2013 Here's another Dubai horror story: http://www.cnn.com/2013/04/28/world/meast/uae-uk-abuse-claims/index.html?hpt=imi_c2 Verdict near for imprisoned Britons allegedly tortured in UAE By Leone Lakhani and Mark Morgenstein updated 8:39 PM EDT, Sun April 28, 2013 (CNN) -- Three British citizens held on drug charges in the United Arab Emirates since July could face a verdict as early as Monday. Grant Cameron, Karl Williams, and Suneet Jeerh, all in their mid-20s, have pleaded not guilty to charges of consumption and possession of the synthetic cannabis product known as "spice." The consumption charge holds a minimum sentence of four years. Possession with intent to distribute could lead to 15 years in prison. And if they are charged with trafficking, they could face the death penalty, their lawyers say. But the case has earned notoriety for a different reason. The men allege that police beat them and subjected them to electric shocks after their July 10 arrest, according to Reprieve, a UK-based organization that provides legal support to prisoners. Williams and Cameron were visiting Dubai on vacation. Jeerh had moved to Dubai from Britain about six weeks earlier in hopes of getting a job in media, said Kate Higham, a lawyer for Reprieve. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
masterblaster72 0 #25 May 2, 2013 Interesting coincidence -- I was watching a documentary yesterday on the exploitation of foreign workers constructing buildings in Dubai. It amounts to modern-day slavery. Panorama - Slumdogs and Millionaires (this, after the ABC News piece from 2007 where the King's spokesperson acknowledged there are problems and said he intended to do something about them: Dubai's Dirty Little Secret) Also, I read this in BBC News today. Yikes. 'Towering inferno' fears for Gulf's high-rise blocks No way in hell would I give Dubai a penny of my business. Be humble, ask questions, listen, learn, follow the golden rule, talk when necessary, and know when to shut the fuck up. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
