SethInMI

Members
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Content

    1,880

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    7

  • Feedback

    0%

  • Country

    United States

Everything posted by SethInMI

  1. SethInMI
    cookie monster
  2. SethInMI
    Masterpiece. The Pathétique
  3. SethInMI
    Mayor McCheese
  4. SethInMI
    artful dodger
  5. SethInMI
    fade
  6. SethInMI
    ping
  7. SethInMI
    under the sea
  8. SethInMI
    ...and justice for all
  9. SethInMI
    Pledge
  10. SethInMI
    Kraft Dinner
  11. SethInMI
    Toil
  12. SethInMI
    chuck
  13. SethInMI
    Olive (our adopted cat was prv called Mouse)
  14. SethInMI
    Glad you got me sorted. eta: my "can't" was in the vein of "you can't do that without adverse consequences". Which reminded me of Kristen's(?) sig line one of my favorites: "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"
  15. SethInMI
    From the "adverse-influences" section of cps.gov.uk (crown prosecution service website) Regarding Section 34 of the 1994 act (the provision mentioned below): "The Court of Appeal approved the statement of the trial judge in Brizzalari [2004] EWCA Crim 310, that the mischief at which the provision was primarily directed was the positive defence following a "no comment" interview and/or the "ambush defence"." I think my use of "can't" is throwing you off. I think "may be held/used against you" is more acceptable.
  16. SethInMI
    yeah I see what you are after. You can rely on a fact, but the jury is allowed to consider, to your detriment, the fact that you earlier refused to provide such facts. My comment on ambushing the prosecution was taken from this link, which to me reads that the caution you refer to is referencing the "ambush defense" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_silence_in_England_and_Wales#Facts_later_relied_upon The US courts have no such provision. If you don't want to answer police questions, it may not mean you are guilty, just that you don't like police and want to make their life harder.
  17. SethInMI
    ha. yeah. Season 3 seemed to have a few more credulity stretching moments that the prior seasons, but we enjoyed it. As this post demonstrates, to me the differences in procedure bring a fresh feel and some fascination as a long time police procedural watcher (Law and Order NYPD Blue etc)
  18. SethInMI
    this is very true. the fact that the only reason someone would not testify is if they would incriminate themselves does make it hard for a jury to disregard. In practice it sounds like the two systems end up similar, but it was odd to read the fact that British juries are specifically allowed to consider silence as one factor in a guilty verdict.
  19. SethInMI
    I read there is a "ambush the prosecution rule" that says you can't refuse to answer questions and then provide an answer in your defense at trial. I guess there is some room between interview and trial for working that all out?
  20. SethInMI
    I've watched "Line of Duty" enough to get curious about the differences between the "Miranda Warning" / 5th amendment rights differences between the UK and US. A brief summary for people who like that sort of thing (and correct me pls brits). if you refuse to answer a question during a police interview: USA: it does not impact your trial at all. UK: you cannot later supply an answer at trial (in other words you have to stick to your silence defense) if you refuse to answer a question in a trial USA: a criminal jury cannot take that as an indication of your guilt UK: a jury can draw an "adverse inference" and regard your silence as one indication of guilt (there must be other corroborating evidence) Also of interest was in the UK, without a constitutional backing, there is more flexibility to modify the law. In 1994 the "adverse inference" bit was added to the law, which in the US is hard to imagine without a constitutional amendment...
  21. SethInMI
    Krazy
  22. SethInMI
    its a little funny it feels like Branson and Bezos are like kids playing with toys in a bathtub while Elon is building a yacht next door. Once that billionaire Japanese dude makes his circuit of the Moon the world will forget about the other two.
  23. SethInMI
  24. SethInMI
    It's a start though. Every once in a while something happens that makes me feel I am actually living in the future, and turning space into a tourist destination is one of them. Maybe the cost will come down enough that I could ride one day, I got about 20-30 years or so to wait.
  25. SethInMI
    water