Falsehoods unchallenged only fester and grow.


All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 181 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next   
Author Message
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:01 am
Posts: 18609
Location: Planet Earth (most the time)
Occupation: I'm not at liberty to say. In other words, I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.
I think the folks who have to balance the budgets and yet provide police would like to speak to you.

_________________
Yes We Can! ~ Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:35 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
mimi wrote:
I think the folks who have to balance the budgets and yet provide police would like to speak to you.


I would be happy to, as I represent law enforcement in my practice and deal with police on a regular basis. I will simply tell them the same thing any other lawyer will tell them about their 1st Amendment obligations.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:39 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am
Posts: 5522
Occupation: retired
Jury is coming back in. Court is being called back into order.

Jury sided with the prosecutors. I guess that means no permit will be issued. Now what. Jones gets to sue like the Westboro folks do. That will cost the city as well.

_________________
Mark Twain
Quote:
Research shows that 87.666 per cent of all statistics are made up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
Per twitter feeds I'm looking at: a jury has ruled that Pastor Jones and his protest is likely to breach the peace.

Translation: officials in Dearborn have read no U.S. Supreme Court cases that were issued after approximately 1842 and are about to get a judicial smackdown, probably in federal court.

EDIT: To be fair, this is all the prosecution's doing. Let's see what the trial judge does with this "verdict."

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:50 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm
Posts: 9411
mimi wrote:
I think the folks who have to balance the budgets and yet provide police would like to speak to you.


So, if an anti-Semitic community found worship services at a synagogue so offensive that they were willing to commit acts of terrorism against it, and this necessitated expending money to protect them, we should shut down the synagogue? Allowing protected rights to be shut down by the illegal acts of third parties is not what this country is about. If Jones is breaking the law, he can and should be shut down. He should not be shut down because of illegal threats from third parties.

_________________
L—d! said my mother, what is all this story about? — A Cock and a Bull, said Yorick — And one of the best of its kind I ever heard. -- Sterne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:51 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Posts: 13611
Location: New England
Occupation: Professor of Sociology
Facebook users have also concluded that the jury decided in favor of Wayne County. A leak? Did they realize that Jones had no argument for being allowed to protest in that place?

_________________
"Someone should tell Mrs. Reagan that young people -- not even young people on drugs -- are not the ones responsible for the major problems besetting the world!" John Irving, A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel, p. 370.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm
Posts: 9411
poutine wrote:
Per twitter feeds I'm looking at: a jury has ruled that Pastor Jones and his protest is likely to breach the peace.


I'm rather perplexed at why a jury is deciding a case about injunctive relief, which is a matter of equity and therefore usually decided by a judge and not a jury.

_________________
L—d! said my mother, what is all this story about? — A Cock and a Bull, said Yorick — And one of the best of its kind I ever heard. -- Sterne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:55 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
esseff44 wrote:
Jury is coming back in. Court is being called back into order.

Jury sided with the prosecutors. I guess that means no permit will be issued. Now what. Jones gets to sue like the Westboro folks do. That will cost the city as well.


Depends on how he chooses to enforce his legal rights at this point. Also, we only know what the jury has done so far. A judge still needs to digest the verdict and then decide what, if anything, to do about it. The judge is the gate-keeper for any citizen's constitutional rights, not a jury.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:56 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2009 1:01 am
Posts: 18609
Location: Planet Earth (most the time)
Occupation: I'm not at liberty to say. In other words, I'd tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.
A Legal Lohengrin wrote:
mimi wrote:
I think the folks who have to balance the budgets and yet provide police would like to speak to you.


So, if an anti-Semitic community found worship services at a synagogue so offensive that they were willing to commit acts of terrorism against it, and this necessitated expending money to protect them, we should shut down the synagogue? Allowing protected rights to be shut down by the illegal acts of third parties is not what this country is about. If Jones is breaking the law, he can and should be shut down. He should not be shut down because of illegal threats from third parties.


I don't think this is the same thing.

I don't think a guy going on a roadshow is the same thing at all as what you describe here. Each and every town Jones takes his show to will have to pay for security.

Heck, it looks like he gets better security than most politicians or judges.

_________________
Yes We Can! ~ Thomas Jefferson


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 6:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
mimi wrote:
A Legal Lohengrin wrote:
mimi wrote:
I think the folks who have to balance the budgets and yet provide police would like to speak to you.


So, if an anti-Semitic community found worship services at a synagogue so offensive that they were willing to commit acts of terrorism against it, and this necessitated expending money to protect them, we should shut down the synagogue? Allowing protected rights to be shut down by the illegal acts of third parties is not what this country is about. If Jones is breaking the law, he can and should be shut down. He should not be shut down because of illegal threats from third parties.


I don't think this is the same thing.

I don't think a guy going on a roadshow is the same thing at all as what you describe here. Each and every town Jones takes his show to will have to pay for security.

Heck, it looks like he gets better security than most politicians or judges.


I'm still not understanding the rationale you want to adopt to charge people for the privilege of protesting. Apparently it costs $100,000 to protest a mosque in Dearborn, Michigan. I guess if I want to protest at the Trump Tower in Manhattan it will cost me $3.6 billion.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm
Posts: 9411
mimi wrote:
I don't think this is the same thing.

I don't think a guy going on a roadshow is the same thing at all as what you describe here. Each and every town Jones takes his show to will have to pay for security.

Heck, it looks like he gets better security than most politicians or judges.


It isn't the same thing. One is a religious community peaceably engaging in worship. The other is an evil scumbag deliberately uttering vile speech with the intent to harm others. The First Amendment does not distinguish between these, though, because while my opinion of Jones's conduct is that it is reprehensible, the feelings of anti-Semites are similar, that the speech or conduct they want to stop, however peaceable it is, is reprehensible to them, according to their subjective sentiments.

To discriminate against speech because its content is offensive is to say that freedom of speech is basically determined by the opinion of the audience. That is to say, there is no freedom of speech, merely freedom of inoffensive speech to which nobody objects.

_________________
L—d! said my mother, what is all this story about? — A Cock and a Bull, said Yorick — And one of the best of its kind I ever heard. -- Sterne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:04 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
Look, hundreds of Americans from all different religions gathered in Dearborn today to protest the two idiot bigots from Florida:

http://www.wxyz.com/dpp/news/region/way ... aith-rally

And guess what? They weren't hauled into court first, forced to defend themselves, and hand over a check for $100,000 to do so. People from all over the world can see right into the heartland of America and see regular Americans, hundreds of them, protesting in favor of peace and tolerance. All without government interference. Imagine that.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am
Posts: 5522
Occupation: retired
If I heard the judge correctly, the two are off to jail until they post a one-dollar bail. I didn't hear the first part of his ruling.

_________________
Mark Twain
Quote:
Research shows that 87.666 per cent of all statistics are made up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Posts: 13611
Location: New England
Occupation: Professor of Sociology
The refusal to post $1 peace bonds, which carry the important restriction for three years of not entering upon the property of the Islamic Center or adjacent property, shows me that Jones only wanted to cause offense.

_________________
"Someone should tell Mrs. Reagan that young people -- not even young people on drugs -- are not the ones responsible for the major problems besetting the world!" John Irving, A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel, p. 370.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
esseff44 wrote:
If I heard the judge correctly, the two are off to jail until they post a one-dollar bail. I didn't hear the first part of his ruling.


Confirmed by WXYZ Detroit: Jones refused to post a one dollar bond. As a result, he was jailed.

I think the jury actually ruled that the bond he should be required to pay, the peace bond, was one dollar. That's fascinating! The jury understands the 1st Amendment better than the prosecution did!

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
TollandRCR wrote:
The refusal to post $1 peace bonds, which carry the important restriction for three years of not entering upon the property of the Islamic Center or adjacent property, shows me that Jones only wanted to cause offense.


Causing offense is not illegal.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Posts: 13611
Location: New England
Occupation: Professor of Sociology
poutine wrote:
esseff44 wrote:
If I heard the judge correctly, the two are off to jail until they post a one-dollar bail. I didn't hear the first part of his ruling.


Confirmed by WXYZ Detroit: Jones refused to post a one dollar bond. As a result, he was jailed.

I think the jury actually ruled that the bond he should be required to pay, the peace bond, was one dollar. That's fascinating! The jury understands the 1st Amendment better than the prosecution did!

The amount of the bond was set by the judge, as was the restriction against being on or near the mosque's property. This seems to me to be very much like a bond to prevent stalking.

_________________
"Someone should tell Mrs. Reagan that young people -- not even young people on drugs -- are not the ones responsible for the major problems besetting the world!" John Irving, A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel, p. 370.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:56 pm
Posts: 9411
TollandRCR wrote:
The refusal to post $1 peace bonds, which carry the important restriction for three years of not entering upon the property of the Islamic Center or adjacent property, shows me that Jones only wanted to cause offense.


Injunctive relief, such as being barred from entering property, generally requires some imminent or past offense likely to recur. As poutine pointed out, causing offense is not illegal. Nor did Jones state any intent of trespassing.

This was not an issue for a jury, in my opinion. However, I think the $1 peace bond was a great way of making Jones look like a total jackhole when he took his obvious next step, so I have to give the folks on the jury a thumbs-up. :-bd

_________________
L—d! said my mother, what is all this story about? — A Cock and a Bull, said Yorick — And one of the best of its kind I ever heard. -- Sterne


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
TollandRCR wrote:
poutine wrote:
esseff44 wrote:
If I heard the judge correctly, the two are off to jail until they post a one-dollar bail. I didn't hear the first part of his ruling.


Confirmed by WXYZ Detroit: Jones refused to post a one dollar bond. As a result, he was jailed.

I think the jury actually ruled that the bond he should be required to pay, the peace bond, was one dollar. That's fascinating! The jury understands the 1st Amendment better than the prosecution did!

The amount of the bond was set by the judge, as was the restriction against being on or near the mosque's property. This seems to me to be very much like a bond to prevent stalking.


I don't think that was the judge's rationale, but if it was it would be a farce. He was not "stalking" the mosque; he wanted to protest in front of it.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:17 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
Here's what thea former elected DA for the area has to say:

Quote:
Former Macomb County Prosecutor Carl Marlinga agreed the procedure being used against Jones runs contrary to Supreme Court precedent.

"There appears to be no evidence, no allegation even that Rev. Jones has made a threat against a person or has made a threat against the property of another," Marlinga said. "The Dearborn Police and Wayne County prosecutor are mixing apples and oranges."

Marlinga said regardless of the outcome of today's trial, Jones will have grounds for legal action. The city is better off if it loses in court today, because they "won't have this mistake to be looking at," Marlinga said.

"Even if you think someone will say something that will inflame a crowd, you cannot use the court process in advance to rule on whether or not a person can speak," he said. "Constitutionally, you just can't do it. You can't say if you don't put up money for a bond we're not going to let you speak."


From The Detroit News: http://detnews.com/article/20110422/MET ... z1KIV9E7I9

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:22 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 08, 2009 10:11 pm
Posts: 7517
Location: Outa da doghaus and I ain't goin' back!
Occupation: Arf! Arf! Arooooooooooo! (Get that damned kitty!)
I have to agree with Poutine and Loh. This is where the rubber meets the road on the 1st Amendment. If we can't protect it here, we can't protect it at all. That's fairly old common sense when it comes to freedom of speech issues.

Even though I'd like to be able to believe in Hell for scumbags like these.

_________________
  • I know that there are no limits to which the powers of privilege will not go to keep the workers in slavery.
  • My friends, it is solidarity of labor we want. We do not want to find fault with each other, but to solidify our forces and say to each other: “We must be together; our masters are joined together and we must do the same thing.”
  • Pray for the dead, and fight like hell for the living.
—Mother Jones


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:27 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
Plutodog wrote:
I have to agree with Poutine and Loh. This is where the rubber meets the road on the 1st Amendment. If we can't protect it here, we can't protect it at all. That's fairly old common sense when it comes to freedom of speech issues.

Even though I'd like to be able to believe in Hell for scumbags like these.


A vigorous debate, and an open viewing of what this pastor really believes, are what will lead to society's strong condemnation of his ideas. Putting him in jail only serves as fuel for bigots like him who claim there is some "silent majority" out there that actually agrees with them. It's hard to dispute that claim when no one shows up for a counter-protest, which didn't take place because the protest was censored.

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 16, 2011 12:40 am
Posts: 5522
Occupation: retired
It's a lot like the Westboro cases but they weren't 'carrying' and they stayed within permitted areas. Wouldn't that make a difference?

_________________
Mark Twain
Quote:
Research shows that 87.666 per cent of all statistics are made up.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:40 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2011 4:30 pm
Posts: 2912
Location: The Great Pariah State of Arizona
esseff44 wrote:
It's a lot like the Westboro cases but they weren't 'carrying' and they stayed within permitted areas. Wouldn't that make a difference?


What were the permitted areas? From what I've read, Westboro's 3 protesters were allowed to protest right in front of the mosque. They weren't sued and hauled into court, and they didn't pay a "peace bond".

_________________
Image Image Image Image Image


"What part of 'second' don't you understand?" -Judge Morrison England


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 7:47 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Mar 22, 2009 11:17 pm
Posts: 13611
Location: New England
Occupation: Professor of Sociology
poutine wrote:
Plutodog wrote:
I have to agree with Poutine and Loh. This is where the rubber meets the road on the 1st Amendment. If we can't protect it here, we can't protect it at all. That's fairly old common sense when it comes to freedom of speech issues.

Even though I'd like to be able to believe in Hell for scumbags like these.


A vigorous debate, and an open viewing of what this pastor really believes, are what will lead to society's strong condemnation of his ideas. Putting him in jail only serves as fuel for bigots like him who claim there is some "silent majority" out there that actually agrees with them. It's hard to dispute that claim when no one shows up for a counter-protest, which didn't take place because the protest was censored.

A counter-protest (two, in fact) had already taken place. Thursday night about 700 counter-protesters ringed the Islamic Center. Today "several hundred" people showed up at the Henry Ford Centennial Library in a counter-protest of Muslims, Christians, Jews, and (I would suppose) those of other or no religious persuasion.

I very much doubt that Terry Jones is interested in a healthy debate about his views.

_________________
"Someone should tell Mrs. Reagan that young people -- not even young people on drugs -- are not the ones responsible for the major problems besetting the world!" John Irving, A Prayer for Owen Meany: A Novel, p. 370.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 181 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next   

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


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

Jump to:  
View new posts | View active topics



Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group