No falsehood. There are plenty of witches: http://www.witchvox.com/ I kinda like 'em.
Except for a few like this one:
Posted on 02/26/2007 6:57:45 AM PST by PhatHead
We shall see. This is a classic political show trial of an innocent man.
A "Light" version of the 1930's Moskow Show Trials.
Also seems like Kafka's "The Trial," especially with the crazy indictments and bizarre instructions to the jury.
Was it the juror who did NOT wear a Valentine's T-Shirt for the judge?
is prevented from knowing that their responsibility is not only to determine the facts , but also to determine the law. Although the Supreme Court and various Circuit Courts have stated this fundamental function of the jury, they now uphold the right of the trial judge to NOT so inform the jury.
Uh-Oh! That was the juror who did NOT wear the Valentine T-Shirt for the judge. Some have predicted here that she would be tossed by the liberal jurors out to hang scooter. Sounds like a trumped up excuse to have her bumped.
She was the one who did NOT wear a Valentine love note for the judge. Not good news. The one CONTRARIAN on the jury gets the boot.
can you post link to the instructions to the jury. I haven't been able to find them.
Malleus Maleficarum was written in the late thirteen hundreds by two monks. The idea was to define, describe and diagnose witches. For two hundred years this book sat on Judge's desks since in many jurisdictions only the secular Judges could prescribe death. In any case it worked admirably since it assumed a falsehood (there are witches)and then tried people on this falsehood with, among other things, torture.
You can find the Wikipedia entry: HERE.
FWIW, it seems the Federal Judges are using the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure just like they previously used Malleus Maleficarum--to punish people for mistaken beliefs and memory. Only now, no torture except the knowledge if you fail their tests you will go to prison regardless of your inability to conform your conduct to the mistaken assumptions they made into laws by ignorance.
We eventually knew better when it came to witch trials. Hopefully, we will soon know better when it comes to memory trials. The courts simply have to recognize reason and science; failing in this means no one is safe.
Things you will learn studying art history:
There are obvious, observable differences between poor, mediocre, good and great art.
While there are differences of opinion and over time some changes in emphasis the roll call of great artists hasn't changed much.
Nearly all great art was created funding by either religious establishments, or the rich.
FedGov has never funded or created great art. The WPA in the 1930s paid salaries to several good or great artists for a decade and they did nothing note worthy. When the gravy train was cut off they invented Abstract Impressionism and became famous and rich.
Art is an asset of the rich, like real estate and stock shares.
I can't speak for the climate at the Met, but I think any competent and deep study of history (military history, art history, history of science, etc). leads one to hold at least some conservative beliefs.
Trendy, relativistic thinking is not supported by understanding the lives of people like the great artists.
No falsehood. There are plenty of witches: http://www.witchvox.com/ I kinda like 'em.
Except for a few like this one:
It's just strange that the ONE contrarian on the jury is also the one to get the boot. My guess is that she was voting against the liberals and they had to figure a way to REMOVE her from the jury.
Well it's been a fun day. The early call to come to court, the dismissal, the speculation, the power failure. It's 5:00 there. One assumes that the work day is over so more deliberation tomorrow, I suppose.
This whole thing stinks, and so the game goes on.
I think that this case will likely get to the Supreme Court before its over, and millons of dollars spent for liberal propaganda.
Poor Scooter. He deserves way better than this pack of lies.
I would not be surprised if the dismissed juror managed her own life in a relatively conservative manner. Libs who do not do so rarely make it to the age of 70 in control of all of their faculties.
How many in the art community, after residing on the Upper East Side Manhattan for a working career, and then having retired to the District of Columbia (NOT Santa Fe, New Mexico -- but the District of Columbia!) are likely to be George Bush and Dick Cheney fans?
I suspect not too many.
He gets paid the same whether he is trying this case or another one back in Chicago. Your "economic interest" is a red herring.
so, what is you read on what transpired today? and I never saw your comments on the valentine's day shirts incident.
"..The woman who was dismissed from the jury is an art history expert and scholar who formerly served as a curator of prints at the Metropolitan Museum of Art. She was also the only juror who did not wear a red T-shirt as part of the jury's Valentine's Day greeting to the court..."
Sounds to me like they politically cleansed that jury.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.