Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Alan Chapman
City employees have a vested interest (financial) in perpetuating the system. That makes them predujiced in favor of the state.

With the same broad brush, I could say that, because the libertarians want to see the death of the system, libertarians should be culled from the jury pool.

Why you think that a city employee couldn't be impartial, and you, Alan Chapman, could, is beyond me.

415 posted on 05/16/2002 5:51:29 PM PDT by sinkspur
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 397 | View Replies ]


To: sinkspur

With the same broad brush, I could say that, because the libertarians want to see the death of the system, libertarians should be culled from the jury pool.

It's easy to show that city employees have a vested interest -- their paychecks attest to that fact. What evidence will you use to back up your assertion that Libertarians want, as you wrote, "libertarians want to see the death of the system"?

Why you think that a city employee couldn't be impartial, and you, Alan Chapman, could, is beyond me.

Ahh, feigning ignorance again. Not becoming of you even though you chose to wear it often. One thing is clear, you want the present, unjust system to perpetuate.

419 posted on 05/16/2002 6:09:38 PM PDT by Zon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
Why you think that a city employee couldn't be impartial, and you, Alan Chapman, could, is beyond me.

No person should be allowed on a jury pool for any case involving his employer. Since someone who goes against his employer (especially in anything that turns out to be a high-profile case) faces a non-trivial likelihood of reprisals for doing so, it is best to avoid any appearance of pressure or impropriety by having cases tried by jurors with no ties to either party.

421 posted on 05/16/2002 6:10:31 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
Why you think that a city employee couldn't be impartial...

Because the prospect of losing their job (due to lack of convictions) would likely predujice them in favor of the state.

...and you, Alan Chapman, could...

I would convict if the initiation of force or fraud took place and could be proven beyond a reasonable doubt. However, I do not consider crimes against the state to be crimes. Crimes against the state are the recourse of the weak and envious for that which they cannot attain without resorting to violence.

Justice is served when a damaged party is compensated for their loss. Justice is not served when somebody is thrown in prison to please self-righteous do-gooders.

425 posted on 05/16/2002 6:17:12 PM PDT by Alan Chapman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies ]

To: sinkspur
With the same broad brush, I could say that, because the libertarians want to see the death of the system, libertarians should be culled from the jury pool.

I wouldn't want a libertarian on a jury to decide a traffic ticket. Fortunately they are statistically insignificant, based on election returns. But they're as much an enemy of the state and our country as any ACLU type.

602 posted on 05/17/2002 4:25:34 PM PDT by VA Advogado
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 415 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson