Re: active practice in America

At 08:45 AM 9/30/96 -0800, Timothy C. May wrote:

>(Legal purists will point out that the second trial was for "Federal civil
>rights violations." Harummphh. What would the Founders think of this logic:
>"First we try them on ordinary criminal charges. If they are found Not
>Guilty, we charge them in the next higher court with more abstract charges.
>If they are still found found Not Guilty, we hit them with "civil rights"
>and "being disrespectful to women" charges. And if that doesn't work, we
>charge them in the World Court. We've only had one guilty party get past
>them, and for that guy we appealed to the Pope and he put a Papal Hex on
>the guy and ordered him burned in oil.")
>
>Double jeapardy means the system gets one shot at proving charges, not two
>or three.
>
>(And, yes, even though I am sure O.J. Simpson killed those two people, I am
>not happy with what appears to be a _second_ trial. For sure, it's a
>_civil_ trial, for damages, but to this layman it looks like a second trial
>on the main charges. I suppose I always thought that being found "Not
>Guilty" on the act itself made it essentially impossible for a civil trial
>to redecide the same issue. Boy, was I wrong.)

As usual, I have a solution to this problem!   (AP, for the relatively 
unitiated out there.)

If people really believe OJ is guilty, just pool your shekels and see him 
dead.   Or, if you believe the cops planted evidence, buy THEIR deaths via 
donation. (No cop would have dared risk AP to jump the wall...particularly 
if by doing so he risked having the evidence thrown out due to illegality.  
Nor would they have risked trying to frame an innocent person, or at least 
one believed innocent by a few million citizens.)  Or do both.  And so on...

Notice, however, that if AP were operational, a lot might have turned out 
differently.  First, if you assume that OJ is guilty, he would have KNOWN 
that he would be the first person suspected if Nicole were murdered.  This 
would have been an enormous deterrent, because he would have known that he'd 
be a potential target even if he managed to commit the "perfect crime" and 
leave no evidence.

However, it's even a bit more complicated that this.  Anyone considering an 
AP donation against OJ would have to realize that he KNEW all this, and 
might have been appropriately deterred, and if Nicole was killed anyway it's 
quite possible it WASN'T OJ.

Sure, thinking about this can give anyone a headache.  That's because AP 
can't answer the question, "Is OJ guilty," but it could dramatically change 
the circumstances in which such questions are answered.  


Jim Bell
jimbell@pacifier.com

In <199610010319.UAA19992@mail.pacifier.com>, on 09/30/96 
   at 08:18 PM, jim bell <jimbell@pacifier.com> said:


=1EAs usual, I have a solution to this problem!   (AP, for the relatively=
 
=1Eunitiated out there.)
=1E
        well, Jim, at least you are consistent...

        I will not fault your logic in terms of the mental gymnastics
    below, but it is 'method.'   it's like anarchy is the perfect non-
    government in a perfect world.  well...  the problem is the
    perfect world is it not?  then we look at the libertarian view-
    point which starts on the premise of "benevolent" anarchy --but it
    might be a "benevolent" republic or despot to reign in the non-
    reformable greedy, violent, and generally all around "offensives."

        before you get through with just what type of government can
    support the perfect anarchy, your back in the loop trying to find
    the perfect anarchists...   next, who has the power?  --power 
    corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely.

        could a rule of civil, not common, law which operated under
    fundamentalist islamic rules --except a little more humane in the
    physical application of the punishment work?  would we go so far
    as to suggest a set of "requirements" for any public servant in 
    office where failure leads to beheading, no appeal.  public 
    beheading like the Islamic, following afternoon prayer services?
    why not?  it does not seem to be a pleasant way to die.  

        if I were to face the ultimate sanction, I would take the 
    firing squad --but not tied to a chair with a bag over my head
    being targeted by seven slobbering men, 3 of which have blanks so
    noone knows who really did shoot the lump of coal tied to the 
    chair  --they will not shoot you like a man because the state is a 
    coward, not the man about to die.  the fact you might see your
    executions frightens them --in Utah, which used the firing squad
    a month ago, the condemned _never_ sees his executioners.
    
        crap!  what's wrong with standing against the wall or a pole?
    can not a man die with a little dignity?  are the 4 out of 7 
    executions who fire a fatal shot to heart *painted* on the coal
    bag going to be cursed by the condemned?  crap!

        regardless of logic, and temptation to clean up the environ-
    ment, the population is not capable of altruism and will immedi-
    ately slide into a continuous round of retaliatory executions as
    the usual pharisees change your money at the tables set up at
    the temple gates.

        if we had the perfect population base, and no bad apples, we
    would not be in the position of being subject to the Gadianton
    Robbers in the first place.  the problem degenerates to the fact
    the AP scheme will degenerate in a population where everyone is
    just another Gadianton Robber practicing rape, pillage, and burn
    on the countryside.

        the original objective, I presume, was to create the perfect 
    pseudo-anarchy, and the perfect, innocent as the day they were
    born population.  --never happen, given human greed, etc. keep
    in mind that the 1/3 of the hosts of heaven, who were thrown off 
    with Satan. are being being circulated through our population 
    looking for anyone willing to sell their soul for "creature 
    comforts"  rather than eternal rewards --look around you; how
    many really good people do you see?  

        I always say:  

            "people are generally good people
                    ...until there is money involved."

        peace,
            --attila

=1EIf people really believe OJ is guilty, just pool your shekels and see =
him 
=1Edead.   Or, if you believe the cops planted evidence, buy THEIR deaths=
 via 
=1Edonation. 
=1E
    [snip]

=1ESure, thinking about this can give anyone a headache.  That's because =
AP 
=1Ecan't answer the question, "Is OJ guilty," but it could dramatically c=
hange 
=1Ethe circumstances in which such questions are answered.  

--
one of the few things we all share: 
  the utter, corrosive contempt for our elected officials.

--
  Politicians are like diapers.
    They both need changing regularly, and for the same reason.