Supreme Court rules 9-0 against EPA over wetlands
 

On Mar 24, 5:34*am, "HeyBub" wrote:
Robert Green wrote:

Harry, I admire the fact that you believe people will get a better
outcome from a judicial trial. *However, my sister's a judge and I
can assure you, she can do bureaucracy like nobody's business. The
problem is often expressed as "they wouldn't arrest him if he wasn't
guilty." *Judges often side with the government that also signs their
paychecks. *It's a pretty common human failing.

As an aside, Alan Dershowitz posited the following rules:

1. Virtually every criminal defendant is guilty.
2. Rule #1 is known to the judge, the district attorney, and defense
counsel.
3. Few criminal defendants can be convicted without violating one or more of
their Constitutional rights.
4. Rule #3 is known to the judge, the district attorney, and defense
counsel.
5. Defendants are often convicted, not for what they did, but for what can
be proved. Much of the time what they did cannot be proved and what was
proved was not what they did.
6. Rule #5 is known to the judge, the district attorney, and defense
counsel.

Studying the above rules will demonstrate why almost everyone in prison
feels they are there on a bum rap.

Ya forgot the mosst important one.

Trials are nt about "justice" it is only about who wins or loses the
case.

Harry K

Supreme Court rules 9-0 against EPA over wetlands
 

On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 13:11:10 -0700 (PDT), Harry K
wrote:

Now the winner can contest the EPA for a sunny day in court.

Does the EPA have some administrative remedy, instead of some bean
counter having final word. Otherwise this should not have gotten into
court?

they don't seem to have had one (and for sure don't now - not
needed). That case drug on fr several years until it got to the
Supremes who pointed out clearly that becasue a beurocrat says
something, that ain't good enough.

Harry K

+1

Supreme Court rules 9-0 against EPA over wetlands
 

On Fri, 23 Mar 2012 17:18:01 -0400, "Robert Green"
wrote:

Even been accused of brutality by a Nigerian Prince.

Who, you? What happened? Aren't all Nigerians princes or oil heirs,
looking to share their wealth with anyone who can cash a $20M check?
Nigeria's two greatest exports are oil and fraud scams. Or was it the old
joke: "How many prison guards does it take to push a Nigerian prisoner down
a staircase? NONE! He fell!"

Bobby, he was a real Prince of his tribe from Nigeria not a diplomat
but used his embassy). Not some spammer of present days. A long story,
but funny.

The convicts don't fall "down a staircase". They trip going up, often
referred too as self-inflicted injuries. LMAO

Supreme Court rules 9-0 against EPA over wetlands
 

On Sat, 24 Mar 2012 07:34:16 -0500, "HeyBub"
wrote:

Robert Green wrote:

Harry, I admire the fact that you believe people will get a better
outcome from a judicial trial. However, my sister's a judge and I
can assure you, she can do bureaucracy like nobody's business. The
problem is often expressed as "they wouldn't arrest him if he wasn't
guilty." Judges often side with the government that also signs their
paychecks. It's a pretty common human failing.


As an aside, Alan Dershowitz posited the following rules:

1. Virtually every criminal defendant is guilty.
2. Rule #1 is known to the judge, the district attorney, and defense
counsel.
3. Few criminal defendants can be convicted without violating one or more of
their Constitutional rights.
4. Rule #3 is known to the judge, the district attorney, and defense
counsel.
5. Defendants are often convicted, not for what they did, but for what can
be proved. Much of the time what they did cannot be proved and what was
proved was not what they did.
6. Rule #5 is known to the judge, the district attorney, and defense
counsel.


(Bring the guilty ******* in so we can hurry up and have a fair trial)

Studying the above rules will demonstrate why almost everyone in prison
feels they are there on a bum rap.


You got that right. I heard over and over for years; "I'm innocent!"

spit Son we got you here fer twenty years.... this is for all the
things you were never caught for...

(LOL)

Supreme Court rules 9-0 against EPA over wetlands
 

Han wrote:
" wrote in
news:cbc7999e-
:

So, maybe Sadam was really trying to find a cure for cancer?

Ask the Kurds or the Iranians how they benefitted ...

They damn sure didn't die from cancer! QED.