I came across this is little story today, it's not breaking news. I suspect that a member of the housekeeping staff knows something about the bomb threat that required the sweep for weapons.
According to police in Secaucus, the bomb threat — which later was determined to be bogus — was called in to Hudson Regional Hospital on July 18. During a search, bomb detection dogs led investigators to an unlocked office closet containing dozens of firearms.
Among the weapons were 11 handguns and 27 rifles or shotguns, according to police. The closet also contained a .45 caliber semi-automatic rifle with a high-capacity magazine that was determined to be an assault rifle, and a 14-round high-capacity handgun magazine.
The arrested the guy the next day.
What the heck do you think this guy was doing? It sounds very ominous that he was keeping those weapons there.
Specializes in NICU, PICU, Transport, L&D, Hospice.
Roitrn said:
There is always exculpatory evidence in any legal case. It is the duty of the defense to present such evidence. And defend their client. So of course they will "try anything". Are you suggesting defence lawyers not try and defend their client?
What "majority opinion"?.
No, there's not always exculpatory evidence. There are sometimes just questions and opinions and suggestions and possibilities of varying likelihood... but no actual exculpatory evidence. I sat on a jury in a murder trial with no exculpatory evidence presented.
As a pro-Trump protest turned into a violent attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6 last year, four people in the crowd died.
Ashli Babbitt, an Air Force veteran, was fatally shot by a Capitol Police officer as rioters tried to breach the House chamber.
Kevin D. Greeson died of a heart attack, collapsing on the sidewalk west of the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Rosanne Boyland appeared to have been crushed in a stampede of fellow rioters as they surged against the police.
Benjamin Philips, the founder of a pro-Trump website called Trumparoo, died of a stroke.
The Capitol Police had previously said that Officer Sicknick died from injuries sustained "while physically engaging with protesters.” The Washington medical examiner later ruled that he had died of natural causes: multiple strokes that occurred hours after Officer Sicknick's confrontation with the mob. The medical examiner added, however, that "all that transpired played a role in his condition.”
It was a name synonymous with failure. More than 80 years ago, an Army base in Blackstone, VA., was named for George E. Pickett, the defeated Confederate general who led the disastrous "Pickett's charge" at the Battle of Gettysburg.
Now the base is the first of nine named for a Confederate to be redesignated by the end of this year. On Friday, Fort Pickett became Fort Barfoot, in honor of Col. Van Barfoot, a World War II hero and a Medal of Honor recipient.
Exactly right. Racists have always had the freedom to use hate speech, sometimes very openly.
No we don't have to leave. We can loudly point out the racist hate speech. We can critique and criticize that speech. We can examine the type of person who would publicly utter such hateful and racist speech. We can talk about the dangers of a public personality using such hateful and inflammatory speech. How arrogant to suggest that we have to leave.
No we don't need to calm our feelings. Anymore than you think that Trump needs to calm his. That double standard is ridiculously obvious and contrived.
If you don't like our freedom of speech you could also take your double standard and leave the country.
Exactly!! You have the right to all that speech. However, that right also extends to others. Regardless of your opinions and emotions.
The price of free speech in your case is that everyone has it. Especially Trump
Have something against Canada? I'm a traveling nurse educator. I spend allot of time there. Canada is on its way to being very extreme far left. You would love it. Perhaps the NewYork governor can send you up to the boarder?
I like Canada. I have spent a lot of time there, mostly at hockey rinks. I already live at the border. I don't concern myself with their politics, but I think Trudeau is kinda cute.
The discussion of his racist tropes is all across the media... except, apparently where you inform yourself. Most people are aware of the use of dehumanizing terminology among racists and authoritarians. Referring to a black man as an animal and less than human has deep roots in American history. Maybe some folks aren't learning that history.
If one person gets away with a crime does that mean that another person should get away with a crime? We don't need to talk about other people. We can just focus upon the investigation into Trump's crimes or appearance of crimes.
Republicans in congress are trying to protect Trump, not the DOJ. The DOJ under Barr tried to protect Trump by asking that no further investigating or prosecution occur after Cohen was convicted. It's important to get those details correct... there's lists of misinformation swirling around.
That last bit was supposed to be... what, sarcasm? If the left is having wet dreams over evidence of Trump's misconduct, Trump sure is providing them with lots provocative material... all by himself. Maybe he should stop, eh?
Trump is painting a portrait of himself for the world to see... if they choose to see. Everyone has the freedom to look away and clearly, some are.
Perhaps you should reflect on your own thoughts about racism? To conclude that someone who refers to an POC as an animal is because of the color of their skin reflects more on the person or ideology making that claim. People call other people animals all the time. If it was a specific animal commonly used un history, that's one thing but just because he called this DA an animal you immediately liken that with his race? Wow.
You suggested if Trump was above the law and asked if anyone else would be able to get away with what he does?. So keep in line with ypur own train of thought.
Republicans are trying to protect the sanctity of the justice system to not be corrupt and political. As this leads to tyranny. Not democracy. It's unfortunate that it has to do with Trump. Our freedom and democracy and the prevention of tyranny must be defended regardless of who it is. All people should be free from a corrup justice system and protected from tyranny. Unfortunately for you, this includes Trump. The DOJ isn't constantly being subjected to endless investigations that result in nothing. Why do the Republicans need to protect it? Other than preventing corruption and tyranny within? Is seemsvthey ate doing just that.
Yes it was sarcastic. However much less vulgar than how you rephrase it. I'm sure the, Trump saying bad things Media addicts would rather he continue. He should stop! However what would anyone talk about?
Good. Let Trump run himself into the ground with his own mouth. Actually don't let him. He doesn't need you to give him permission, or anyone else. Trump can use his first amendment right to say whatever he wants. Freedom of speech also has consequences.
As a pro-Trump protest turned into a violent attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6 last year, four people in the crowd died.
Ashli Babbitt, an Air Force veteran, was fatally shot by a Capitol Police officer as rioters tried to breach the House chamber.
Kevin D. Greeson died of a heart attack, collapsing on the sidewalk west of the Capitol on Jan. 6.
Rosanne Boyland appeared to have been crushed in a stampede of fellow rioters as they surged against the police.
Benjamin Philips, the founder of a pro-Trump website called Trumparoo, died of a stroke.
The Capitol Police had previously said that Officer Sicknick died from injuries sustained "while physically engaging with protesters.” The Washington medical examiner later ruled that he had died of natural causes: multiple strokes that occurred hours after Officer Sicknick's confrontation with the mob. The medical examiner added, however, that "all that transpired played a role in his condition.”
Yes. All those people died. Some of them would not have if they were not there. Ashley Babbot and the lady who was trampled.
Officer Sicknick could have died the same way at any intense police altercation. This also applies to the Trump supporter who died of a hear attack.
Yet still no charges for Trump?
Quote
At least 25 Americans were killed during protests and political unrest in 2020
I like Canada. I have spent a lot of time there, mostly at hockey rinks. I already live at the border. I don't concern myself with their politics, but I think Trudeau is kinda cute.
Oh Canada, has a PM that looks good without a shirt. And likes to do black face. Or in this case dressed in a chareracture of an East Indian man who was standing right next to him in this pic. It was so disrespectful I left out the image of the man next to him. Cute hey?
No, there's not always exculpatory evidence. There are sometimes just questions and opinions and suggestions and possibilities of varying likelihood... but no actual exculpatory evidence. I sat on a jury in a murder trial with no exculpatory evidence presented.
Majority opinion is democracy...
Right. So the government in some states that are passing laws that you do not like is also democracy. As the people's majority elected the officials making these laws.
It most certainly does includes exculpatory evidence and it is the procecutions duty to provide it to the defence. Do not get exculpatory confused with exonoration.
Quote
Exculpatory evidence is also called Brady material and includes any evidence that may prove a defendant's innocence. The Brady Rule requires the prosecutor to turn over exculpatory evidence to the defense team before trial. However, the defendant must prove that the evidence will help their case.Jul 30, 2020
It can vary slightly between states but it is fundamentally the same.
So the prosecution of Trump in a trial that will never happen has to provide evidence that could prove innocence. Something I imagine no far left democrats wants...... And quite possibly why no charges to date........
Oh Canada, has a PM that looks good without a shirt. And likes to do black face. Or in this case dressed in a chareracture of an East Indian man who was standing right next to him in this pic. It was so disrespectful I left out the image of the man next to him. Cute hey?
Exactly. Summary in your own words. "I do not need evidence, or to prove it". You simply do not care about the 1st amendment and due process and proving guilt. Sounds kind of fascist to me. Or indoctrination by the radical left.
As of yet, there has been no indictments for the Jan.6 "insurrection". No trial, NOTHING. Doesn't stop you and anyone from claiming he's guilty in the absolute.
This is the point.
I wasn't LOL at that and you know nlit. Should have stopped typing after your last comment.
I do not have to provide evidence or prove my opinion. Because it's an opinion. Having an opinion does not make me a fascist. Having an opinion does not prove that I do not care about the first amendment or due process.
toomuchbaloney
16,242 Posts
No, there's not always exculpatory evidence. There are sometimes just questions and opinions and suggestions and possibilities of varying likelihood... but no actual exculpatory evidence. I sat on a jury in a murder trial with no exculpatory evidence presented.
Majority opinion is democracy...