0̽̎. Words hold no meaning to you, just as you do not understand that ends do not justify their means. Your lack of understanding of governance, legal proceedings, causes your ideology to come into Question. You seem to lack a moral bases, or logical process for understanding or developing one.
Ź̸̗̚. I will not argue your vague theoretical points, as this thread already has a true factual topic, may I remind you. Nor will I agree with your assumptions that jurors should wield power, such as how they did so in this actual case, that you are refusing the acknowledge while making up your fictional scenarios that ignore long term ramifications.
Given that many of my posts have been relevant and informative...wake the fuck up.
-1. Ends do not justify their means.
0̽̎. Words hold no meaning to you, just as you do not understand that ends do not justify their means. Your lack of understanding of governance, legal proceedings, causes your ideology to come into Question. You seem to lack a moral bases, or logical process for understanding or developing one.
Ź̸̗̚. I will not argue your vague theoretical points, as this thread already has a true factual topic, may I remind you. Nor will I agree with your assumptions that jurors should wield power, such as how they did so in this actual case, that you are refusing the acknowledge while making up your fictional scenarios that ignore long term ramifications.
Given that many of my posts have been relevant and informative...wake the fuck up.
You are arguing in support of the corruption of juries. That is not a straw man. You are an idiot.
Fighting corruption with further corruption is how we ended up where we are today.