Freethought & Rationalism Archive

GakuseiDon · 03-11-2004, 10:45 PM

Very funny!

Boro Nut · 03-12-2004, 04:26 AM

On a serious note, I feel compelled to point out that I have used a lot of artistic license. Although a British judge can formally direct a jury to return a not-guilty verdict at any point in a trial, based on his assessment that it would be unsafe to return a guilty verdict on the available evidence, only a jury can return a guilty verdict after due deliberation. Judges can't just arbitrarily find someone guilty, especially without even listening to any evidence, and certainly can’t decide a case simply by taking a dislike to one party or another right at the outset. Only Judge Judy can do that.

Boro Nut

Sven · 03-12-2004, 06:08 AM

I also want to add one!!!
:notworthy

ElectEngr · 03-12-2004, 10:09 AM

Would Rumpole even touch this case?

I was half expecting some mention of "Waldorf Street" and "Boogy-Woogy" music.

:notworthy :notworthy

Later,
ElectEngr

[ edit to add: 15 and 7?...I maybe wrong but (I'm not that familiar with the British monitary system) I thought the UK went on the decimal system in 1971? ]

Amaleq13 · 03-12-2004, 10:19 AM

Quote:

Originally posted by Thugpreacha
I don't see what all the acolades are about!

The non-analogous "analogy" that followed the sentence above renders the above sentence redundant.

Gawen · 03-12-2004, 01:48 PM

That WAS brilliant, Boro. Now if we could just get American Justices to see the same light.........

Dr Rick · 03-12-2004, 02:10 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Thugpreacha
I don't see what all the acolades are about! Thats like the bacteria in my shoe putting me on trial for using Odor Eaters!

Apparently, your pointless analogy isn't the only thing that stinks...

Boro: :notworthy

Boomeister · 03-12-2004, 06:09 PM

Bravo!

Kosh · 03-12-2004, 06:15 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by ElectEngr
Would Rumpole even touch this case?

I was half expecting some mention of "Waldorf Street" and "Boogy-Woogy" music.

:notworthy

You're dating yourself! (And me too).

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-11-2004, 10:45 PM	#11
GakuseiDon Veteran Member Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: Australia Posts: 5,714	Very funny!

03-12-2004, 04:26 AM	#12
Boro Nut Veteran Member Join Date: Nov 2000 Location: Middlesbrough, England Posts: 3,909	On a serious note, I feel compelled to point out that I have used a lot of artistic license. Although a British judge can formally direct a jury to return a not-guilty verdict at any point in a trial, based on his assessment that it would be unsafe to return a guilty verdict on the available evidence, only a jury can return a guilty verdict after due deliberation. Judges can't just arbitrarily find someone guilty, especially without even listening to any evidence, and certainly can’t decide a case simply by taking a dislike to one party or another right at the outset. Only Judge Judy can do that. Boro Nut

03-12-2004, 06:08 AM	#13
Sven Contributor Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: outraged about the stiffling of free speech here Posts: 10,987	I also want to add one!!! :notworthy

03-12-2004, 10:09 AM	#14
ElectEngr Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: ahhh, I've moved since then.... Posts: 1,729	Would Rumpole even touch this case? I was half expecting some mention of "Waldorf Street" and "Boogy-Woogy" music. :notworthy :notworthy Later, ElectEngr [ edit to add: 15 and 7?...I maybe wrong but (I'm not that familiar with the British monitary system) I thought the UK went on the decimal system in 1971? ]

03-12-2004, 01:48 PM	#16
Gawen Contributor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Cylon Occupied Texas, but a Michigander @ heart Posts: 10,326	That WAS brilliant, Boro. Now if we could just get American Justices to see the same light.........

03-12-2004, 06:09 PM	#18
Boomeister Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: The Big State in the South Posts: 448	Bravo!

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.