ruffneck23
front left
.
Last edited:
I was pointing out that her father was an evil, powerful, murderous old shit and that Epstein was an evil, powerful child abusing shit. She is an evil abusing factotum. I too am wary of "competitive evil calculation". However, I think it is absurd to say that "her crimes exceeded her dad", if only because she never had the power to commit the crimes of her dad.While I’m not sure the competitive evil calculation is useful or even possible, I do feel the need to point out that you seem to have drawn an equivalence between Ghislane Maxwell’s crimes, and a hypothetical employee procuring women for her father.
Ghislane Maxwell wasn’t just a procurer. She groomed children into sexual exploitation and trafficking. Not women. Children of 14.
Whilst perhaps not on a holocaust level of war crime, she trafficked children, repeatedly. We don't know how many victims there are, nor the effects of trauma on them. For example, Virginia Guiffre has spoken about wanting to die, on the Epstein island she was trafficked to.I'm struggling with the prosecutions argument that this "was the worst crimes imaginable" anybody concur.
I'd have thought on the other side of the pond that 9/11 or the Holocaust would beat this to the title of "worst crime imaginable" - or have they got a very sheltered prosecution.
Nobody died here.
Because she is a woman who committed these crimes against children, and against the general societal philosophy of 'women don't do this type of thing', that's why it's in the 'worst crime imaginable' territory.
I think you meant #totesimpartial100%Just spotted that as well as Dershowitz, the BBC presented comments on the trial from Kyle Rittenhouse's defence lawyer.
#impartial
but transporting someone across state boundary lines seems to be part of it (don't know if it would be ok if you only moved a person from one town to another in the same state.)
Yes, I realise that.. I was asking whether it's the crossing the state lines that makes it specifically a federal offense.
yes.
Scotland is completely different. It is probably as different from English ( which also means Welsh) law than we both are from American law.ah
think that's what's confusing me (and probably a few other people in the UK) - while there are some differences in law round the four countries of the UK, the whole concept of state and federal law / offences is a bit from a UK perspective...
So is Mopery.Scotland is completely different. It is probably as different from English ( which also means Welsh) law than we both are from American law.
It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.
Just looked that up. Ace crime, I’d like that on my record.So is Mopery.
I liked this bit from the wiki entry:Just looked that up. Ace crime, I’d like that on my record.
In discussions of law, mopery is used as a placeholder name to mean some crime whose nature is not important to the problem at hand. This is sometimes expanded to "mopery with intent to creep" or "mopery with intent to gawk".
Scotland is completely different. It is probably as different from English ( which also means Welsh) law than we both are from American law.
It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.
That was the county line (probation condition).The US state boundary lines - the makings of many a good episode in The Dukes of Hazard.
It doesn’t as the UK isn’t federal. Also in law UK borders ( parish and county which are both important for charging ) are 1km wide, in that any courts jurisdiction extends up to 500 meters into the next. This avoids the Dukes of Hazard county line stuff.Scottish and English law is different. But committing a crime that straddles the border between the two countries doesn't elevate the crime in any way, unlike in the US
Scotland is completely different. It is probably as different from English ( which also means Welsh) law than we both are from American law.
It has loads of the old cool offences like housebreaking and the ‘not proven’ verdict. Breach of the peace is a crime there too.
If you commit a non federal offence ( including murder) in one US state and then go to another there almost always has to be an extradition process to bring you back for trial as if you had gone to another country.That was the county line (probation condition).
I've committed mopery on both sides of the border but do I get any recognition for it in England? No, no I bloody don't.Scottish and English law is different. But committing a crime that straddles the border between the two countries doesn't elevate the crime in any way, unlike in the US
yes - i know some of the offences are different, and that some things can be illegal in Scotland but not in England (or vice versa) but you either get done in an English or Scottish court depending on where you (allegedly) did whatever.
I used to be involved in doing criminal records checks for taxi drivers, and one came back as having been done for "lewd and libidinous practices and behaviour" in Scotland, and had to make some enquiries just what this meant (think it equated to indecent exposure in English law) before we said 'no'
My grandfather once received a police warning for the offence of cycling furiously.I liked this bit from the wiki entry:
I want ‘mopery with intent to gawk’ on my charge sheet.
comes up a lot in episodes of Law & Order.If you commit a non federal offence ( including murder) in one US state and then go to another there almost always has to be an extradition process to bring you back for trial as if you had gone to another country.
Could have been worse. Could have been wanton and furiously…My grandfather once received a police warning for the offence of cycling furiously.
This is an odd way of championing the rights of Assange the Shit Smearer. , who was also credibly accused of rape. I'm sure the D of Y wishes that he'd committed his alleged offences in Sweden as the Swedish Statute of Limitations would mean that too much time had elapsed for charges to be brought.
Julian Assange: Sweden drops rape investigation
Prosecutors drop a rape inquiry into Wikileaks founder Julian Assange, who is in custody in the UK.www.bbc.co.uk
I surmise they've had some complaints:
I surmise they've had some complaints:
Yeh I've noticed you struggling with quite a bit. For those of us not involved with jihadi terrorism or in positions of power in Nazi Germany, which is most of us, things like murder, rape, and child abuse are among the worst crimes people can commit.I'm struggling with the prosecutions argument that this "was the worst crimes imaginable" anybody concur.
I'd have thought on the other side of the pond that 9/11 or the Holocaust would beat this to the title of "worst crime imaginable" - or have they got a very sheltered prosecution.
Nobody died here.