Home | Community | Message Board


This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.


Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]
Anonymous #1

how much time am i looking at
    #12852873 - 07/05/10 05:50 PM (13 years, 10 months ago)

For walking up to a man and beating him moderately?

The fact that he had it coming I'm sure has no sigifigance judicially

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
InvisibleLe_Canard
The Duk Abides


Registered: 05/16/03
Posts: 94,392
Loc: Earthfarm 1 Flag
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: Anonymous #1]
    #12853087 - 07/05/10 06:45 PM (13 years, 10 months ago)

If your record is clean, probably probation and anger management classes. If you have a history of assaults and/or other arrests, you might be facing some jail time.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefastfred
Old Hand
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: Le_Canard]
    #12853557 - 07/05/10 08:19 PM (13 years, 10 months ago)

Simple battery is usually 3-7 days in jail.  Unless you have a record for this sort of thing you shouldn't get any supervised probation or classes.  Every state and judge varies though.

If you're really curious just go sit in court for a day and you'll see plenty of assault and battery cases.  Monday is a good day for seeing the results of Friday night fights.


-FF

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinenumonkei
Back! From thedigestive tractof dave theiguana!

Registered: 04/12/06
Posts: 2,500
Loc: A Tree
Last seen: 7 years, 2 months
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12854375 - 07/05/10 11:11 PM (13 years, 10 months ago)

Toiletduk and fastfred speak what I have seen in courtrooms.

Was your charge a case of aggravated assault? Do you have a specific charge you are answering to?

Quote:

The fact that he had it coming I'm sure has no sigifigance judicially




I hope not, "sigifigance" might make the lawyers confabulationijatilated.




~Monk

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous #1

Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: numonkei]
    #12855095 - 07/06/10 03:48 AM (13 years, 10 months ago)

Depending on whether he presses charges or not right?

I should clarify that this incident has yet to take place, and I'm trying hard to just let things go. My record is clean btw, and thanks for the responses, maybe I will check out a courtroom.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineistandalone
the clit commander
Male


Registered: 04/30/09
Posts: 2,997
Loc: somewhere in southern VT
Last seen: 9 months, 30 days
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: Anonymous #1]
    #12856318 - 07/06/10 12:37 PM (13 years, 10 months ago)

it can go two ways. the victim could press charges, or not. but if the cops/states attorney gets wind of it, they'll press charges regardless of whether the victim wants too.

but for aggravated assault, first offense your looking at a year or so probation and anger management classes. maybe fines and/or community service too/instead.

it all depends on the judge and the local laws that pertain to you.


--------------------
Now he's Johnny Hammersticks hammerin' away like he's friggin' Tommy Noble

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefastfred
Old Hand
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: istandalone]
    #12857689 - 07/06/10 05:12 PM (13 years, 10 months ago)

> but if the cops/states attorney gets wind of it, they'll press charges regardless of whether the victim wants too.

This seems to be a common misconception about the legal system.  In the US you have a right to confront your accuser.  That means that the state can present no evidence without producing the accuser.  If the victim gives a statement, then fails to show up to court they cannot use that statement against you.  Usually this means that they will have no evidence against you unless the victim cooperates and is willing to press charges.

If there are other witnesses then they can try to prosecute you using them.  They can also reduce the charge to "disturbing the peace" or some other bullshit, at which point the state becomes the accuser and there is a very low burden of proof on them.

Of course, they have many ways of compelling the victim to testify if they really want to get you.  However, if the victim gets on the stand and just answers "I don't recall" for awhile there's really not that much they can do.

Anyhow, there's usually little reason to press charges if the victim doesn't want to pursue it.

To the OP... you seem to be premeditating this, which will lead to an aggravated assault charge.  If you talk some shit and make it seem like a standard street fight it would likely only be simple battery.  Look up your state laws and see what the exact definitions are.

I got sucker punched one time.  Even though I'd usually never go to the law, this guy was a real piece of shit and I didn't even know him.  He was also on probation and had violated it several times in the course of even crossing my path.  Anyways, even with a record a mile long they wouldn't pick him up on assault, only simple battery.  They told me he faced only about 3-7 days in the can for it.  I never ended up pressing charges, but he did get arrested and got a probation violation, which was probably significantly more than the simple battery charge.

So usually dude vs. dude that doesn't put someone in the hospital is just simple battery, with a short jail stay as punishment.  Usually just a short, unsupervised probation results.  Anger management classes are usually just for people with a pattern of angry violence.  Of course, if you beat him up because he stole your coaster at the bar or some such silly thing they might deem you a good candidate for anger management.

I suggest just getting in a fight with him.  Call him out and let him throw the first punch if possible.  If the victim was a willing participant the cops usually don't get called/involved.


-FF

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlinec1dh3d
The elephant is BACK
Male User Gallery


Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 07/15/08
Posts: 5,229
Loc: Flag
Last seen: 11 months, 5 days
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12860376 - 07/07/10 03:11 AM (13 years, 10 months ago)

I would encourage you to consider long term consequences of the crime more than short term - background checks. Jobs, apartments, a permit to carry a concealed weapon, etc.

Violent crimes will get an application thrown out about as fast as rape, theft, and murder - keep your record clean.

Edited by c1dh3d (07/07/10 03:20 AM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineistandalone
the clit commander
Male


Registered: 04/30/09
Posts: 2,997
Loc: somewhere in southern VT
Last seen: 9 months, 30 days
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12860761 - 07/07/10 06:55 AM (13 years, 10 months ago)

"This seems to be a common misconception about the legal system.  In the US you have a right to confront your accuser.  That means that the state can present no evidence without producing the accuser"

not true. 9 out of 10 times the victim just signs an affidavit of what happened. that's sufficient evidence.


--------------------
Now he's Johnny Hammersticks hammerin' away like he's friggin' Tommy Noble

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefastfred
Old Hand
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: istandalone]
    #12865523 - 07/08/10 01:32 AM (13 years, 10 months ago)

> 9 out of 10 times the victim just signs an affidavit of what happened. that's sufficient evidence.

DOH!  You entirely missed the point of my post.  It's not admissible.  The judge can't even legally look at it!

You have a right to confront and cross-examine any witnesses at trial.  Any evidence from ANYONE you can't confront/cross-examine is NOT admissible.  They can't present or even mention it at trial unless they can produce the witness!


-FF

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineistandalone
the clit commander
Male


Registered: 04/30/09
Posts: 2,997
Loc: somewhere in southern VT
Last seen: 9 months, 30 days
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12871278 - 07/09/10 06:31 AM (13 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

fastfred said:
> 9 out of 10 times the victim just signs an affidavit of what happened. that's sufficient evidence.

DOH!  You entirely missed the point of my post.  It's not admissible.  The judge can't even legally look at it!

You have a right to confront and cross-examine any witnesses at trial.  Any evidence from ANYONE you can't confront/cross-examine is NOT admissible.  They can't present or even mention it at trial unless they can produce the witness!

this must differ from state to state. here, the victim of abuse/violence only need to either sign an affidavit or speak before a sort of grand jury.
happens all the time here.

-FF




--------------------
Now he's Johnny Hammersticks hammerin' away like he's friggin' Tommy Noble

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
OfflineLbDub
Male


Registered: 10/24/07
Posts: 1,647
Last seen: 10 years, 4 months
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: c1dh3d]
    #12874068 - 07/09/10 05:35 PM (13 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

c1dh3d said:
I would encourage you to consider long term consequences of the crime more than short term - background checks. Jobs, apartments, a permit to carry a concealed weapon, etc.

Violent crimes will get an application thrown out about as fast as rape, theft, and murder - keep your record clean.




I'd suggest this course of action as well. Or, if you must do this, don't let him know who attacked him, and be far away before any cops could show up. Some low life isn't worth a permanent record, jail time, community service, etc etc. play it smart.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefastfred
Old Hand
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: LbDub]
    #12878463 - 07/10/10 04:08 PM (13 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

this must differ from state to state. here, the victim of abuse/violence only need to either sign an affidavit or speak before a sort of grand jury. happens all the time here.




Nope.  It's a constitutional right.  It applies to all states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Quote:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.




Quote:

The defense must have an opportunity to "confront" and cross-examine witnesses. The Confrontation Clause relates to the common law rule preventing the admission of hearsay, that is to say, testimony by one witness as to the statements and observations of a person to prove that the statement or observation was accurate. The rationale was that the defendant had no opportunity to challenge the credibility of and cross-examine the person making the statements.




Quote:

The Court ruled that "testimonial" out-of-court statements are inadmissible if the accused did not have the opportunity to cross-examine that accuser and that accuser is unavailable at trial.




Quote:

The right to confront and cross-examine witnesses also applies to physical evidence; the prosecution must present physical evidence to the jury, providing the defense ample opportunity to cross-examine its validity and meaning. Prosecution generally may not refer to evidence without first presenting it.





There you have it!  Your constitutional rights lesson of the day.

They cannot generally present ANY evidence which is not right there in the court for you to examine, cross-examine, etc..  Even lab tests will get thrown out if the actual lab guy is not there to testify.

The ONLY exception to this rule that I'm aware of is if the witness is dead.  In that case the right to confront just doesn't really make sense.

So know your rights!  Prosecutors, cops, etc. count on you not knowing your rights and they will bulldog and otherwise fuck you over for not knowing them.  Remember, there's no law against prosecutors bluffing you into a shitty deal when they actually don't even have any admissible evidence.


-FF

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineistandalone
the clit commander
Male


Registered: 04/30/09
Posts: 2,997
Loc: somewhere in southern VT
Last seen: 9 months, 30 days
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12881127 - 07/11/10 04:43 AM (13 years, 10 months ago)

So know your rights!  Prosecutors, cops, etc. count on you not knowing your rights and they will bulldog and otherwise fuck you over for not knowing them.  Remember, there's no law against prosecutors bluffing you into a shitty deal when they actually don't even have any admissible evidence

i guess that's what it comes down to....the state's attorney counts on your NOT knowing your rights.
then they fuck you in the ass with it.


--------------------
Now he's Johnny Hammersticks hammerin' away like he's friggin' Tommy Noble

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineoudenmallon
Stranger
Male User Gallery

Registered: 06/23/10
Posts: 13
Last seen: 11 years, 1 month
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: Anonymous #1]
    #12881417 - 07/11/10 07:34 AM (13 years, 10 months ago)

Quote:

Anonymous said:
For walking up to a man and beating him moderately?

The fact that he had it coming I'm sure has no sigifigance judicially




i love how you say moderately... if someone walks up to me and starts beating me, i would not take it moderately


--------------------
There is no freedom in life without freedom of mind.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous #2

Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12932403 - 07/21/10 08:22 PM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

istandalone said:
So know your rights!  Prosecutors, cops, etc. count on you not knowing your rights and they will bulldog and otherwise fuck you over for not knowing them.  Remember, there's no law against prosecutors bluffing you into a shitty deal when they actually don't even have any admissible evidence



WRONG. They have to have enough for an indictment.

Quote:

fastfred said:
Quote:

this must differ from state to state. here, the victim of abuse/violence only need to either sign an affidavit or speak before a sort of grand jury. happens all the time here.




Nope.  It's a constitutional right.  It applies to all states.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sixth_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

Quote:

In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district where in the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the Assistance of Counsel for his defence.




Quote:

The defense must have an opportunity to "confront" and cross-examine witnesses. The Confrontation Clause relates to the common law rule preventing the admission of hearsay, that is to say, testimony by one witness as to the statements and observations of a person to prove that the statement or observation was accurate. The rationale was that the defendant had no opportunity to challenge the credibility of and cross-examine the person making the statements.




Quote:

The Court ruled that "testimonial" out-of-court statements are inadmissible if the accused did not have the opportunity to cross-examine that accuser and that accuser is unavailable at trial.




Quote:

The right to confront and cross-examine witnesses also applies to physical evidence; the prosecution must present physical evidence to the jury, providing the defense ample opportunity to cross-examine its validity and meaning. Prosecution generally may not refer to evidence without first presenting it.





There you have it!  Your constitutional rights lesson of the day.

They cannot generally present ANY evidence which is not right there in the court for you to examine, cross-examine, etc..  Even lab tests will get thrown out if the actual lab guy is not there to testify.

The ONLY exception to this rule that I'm aware of is if the witness is dead.  In that case the right to confront just doesn't really make sense.

So know your rights!  Prosecutors, cops, etc. count on you not knowing your rights and they will bulldog and otherwise fuck you over for not knowing them.  Remember, there's no law against prosecutors bluffing you into a shitty deal when they actually don't even have any admissible evidence.


-FF



DOnt cite the 6th amendment *facepalm* it doesn't apply to the states. The 14th does, which incorporates much of the rest (including the 6th) but it is not the same.

FURTHER, they can use compulsory process on the witness, aka subpoena, AND they can admit the evidence, but you have a right to bring the witness in to cross examine and ask yoru own questions


to be honest, the law is labyrinthine, and I don't know it as well as I would like, but I sure as hell don't pretend I do.

Dont listen to me, sure as hell don't listen to these guys, and CALL A LAWYER

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefastfred
Old Hand
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: Anonymous #2]
    #12933879 - 07/22/10 02:38 AM (13 years, 9 months ago)

What the fuck is with these anonymous dipshit trolls?

They say stupid shit with their real SN, then get proven wrong and roundly dissed, then they just come back to argue under an anonymous shield.

This shit just isn't working.  OP's should be able to post anonymously, everyone else should have to be responsible for what they say.  It's just letting dumbasses shit in other people's boxes.

Every single point Asshole #2 tried to make is flat wrong, and laughably so.  This guy couldn't even pass a 5th grade civics class and has no business posting advice or arguing law here.


-FF

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous #1

Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: oudenmallon]
    #12944199 - 07/24/10 02:56 AM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

oudenmallon said:
Quote:

Anonymous said:
For walking up to a man and beating him moderately?

The fact that he had it coming I'm sure has no sigifigance judicially




i love how you say moderately... if someone walks up to me and starts beating me, i would not take it moderately




i dont think he would hit me back, and i wouldnt beat him to a pulp, but he deserves a good hard punch to the face. thanks for the responses, I understand and appreciate the argument to get the specifics correct, but for this situation, it would be resolved quickly, and id either spend a few days in jail or see nothing come of it.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous #2

Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12945902 - 07/24/10 02:27 PM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

fastfred said:
What the fuck is with these anonymous dipshit trolls?

They say stupid shit with their real SN, then get proven wrong and roundly dissed, then they just come back to argue under an anonymous shield.

This shit just isn't working.  OP's should be able to post anonymously, everyone else should have to be responsible for what they say.  It's just letting dumbasses shit in other people's boxes.

Every single point Asshole #2 tried to make is flat wrong, and laughably so.  This guy couldn't even pass a 5th grade civics class and has no business posting advice or arguing law here.


-FF



Everything I said is wrong?
Ok, let's take the 6th amendment applying to states...

"One of the greatest changes in the interpretation of the Constitution came with the passage of the 14th Amendment after the conclusion of the Civil War...
...The "Due Process Clause" has been interpreted as applying the Bill of Rights, which lists the rights (or privileges and immunities) of the citizens, to the states. Known as "incorporation," the application of the Bill to the states did not come all at once, nor is incorporation complete. Even today, there are some parts of the Bill which have not been incorporated."
CITE: http://www.usconstitution.net/consttop_bor.html

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefastfred
Old Hand
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: Anonymous #2]
    #12945968 - 07/24/10 02:39 PM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Yes, everything you said is wrong.

Constitutional rights apply to every person in the United States regardless of what state they live in.  States are bound by the constitution, it is the highest law of the land.

That's 5th grade civics shit.  Since you don't seem to have even picked up the most basic gradeschool level understanding of the law you really shouldn't be trying to argue it here.


-FF

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12946243 - 07/24/10 03:35 PM (13 years, 9 months ago)

This shows that it wasn't always considered to be "5th grade civics shit". It also shows the 6th (and the others) does apply to the states.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Edited by luvdemshrooms (07/24/10 03:36 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisiblefastfred
Old Hand
Male User Gallery

Folding@home Statistics
Registered: 05/17/04
Posts: 6,899
Loc: Dark side of the moon
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #12946619 - 07/24/10 05:02 PM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

This shows that it wasn't always considered to be "5th grade civics shit".




It has been since 1868.  What year did you take 5th grade civics?

I think 142 years should be long enough for the idea to catch on.  Besides, before that there was the 5th amendment with a similar clause.  They both have substantially the same effect.

Before any of those it goes back to common sense.  What's the fucking point of writing the constitution if nobody has to obey it?  That's just flat out retarded.

The constitution has always been the highest law of the land and states have always been bound by it.  Some legal squabbling and the repeated clarification of that fact doesn't change anything.


-FF

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous #2

Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12947852 - 07/24/10 09:50 PM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

fastfred said:
Quote:

This shows that it wasn't always considered to be "5th grade civics shit".




It has been since 1868.  What year did you take 5th grade civics?

I think 142 years should be long enough for the idea to catch on.  Besides, before that there was the 5th amendment with a similar clause.  They both have substantially the same effect.

Before any of those it goes back to common sense.  What's the fucking point of writing the constitution if nobody has to obey it?  That's just flat out retarded.

The constitution has always been the highest law of the land and states have always been bound by it.  Some legal squabbling and the repeated clarification of that fact doesn't change anything.


-FF



Actually the supreme court in the last few years decided a couple cases determining how exactly the amendments are incorporated (whether the 2nd is fully incorporated for example)  Heller and McDonald are two of these. It is an open area in constitutional law. Further, simply repeating supreme law of the land does not change the fact that the bill of rights did not apply to the states for many years. Just because it is the supreme law does not mean it cannot constrain the federal government differently than state governments, as indeed it has. It seems someone stopped at 5th grade civics and never learned anymore. So search the net, read about incorporation and stop calling people out on topics about which you are ignorant. I cited a quote showing that incorporation is NOT completely identical, so the states and federal government are held to different standards. If you care to dispute that, back it up. With more than insults about 5th grade civics.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Anonymous #2

Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: luvdemshrooms]
    #12947861 - 07/24/10 09:51 PM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

luvdemshrooms said:
This shows that it wasn't always considered to be "5th grade civics shit". It also shows the 6th (and the others) does apply to the states.



Yes, but my point is it is wrong to simply say it applies, because it does not apply in the same way, it is substantively different. But yes, it largely applies.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Invisibleluvdemshrooms
Two inch dick..but it spins!?
 User Gallery

Registered: 11/29/01
Posts: 34,247
Loc: Lost In Space
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: fastfred]
    #12948981 - 07/25/10 06:10 AM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

fastfred said:
Quote:

This shows that it wasn't always considered to be "5th grade civics shit".




It has been since 1868.  What year did you take 5th grade civics?

I think 142 years should be long enough for the idea to catch on.  Besides, before that there was the 5th amendment with a similar clause.  They both have substantially the same effect.

Before any of those it goes back to common sense.  What's the fucking point of writing the constitution if nobody has to obey it?  That's just flat out retarded.

The constitution has always been the highest law of the land and states have always been bound by it.  Some legal squabbling and the repeated clarification of that fact doesn't change anything.


-FF




Your so cute when your angry! I'm guessing you haven't been laid lately.


--------------------
You cannot legislate the poor into prosperity by legislating the wealthy out of prosperity. What one person receives without working for another person must work for without receiving. The government cannot give to anybody anything that the government does not first take from somebody else. When half of the people get the idea that they do not have to work because the other half is going to take care of them and when the other half gets the idea that it does no good to work because somebody else is going to get what they work for that my dear friend is the beginning of the end of any nation. You cannot multiply wealth by dividing it. ~ Adrian Rogers

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Offlineslssurvivor
Mack
 User Gallery

Registered: 03/15/10
Posts: 132
Last seen: 8 years, 4 months
Re: how much time am i looking at [Re: Anonymous #1]
    #12951945 - 07/25/10 06:43 PM (13 years, 9 months ago)

Quote:

Anonymous said:
Depending on whether he presses charges or not right?

I should clarify that this incident has yet to take place, and I'm trying hard to just let things go. My record is clean btw, and thanks for the responses, maybe I will check out a courtroom.




For god sakes man why the fuck are you so set on getting caught for this?  Use your head man, if he really has it coming and you got some cunning, the powers of karma and fate will keep you straight.  :wink:

Edited by slssurvivor (07/25/10 06:51 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2  [ show all ]

Shop: Unfolding Nature Unfolding Nature: Being in the Implicate Order   Myyco.com Golden Teacher Liquid Culture For Sale   Kraken Kratom Red Vein Kratom


Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* Does this constitute the crime that is being charged?
( 1 2 all )
Cannabischarlie 1,475 23 07/12/08 03:49 PM
by Cannabischarlie
* Can the cops indite you if you have mycology supplies and psilocybin spores for research?
( 1 2 3 all )
Anonymous 686 40 11/29/12 01:55 PM
by Enlil
* FBI bulletin on using informant tips to obtain probable cause (long with extensive footnotes) MikeOLogical 1,582 2 07/25/05 11:53 AM
by drtyfrnk
* Commonly Misunderstood U.S. Legal Issues +The Mail and The Law
( 1 2 3 all )
johnm214 34,403 57 01/02/20 09:36 AM
by Ka Faraq Gatri
* Is it a Crime to be Under the Influence of an Illegal Substance?
( 1 2 3 4 all )
Green_T 2,123 61 03/22/09 11:26 PM
by silver97232
* Reid interrogation tip of the month Crasher 872 6 02/06/08 12:00 PM
by Alan Rockefeller
* Not answering the door
( 1 2 all )
Raw 1,200 28 05/27/10 10:25 PM
by Khaos
* Question about getting raided
( 1 2 all )
subiedude 721 21 05/10/10 10:19 AM
by fastfred

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Enlil, Alan Rockefeller
1,087 topic views. 0 members, 0 guests and 1 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2024 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.026 seconds spending 0.006 seconds on 15 queries.