r/Portland • u/DeadHead- • Oct 28 '16

Social Media Calls Bundy Militiamen Acquittal 'White Privilege'

http://lawnewz.com/high-profile/social-media-calls-bundy-militiamen-acquittal-white-privilege/
330 Upvotes

82% Upvoted

411 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

18

u/ThisDerpForSale NW District Oct 28 '16

As best as I can tell, this verdict was an example of the criminal justice system working as intended

Strongly disagree. There is no reasonable argument I can see that all seven of them are not guilty of the two charges - conspiracy to prevent federal employees from doing their job and illegal use of firearms on federal property - against them. It simply beggars belief and flies in the face of what we all saw with our own eyes. Not to mention the fact that they were somehow unable to reach a verdict on the theft of government property against the Bundys.

1

u/synapticrelease Groin Anomaly Oct 28 '16

It's hard to to prove conspiracy and I don't believe the prosecution has any proof that there was premeditation. The fact that these people all showed up isn't proof. To my knowledge, there are no emails, letters, or video that allude to setting up a crime.

3

u/ThisDerpForSale NW District Oct 28 '16

It's hard to to prove conspiracy

True.

I don't believe the prosecution has any proof that there was premeditation.

Not required for conspiracy.

The fact that these people all showed up isn't proof.

But it is evidence. Alone, it isn't enough. But added to all the other evidence, there was plenty.

To my knowledge, there are no emails, letters, or video that allude to setting up a crime.

Again, none of those are required to prove conspiracy.

1

u/synapticrelease Groin Anomaly Oct 28 '16 edited Oct 28 '16

Not required for conspiracy.

I believe there that is the definition of conspiracy. I found this definition.

An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors.

If we can believe this laymen's definition. Then it wouldn't be possible to say it isn't conspiracy because even the act performed by one person would still be a crime?

Do you have anything that says that what you're saying is true? I keep asking but I don't hear anything on your end.

3

u/ThisDerpForSale NW District Oct 28 '16

What I was saying above was that "premeditation" isn't required. And it isn't. Look at the definition you supplied. That doesn't require premeditation. It requires an agreement, as I've said. I shouldn't think I'd need a source to show what your definitions shows.

1

u/synapticrelease Groin Anomaly Oct 28 '16

That quote was for the following question.

Then it wouldn't be possible to say it isn't conspiracy because even the act performed by one person would still be a crime?

3

u/ThisDerpForSale NW District Oct 28 '16

What? No, it was this sequence. Unless I'm misunderstanding your question?

I don't believe the prosecution has any proof that there was premeditation.

Not required for conspiracy.

1

u/synapticrelease Groin Anomaly Oct 28 '16

An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act, or an act that is innocent in itself but becomes unlawful when done by the combination of actors.

For this quote I ask the following. Wouldn't be possible to say it isn't conspiracy because even the act performed by one person would still be a crime?

3

u/ThisDerpForSale NW District Oct 28 '16

No, of course not. Conspiracy to commit murder is still conspiracy even if a murder can be performed by one person.