Skip Navigation

InitialsDiceBearhttps://github.com/dicebear/dicebearhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/„Initials” (https://github.com/dicebear/dicebear) by „DiceBear”, licensed under „CC0 1.0” (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/)MO
Posts
1
Comments
203
Joined
2 yr. ago

  • Am I biased? Fucking absolutely and I hope he's found guilty.

    Can I set aside my bias and only consider the evidence as presented? Also fucking absolutely.

    There are plenty of people who care enough about the rule of law that would let a man they hate walk free. If you can't, perhaps you should be more concerned with yourself than the implications you ascribe to others who don't deserve it.

  • The only piece to this puzzle I didn't have is in your first link.

    Biggs received a medical discharge from the Army when he was 28

    Cool, so he didn't have 20 years AND he isn't retired; he was medically discharged. These two factors absolutely remove him from consideration of punishment under the UCMJ. Nice detective work there!

    You should take the "(Ret.)" out behind his name so as not to mislead though.

  • I don’t know the context behind the excerpt they posted

    That's the problem; they didn't post the context that would demonstrate he is not subject to the UCMJ as a veteran. Some retirees may be subject to the UCMJ, but in general, the UCMJ applies to active duty military. I'm a veteran with legal experience, not a lawyer, so I'm willing to be corrected with facts from someone who knows and isn't just repeating bullshit they heard on social media.

    The elements of this crime have several different acts which qualify; you don't have to do all of them to be guilty. The preface (which was cut off) denotes which people are subject to punishment under this law, which would almost certainly NOT include Biggs.

  • He doesn't fit element A, so this whole discussion is moot. Please stop spreading misinformation. Also, if you're gonna cite the UCMJ, cite the corresponding statute number (Article 94). Also, it helps if you spell UCMJ correctly

  • And here I was always told that "ignorance of the law is no excuse."

    Well, that's just something people say that is often misunderstood. "You don't have to know the exact statute to fulfill the elements of a described criminal act" is more appropriate.

    I don't think anyone's mens rea matters.

    It absolutely matters. But again, you can "with corrupt intent" do something that violates the law without actively thinking "I mean to do this in a corrupt way." Similarly, you can "with the intent to permanently deprive" take a car that doesn't belong to you without actively thinking "I mean that this person should never see their car again. Mens rea has a lot more nuance than you propose, and if it didn't, almost nobody would be convicted of anything.

  • At this point, no. As I read this, this is the earliest homonine fossil to date, to include those found in Africa (by over a million years, no less). Again, as I read this, early primates left Africa and returned as hominids.

    If this is true, it certainly upsets the apple cart regarding the hominid timeline. I'm no scientist, but my bet is the African fossil record is just incomplete, and eventually an ancestor to this creature will be found in Africa. I think it's just a "this is the best evidence we have at the moment" kind of thing. Again, I'm just some jackwad on the internet, so probably don't listen to anything I say

  • I am just hoping someone takes this up and actually challenges it in the courts well ahead of time.

    I personally know someone working to file suit against the state AG to bar trump from the ballot in their state, so there are things going on. Whether they're successful or not is anyone's guess.

    My guess is "no, they won't be." The 14th may in fact bar someone from holding office, however, it's my personal belief the 5th and the 14th both require them to be convicted of said offenses to first trigger the bar