UmeU @ UmeU @lemmy.world

Posts

0

Comments

311

Joined

2 yr. ago

Embezzling all his campaign funds

Because something has not yet been proven to be impossible does not make that thing possible.

Speculation alone does not make a thing possible. You cannot claim that something is possible until you have demonstrated that it is indeed possible.

All things that have not been proven to be possible have a default state of being impossible until their possibility can be demonstrated.

Gibberish, absolute gibberish.

You are talking funny friend… we can NOT recreate the human brain. Maybe someday, but so far it has not been demonstrated to be possible.

You say that we can recreate the human brain because we know the human brain can exist.

The sun can exist, can we recreate the sun?

Just because intelligence exists does not mean it is possible to artificially create general intelligence… we would need some evidence that AGI is possible other than ‘makes sense to me’

Because intelligence exists, AGI similar to the human brain is possible? Your conclusion does not follow the premise.

Would there be traffic though?

First suggestion:

Women are the most vulnerable in the world and the most vulnerable are the most affected by the disease and the most likely to be affected by it is the people who are affected by it

Middle suggestion:

Women are not allowed in this world anymore because of their own personal preferences

What’s more reliable than NPR?

Does AP have a left center bias because reality has a left center bias?

Or maybe a little from column A and a little from column B

YoU dOn’T kNoW wHaT lIBeRaL mEaNs

To be fair, there is a considerable amount of overlap.

His defense was irrelevant because by only charging 1st degree, and not including the lesser charges, the prosecution took on the burden of proving premeditation, which was not possible to prove in this case.

Even if they were able to admit the evidence that KR had talked about his desire to kill protesters only weeks earlier, the prosecution would still have had trouble proving premeditation beyond a reasonable doubt given this heresy evidence alone.

He was found not guilty because the premeditation was not established beyond a reasonable doubt.

The self defense argument only would have been relevant if he had been charged with 2nd degree murder, reckless homicide, or manslaughter.

In the case of reckless homicide, his self defense argument would have failed due to the fact that a reasonable person would have known that bringing a loaded rifle into the middle of an unpredictable and potentially volatile situation would have the potential of resulting in death.

His unjustified and inappropriate presence that night instigated the conflict, and but for the fact that he was incorrectly charged, he would be in jail now.

Keep in mind that the verdict only establishes that the prosecution did not meet their burden of proof, not that the jury believed the self defense story.

All of his shootings were legally self defense

Not quite… The jury’s decision simply indicated that the prosecution did not meet their burden of proof, not that the defense’s position was accepted as fact. This is an important distinction.

… at trial the jury absolutely decided his case correctly.

Agreed, but keep in mind he was found to be not guilty, which is not the same thing as innocent.

Because he's immensely, painfully stupid.

Immensely, painfully, and dangerously stupid.

But we really, really don't need to give him any more of a spotlight than he already has.

Fair enough, but I think that this case should be taught in law school as an example of prosecutorial negligence in that if he were simply charged appropriately, 2nd degree non premeditated and/or manslaughter, he would be in prison now for a minimum of 15 years but probably closer to 25 years.

The choice to only charge 1st degree, which took on the burden of proving premeditation, was the biggest legal blunder of our time… worse than Alex Jones’s lawyer sending the full cell phone copy to the prosecutor, which was an absolute joy to watch live as it happened.

He got off because of an overly ambitious prosecution. Had he been charged appropriately, with second degree non premeditated, he would have been found guilty.

He was only charged with first degree premeditated, and because the prosecution had no way to prove that this idiot kid intended to kill when he traveled to the area, the jury had no choice but to find him not guilty.

The prosecutor is at fault, not the jury.

Good job, we need more people like you, people who value the truth.

I watched every moment of the trial including the jury instructions. You are spreading false information. Please check your sources.

They did NOT establish definitively that it was self defense.

The verdict established that the murders were not premeditated, which they weren’t.

For the charge of 1st degree murder the prosecution had to prove premeditation which they were unable to do, hence the not guilty.

For some inexplicable reason, the prosecution failed to also charge 2nd degree, which would have likely received a guilty verdict.

Please note the distinction: while the defense certainly argued self defense, the not guilty verdict does not prove the defense theory to be correct, it simply proves the prosecution did not meet their burden of proof regarding premeditation, nothing more.

In the US legal system, people are not proclaimed innocent, they are found to be guilty or not guilty. Not guilty of one particular charge does not mean that the defendant is innocent of all crimes.

I watched the entire trial.

He wasn’t charged correctly.

Had he been charged with 2nd degree murder he would have been convicted.