| Author | Post |
|---|
mjones
Regular Member
| Joined: | Tue Jul 15th, 2008 |
| Location: | SoCal, USA |
| Posts: | 224 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 7th, 2009 11:15 pm |
|
Edward Peruta wrote: What does "as 4 of 10" mean"?
Any updates should contain a wee bit more information.
not a clue...I'm guessing maybe 4th of 10 cases.
|
Theseus
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 7th, 2009 11:50 pm |
|
Day 4 of 10. On the tenth day the prosecution must start my trial or have a really good reason why they can't.
|
nomidlname
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon May 25th, 2009 |
| Location: | Reno, Nevada USA |
| Posts: | 26 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 8th, 2009 09:50 pm |
|
| Damn Theseus! I feel for you. Hopefully this continuance is something you wanted or at least could use. This continual dragging out of the case is getting a little crazy...
|
N6ATF
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 8th, 2009 11:01 pm |
|
nomidlname wrote: Damn Theseus! I feel for you. Hopefully this continuance is something you wanted or at least could use. This continual dragging out of the case is getting a little crazy...
It's almost like they're dragging it out until the statute of limitations lapses. Which I believe for misdemeanors is 1 year to the date of the accused crime, since a misdemeanor cannot be punished by more than 1 year in jail (at which point it would become a felony).
Last edited on Thu Oct 8th, 2009 11:03 pm by N6ATF
|
grumpycoconut
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 01:25 am |
|
N6ATF wrote: nomidlname wrote: Damn Theseus! I feel for you. Hopefully this continuance is something you wanted or at least could use. This continual dragging out of the case is getting a little crazy...
It's almost like they're dragging it out until the statute of limitations lapses. Which I believe for misdemeanors is 1 year to the date of the accused crime, since a misdemeanor cannot be punished by more than 1 year in jail (at which point it would become a felony).
Statute of limitations means nothing here. It only applies with regard to charging the crime. The charge has been laid and the statute has been satisfied. I just finished an attempted homicide case that was continued for over 3 years with the scuz bucket in custody the whole time. On the happy side for you Theseus you can control the timing to some extent. All you have to do is stop agreeing to continuances and you can force the prosecutor to either start the trial or drop the case until they decide to charge you again.Last edited on Fri Oct 16th, 2009 05:40 am by grumpycoconut
|
AyatollahGondola
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 03:51 am |
|
| Here is Sac, the custom is to push back, push back. I know one person charged with some felonies, not gun related, and he's been going to court for five years without a trial yet. Out on bail or OR, but out just the same.
|
We-the-People
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 06:21 pm |
|
That's just not right. The entire time the charges are "hanging" over someones head they are, in reality, "damaged". Yes the law says you're innocent until proven guilty but what limitations does a person encounter while "out on bail"? Here in Oregon there are usually a ton of restrictions and sometimes even mandatory probation officer meetings, drug tests, lie detector tests, etc.
Some people on bail need some restrictions (violent offenses) but bail is often a time of "limbo" where the citizen is deprived of some or many rights without having been convicted of any wrong doing. It's just not acceptable that our system is allowed to "function" in this way.
Grrrrrrr
|
AyatollahGondola
Regular Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 06:29 pm |
|
| Well, I don't think you have to put up with it unless you waive time. Waiving time is pretty customary though, to give the defense time to build their case. But once waived, it's pretty hard to call the prosecution on foot dragging
|
suntzu
Regular Member
| Joined: | Sun Jun 22nd, 2008 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 899 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 07:52 pm |
|
N6ATF wrote: nomidlname wrote: Damn Theseus! I feel for you. Hopefully this continuance is something you wanted or at least could use. This continual dragging out of the case is getting a little crazy...
It's almost like they're dragging it out until the statute of limitations lapses. Which I believe for misdemeanors is 1 year to the date of the accused crime, since a misdemeanor cannot be punished by more than 1 year in jail (at which point it would become a felony).
Maybe they are dragging this out hoping he Theseus will tire and simply cop a plea? A war of attrition perhaps?
|
Theseus
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Fri Oct 9th, 2009 10:46 pm |
|
Make no mistake, my resolve is strong. I will not tire for the cause of justice. I did not break the law and will not admit that I did. I will not accept a lighter plea, I will not surrender my weapons.
suntzu wrote: N6ATF wrote: nomidlname wrote: Damn Theseus! I feel for you. Hopefully this continuance is something you wanted or at least could use. This continual dragging out of the case is getting a little crazy...
It's almost like they're dragging it out until the statute of limitations lapses. Which I believe for misdemeanors is 1 year to the date of the accused crime, since a misdemeanor cannot be punished by more than 1 year in jail (at which point it would become a felony).
Maybe they are dragging this out hoping he Theseus will tire and simply cop a plea? A war of attrition perhaps?
|
coolusername2007
Regular Member
|
Posted: Sat Oct 10th, 2009 06:48 am |
|
| Theseus I wouldn't let the prosecution drag this out and delay this anymore. I would make them present their case. If its your side that needed more time, then I suppose that's fine. But I have personally seen a case where the prosecution "pretended" they had "scheduling conflicts", "emergencies" in other cases, and more. When in reality they just kept on building their case. And in the experience I had...it benefitted them, they won. Force them to put up or shut up. And once the actual trial begins, DO NOT let them skip a day, delay, put off, or present any other excuse to not continue to the end (including their child is sick and needs to be picked up from school). Doing so will only hurt your case and/or argument. I would even instruct your attorney to this effect before the trial begins.
|
Legend_AB
Regular Member
|
Posted: Tue Oct 20th, 2009 11:55 pm |
|
Any more info?
|
Streetbikerr6
Regular Member
| Joined: | Mon Feb 2nd, 2009 |
| Location: | Folsom, USA |
| Posts: | 206 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Oct 21st, 2009 12:02 am |
|
coolusername2007 wrote: Theseus I wouldn't let the prosecution drag this out and delay this anymore. I would make them present their case. If its your side that needed more time, then I suppose that's fine. But I have personally seen a case where the prosecution "pretended" they had "scheduling conflicts", "emergencies" in other cases, and more. When in reality they just kept on building their case. And in the experience I had...it benefitted them, they won. Force them to put up or shut up. And once the actual trial begins, DO NOT let them skip a day, delay, put off, or present any other excuse to not continue to the end (including their child is sick and needs to be picked up from school). Doing so will only hurt your case and/or argument. I would even instruct your attorney to this effect before the trial begins.
Yes you have a right to a speady trial, unless you waived your rights when signing the court papers... 
|
CA_Libertarian
State Researcher
|
Posted: Wed Oct 21st, 2009 09:45 am |
|
He's already mentioned he waived the right to a speedy trial. This was for his benefit, as this gives his attorney time to plan the defense strategy, and counter the state's case.
As for updates... sent him a PM... it's been a while since his last post. My guess is his silence is on orders of his attorney.
|
Theseus
Founder's Club Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 21st, 2009 09:28 pm |
|
Information is the same. Oct 28th is 4 of 10, meaning the trial will be the first week of Nov.
As for a speedy trial, I feel that if we simply went to trial in the beginning that we would likely have won because they didn't really have a case in the beginning. The only reason they have a case now is the judge gave them a case by taking away the real exemption of private property.
Now, there is a chance we will win at trial, but if not we are preparing for a fight at appeals. I stand a better chance to win there than I do at trial.
CA_Libertarian wrote: He's already mentioned he waived the right to a speedy trial. This was for his benefit, as this gives his attorney time to plan the defense strategy, and counter the state's case.
As for updates... sent him a PM... it's been a while since his last post. My guess is his silence is on orders of his attorney.
|
Sons of Liberty
Regular Member
|
Posted: Thu Oct 22nd, 2009 02:05 am |
|
It's pretty hard to win a case where the judge who is presiding is also the one who imposes his own laws! 
|
demnogis
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 04:10 am |
|
| Update?
|
N6ATF
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 05:49 am |
|
Theseus wrote: Information is the same. Oct 28th is 4 of 10, meaning the trial will be the first week of Nov.
^
|
demnogis
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 05:52 am |
|
Heard some mentioning on Calguns of a victory... I was biting my nails in suspense...
|
MudCamper
Regular Member
|
Posted: Wed Oct 28th, 2009 05:56 am |
|
demnogis wrote: Heard some mentioning on Calguns of a victory... I was biting my nails in suspense...
I seriously doubt it. Seems like things are going the other way. Let's wait for Theseus to comment.
|
Current time is 12:29 am | Page:   1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 ...   |
|
