Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3] ]

Subject: Re: We're royally fucked Author: Anne [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 12:46:04 06/29/02 Sat In reply to: Astrid 's message, "Re: We're royally fucked" on 10:18:58 06/29/02 Sat >>One more thing - it sickens me to see criminals get >>off on technicalities. But I don't so much blame the >>judicial system for that, as I do the low-life >>attorneys who make it their goal in life to free known >>criminals. > >But... that is the job of a defense attorney. What >kind of a society would we live in if a defense >attorney DIDN'T do his damnedest to keep his clients >out of jail?? I understand what you're saying, and I admit that there is a fine line. But I'm not talking about your everyday defense attorney. We all know that there are criminals who get off *only* because their attorney found one small shred of a technicality. Never mind that said criminal was indeed *guilty*. I mean, does anyone think OJ was innocent?? The Bill of Rights is to protect the *innocent*. Not help the guilty get off on a technicality. > [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Subject Author Date Re: We're royally fucked Astrid 13:33:59 06/29/02 Sat Re: We're royally fucked -- Anne, 14:46:29 06/29/02 Sat Re: We're royally fucked -- Astrid, 21:41:21 06/29/02 Sat Re: We're royally fucked -- Alan, 07:39:49 06/30/02 Sun Re: We're royally fucked -- Michelle, 12:42:14 06/30/02 Sun Re: We're royally fucked -- Alan, 03:50:32 07/01/02 Mon Re: We're royally fucked -- Alan, 07:41:39 06/30/02 Sun Re: We're royally fucked Astrid 13:36:11 06/29/02 Sat Re: We're royally fucked -- Alan, 07:44:47 06/30/02 Sun Re: We're royally fucked -- Bruja, 13:35:38 07/02/02 Tue Re: We're royally fucked Alan 07:37:04 06/30/02 Sun Re: We're royally fucked -- Michelle, 12:45:04 06/30/02 Sun Re: We're royally fucked -- Alan, 03:55:03 07/01/02 Mon Re: We're royally fucked -- Anne, 05:16:07 07/01/02 Mon Re: We're royally fucked -- Alan, 01:36:23 07/02/02 Tue Re: We're royally fucked -- Anne, 05:22:57 07/02/02 Tue