Comments on: The AQA thread http://apublicdefender.com/2008/10/27/the-aqa-thread/ Tue, 24 Jan 2012 02:29:56 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: The crumbs are asking me questions | a public defender http://apublicdefender.com/2008/10/27/the-aqa-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-58667 The crumbs are asking me questions | a public defender Fri, 16 Apr 2010 03:14:19 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1700#comment-58667 [...] terms that led visitors to this blog and make pithy comments about them. I’ve done this before (and again and again) and yes, it is a diversionary tactic which keeps me distracted enough to not [...] [...] terms that led visitors to this blog and make pithy comments about them. I’ve done this before (and again and again) and yes, it is a diversionary tactic which keeps me distracted enough to not [...]

]]> By: A Voice of Sanity http://apublicdefender.com/2008/10/27/the-aqa-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-42168 A Voice of Sanity Fri, 31 Oct 2008 03:55:27 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1700#comment-42168 Why do I have to keep explaining to people that the defense doesn't have to prove anything? If the police fail to collect evidence, or lose it, I maintain that the defense is entitled to the best presumption of what value it might have had for them. Example: I point out that the victim's shoes were seen 150 feet from the house on the street and that although they were pointed out to the police they were ignored and never collected. If they were in fact the victim's shoes it is agreed that it is strong evidence that the accused is not guilty. I am repeatedly told that the defense has to prove that they were the victim's shoes and not just a pair that looked like them, and am not believed when I reject this argument. This is not a good sign for the pool of potential jurors. Why do I have to keep explaining to people that the defense doesn’t have to prove anything? If the police fail to collect evidence, or lose it, I maintain that the defense is entitled to the best presumption of what value it might have had for them. Example: I point out that the victim’s shoes were seen 150 feet from the house on the street and that although they were pointed out to the police they were ignored and never collected. If they were in fact the victim’s shoes it is agreed that it is strong evidence that the accused is not guilty. I am repeatedly told that the defense has to prove that they were the victim’s shoes and not just a pair that looked like them, and am not believed when I reject this argument. This is not a good sign for the pool of potential jurors.

]]> By: Ryan McKeen http://apublicdefender.com/2008/10/27/the-aqa-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-42154 Ryan McKeen Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:42:43 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1700#comment-42154 People are now finding my blog by searching "kinder sex." People are now finding my blog by searching “kinder sex.”

]]> By: Gideon http://apublicdefender.com/2008/10/27/the-aqa-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-42087 Gideon Wed, 29 Oct 2008 01:17:23 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1700#comment-42087 F*ck if I know. Lol. F*ck if I know. Lol.

]]> By: Gerard http://apublicdefender.com/2008/10/27/the-aqa-thread/comment-page-1/#comment-42080 Gerard Tue, 28 Oct 2008 21:02:03 +0000 http://apublicdefender.com/?p=1700#comment-42080 What's "change rehab" ? (Google and wiki are letting me down, only finding oblique references...) <i>I understand this is not legal advice, and assume full responsibility for my comments. ;) </i> What’s “change rehab” ? (Google and wiki are letting me down, only finding oblique references…)

I understand this is not legal advice, and assume full responsibility for my comments. ;)

]]>