Climate terrorists that break laws get off scot-free with the most absurd arguments because judges are already far-left activists who don't give a shit about the law.
Our supreme court recently stated that climate change is more important than civil rights.
Germany never had rule of law with an independent judiciary though. I recall during the pandemic judges being removed for not agreeing with lockdown or medical policies. If the state itself controls the courts then it's just tyranny with extra steps.
(we may defacto be the same in the US but do still pretend otherwise)
The judiciary literally is the state in America. But I think you alluded to the appointment process, which yes sure but judges have shown independence once they sit the bench.
I actually meant impeachment. In the US, the legislative branch can remove judges when they are not to its liking. They rarely do it, which is probably why the judicial branch is so out of control and can basically act like mini-dictators.
I'm not sure what is worse. I'd say judges having more power is probably worse, because they have 0 accountability rather than the minimal accountability of legislators. But then again, legislators never protect your rights, while judges sometimes do. Decisions...
The American judicial branch has been bad, but not as bad as it could've been. The biggest problem is the postmodern "living constitution" theory of law that allows judges to basically legislate from the bench.
The biggest problem is not any ideology, but the fact that they're allowed to do whatever the hell they want - which incentivizes them to come up with ideologies that justify them doing whatever the hell they want.
Yes, as bad as they are, at least they defend free speech - I cannot say the same of European judges.
That a massive chunk of all men across nations, cultures, and generations are just so evil from birth they are driven to beat and break women who have done nothing wrong.
Or that women doing horrific and awful things fully expecting themselves to not have to deal with the consequences and are crying when they do.
I think just watching a handful of women speak on social media would put every man with any sense in option 2.
In other words, junkie fight. Chick says he was threatening her with a "sharpened chopstick" (lmao) and she pulled out a knife and accidentally stabbed xim to death.
The real surprise is that she got life, but it's B*itain so she'll be out in a few years, the worst punishment she could possibly face is sharing a cell with a troon.
I don't know why that is so surprising. Many of the black, white-hating politicians have white boyfriends and husbands. Many of the feminists who say that they "hate men" melted for Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard because they were thirsty.
I can't read the article, because it's an archive, but I don't see why they should not convict him - no more than the Imp would vote to acquit a man who murdered a woman for no reason. You can persuade yourself that the victim was "fake" as he did with Sarah Everhard when you're far from the matter, but not when you're up close.
I considered it. He might say that convicting would lead to "women having more of an excuse to murder boys" or something like that. But more likely than not, I think he'd vote to convict.
His main problem is that he's totally detached from the real world, and there's nothing like being on a jury (I assume, I'm a Eurofag) to change that and force you to confront the facts.
they immediately recognised Mr Mayo as a local drug user, who regularly begged outside Tesco’s and Mortlake train station.
their three-month relationship
Sentencing Wallace, Judge Rajeev Shetty
Wallace graduated from St. Mary’s University, Twickenham with a law degree in 2017 and when arrested was one month short of completing her Masters in Human Rights & Legal Practice at the University of Roehampton.
Remember this. These cunts will be the ones filling the benches in 20 years.
Will be? That's already the case here in Germany.
Climate terrorists that break laws get off scot-free with the most absurd arguments because judges are already far-left activists who don't give a shit about the law.
Our supreme court recently stated that climate change is more important than civil rights.
Germany never had rule of law with an independent judiciary though. I recall during the pandemic judges being removed for not agreeing with lockdown or medical policies. If the state itself controls the courts then it's just tyranny with extra steps.
(we may defacto be the same in the US but do still pretend otherwise)
A legacy left over from the Allied occupation
And before.
The "state" controls the judiciary everywhere. Do you mean direct control by the executive?
The judiciary literally is the state in America. But I think you alluded to the appointment process, which yes sure but judges have shown independence once they sit the bench.
I actually meant impeachment. In the US, the legislative branch can remove judges when they are not to its liking. They rarely do it, which is probably why the judicial branch is so out of control and can basically act like mini-dictators.
I'm not sure what is worse. I'd say judges having more power is probably worse, because they have 0 accountability rather than the minimal accountability of legislators. But then again, legislators never protect your rights, while judges sometimes do. Decisions...
The American judicial branch has been bad, but not as bad as it could've been. The biggest problem is the postmodern "living constitution" theory of law that allows judges to basically legislate from the bench.
The biggest problem is not any ideology, but the fact that they're allowed to do whatever the hell they want - which incentivizes them to come up with ideologies that justify them doing whatever the hell they want.
Yes, as bad as they are, at least they defend free speech - I cannot say the same of European judges.
Wow, birds of a feather, shit on our heads, together. Surprised I yam, I yam.
If that's an accurate representation then your country is past the point of no return.
These people were heroin addicts. Who regularly begged according tot he article. They weren’t going on to graduate from shit ….
They're already filling them right this moment. Have been for decades, in fact.
WEZ B DUCTURS N SHEIT!
Women’s legal defense: he was abusive so I HAD to kill him!
I’m just surprised she didn’t claim rape
Yeah, or "coercive control".
Don't discount all the emotional labor she did.
Frankly I'm at the point where I just assume any abuse they cry about is well earned and long overdue.
"He abused me!"
Doesn't matter. Get fucked.
There really are only two possibilities:
That a massive chunk of all men across nations, cultures, and generations are just so evil from birth they are driven to beat and break women who have done nothing wrong.
Or that women doing horrific and awful things fully expecting themselves to not have to deal with the consequences and are crying when they do.
I think just watching a handful of women speak on social media would put every man with any sense in option 2.
I'm mostly surprised it was a woman. I had even odds on "cuck", "faggot", and "delusional faggot".
Junkie fight. No gender politics about it. Hard core drug users do this on the REG.
In other words, junkie fight. Chick says he was threatening her with a "sharpened chopstick" (lmao) and she pulled out a knife and accidentally stabbed xim to death.
The real surprise is that she got life, but it's B*itain so she'll be out in a few years, the worst punishment she could possibly face is sharing a cell with a troon.
It's worse than I thought, she chased him down the street to execute him. All in self defense, of course.
That (non existent) wooden chopstick sure did look threatening.
What an asshole, he love bombed her till the very last minute.
She had no choice with this kind psychic abuse.
Sounds like he died the he lived, as a simp..
The most shocking thing is she actually got convicted, with a long sentence, by a jury of mostly women.
I don't know why that is so surprising. Many of the black, white-hating politicians have white boyfriends and husbands. Many of the feminists who say that they "hate men" melted for Johnny Depp vs. Amber Heard because they were thirsty.
I can't read the article, because it's an archive, but I don't see why they should not convict him - no more than the Imp would vote to acquit a man who murdered a woman for no reason. You can persuade yourself that the victim was "fake" as he did with Sarah Everhard when you're far from the matter, but not when you're up close.
I feel like imp might find a way to justify that in his mind.
I considered it. He might say that convicting would lead to "women having more of an excuse to murder boys" or something like that. But more likely than not, I think he'd vote to convict.
His main problem is that he's totally detached from the real world, and there's nothing like being on a jury (I assume, I'm a Eurofag) to change that and force you to confront the facts.
I have served on a jury before, and it does indeed force you to confront the facts and also the specificity of law.
i can fix her
He was the carbon she wanted to remove.
Archive.is is booting me back to its homepage today. Sad
Same problem here except it isn't just today. I get an endless cycle of captchas
What an absolute rollercoaster.
What an odd relationship.
“Judge Rajeev Shetty”
Lol
What's the point of using drugs if it makes you more pissed off?
Darwin Award?
Activists don’t know how to love
She should be executed for this heinous crime, as it demonstrates extreme malicious intent.