Woman who sold Ashley Biden's diary sentenced
(archive.ph)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (25)
sorted by:
I'm completely failing to see a crime here other than "actions that damage the image of the Democratic Globohomo Party".
She was convicted of "conspiracy". Conspiracy to what? Where I live, laws are based entirely on the value of the item- your neighbor cut down 100-year-old tree that was the centerpiece of your landscaping? You're only going to recover the value of the lumber in court, they give zero fucks about the impossibility of replacing it or the intangible value of the thing. So what is the going market value for a diary that someone has already filled out?
Supposedly she stole the diary and some other possessions that she planned to sell but yeah it's obvious this only happened because of who was involved.
Is Ashley's diary worth more than $950 for the cops to finally get off their asses?
From the article:
This sounds like she rented a place, forgot her diary, a later renter found it.
The ho left it behind. It's pretty much unfathomable that a Manhattan district attorney is prosecuting this crime.
"crime" happened in florida, better prosecute it in manhattan.
what a joke.
They are saying Ashley Biden left the diary with the woman believing it was a safe space to store it. So she stole it. I imagine if your diary got stolen it doesn't produce a charge. This is the political persecution they keep telling us Trump is going to do
I'm not sure whether people who can't see political prosecution at this point are in denial or deluded. Or precisely what is their problem. I know some of them IRL, and I still can't figure it out. The only real pattern I see is that these people all hate Trump for some other reason. eg: The person is a pussy and is put off by Trump's brashness. The person is a <insert minority/"minority" here> and Trump is anti-<'>.
So they get TDS and then just want the worst for anyone that is perceived as pro-Trump.
Interesting. Where I live it’s usually based around replacement value. 100-year-old tree? Replacement value (so $$$). In some places there are penalty multipliers for a malicious action, so think of replacement cost of a 100 foot oak. Don’t cut down your neighbor’s trees!
I've heard of cases where the replacement needed to be just that, a replacement. So if you cut down a 100 foot oak, start looking for a 100 foot oak.
There's a reason "Tree law! Tree law!" is a meme in some legal circles, because accurately replacing a tree is nearly impossible, leading to ridiculous fines in some cases.
This is off topic, but can they not determine how much less the property would sell for without the tree and use that to calculate damages? I swear I've heard of cases where they did exactly that.
The other part is definitely fair. It also raises a few questions. How can there be any "conspiracy" about selling an old diary? Are they not admitting that the content of the diary is true with this move?