Castanet

keith1612 wrote:yes thats 100% correct.
when police pull us over they convict us on the spot do they not?
most criminal charges result in a loss of not only earnings but also your job.
if the police and government feel this standard is fine for us then they should also live to it.
nobody gives me a free lawyer, paid 2-4 years off.
no they should get the exact same guilty until proven innocent they are forcing on us.

Where do you get the idea that police can convict anybody? And you think most everyone who has been criminally charged have lost their jobs? Before going to court?

OK .... so I wanna know ... does "the right to a speedy trial" enter into play here at all? Like, could these guys get off on that technicality?

I suppose one could ask - "what's the definition of a speedy trial"?

I spose one could ...

That tends to be pretty subjective.

Well, you're no help.

Suprised ?

Not sooprised at all - speedy trials seems to be at least two years down the road.

Welfare.

What does welfare have to do with the court system?

grammafreddy wrote:Well, you're no help.

Well Gramma, that's kinda my point. There are no steadfast rules. As examples, if the accused chooses to make the applicable Charter argument, traffic tickets are getting dumped after about a year, Impaired Driving cases at after about 18 months and the yahoo who shot at police along Westside Rd this past summer, Michael Ellis, had his charges of assault with a weapon (for trying to ram a police car off the road) and drug trafficking charges dumped after 31 months despite his abysmal criminal record.

So see? It isn't really easy to peg where the line is. In this case the seriousness of the charges isn't nearly as serious as for Ellis, but is far more serious than a ticket or, in my opinion, an Impaired Driver. Their lawyers may try and make the argument. But in this situation it all depends on what the reason for the delay is. Is it because of a back-logged court system? Or is it to protect the integrity of a far more serious investigation.

Fancy wrote:Where do you get the idea that police can convict anybody? And you think most everyone who has been criminally charged have lost their jobs? Before going to court?

police already have the power to decide guilt and penalize you on the spot for drinking and driving with no chance of appeal, you think that doesnt cost most people their jobs?
if i get charged i most likely would lose my job or miss court dates, oh and the taxpayers sure as hell wont supply me with a free top notch lawyer.
untill you have had some dealings with the police dont even suggest they treat people as innocent until proven guilty.
anyone who has a few run ins with them learned fast you are guilty the minute they talk to you.
no these four criminals should be in jail waiting for court not paid holidays.

police already have the power to decide guilt and penalize you on the spot for drinking and driving with no chance of appeal, you think that doesnt cost most people their jobs?
if i get charged i most likely would lose my job or miss court dates, oh and the taxpayers sure as hell wont supply me with a free top notch lawyer.
untill you have had some dealings with the police dont even suggest they treat people as innocent until proven guilty.
anyone who has a few run ins with them learned fast you are guilty the minute they talk to you.
no these four criminals should be in jail waiting for court not paid holidays.

I agree here, the whole post is spot on, I did 3 weeks in the remand center. I went into court and after Getting the Jp to lower my bail from $10,000.00 to $1000.00, I went to trial. It lasted 1/2hr and case dissmised, lost my job and all, sat for 3 weeks, and ACTUALLY did nothing. I was guilty on the spot. felt like it anyway.