If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   No juror trial is complete without one of the jurors posting on Facebook: "I've always wanted to fark up a paedophile & now I'm within the law"   (bbc.co.uk) divider line 64
    More: Fail, contempt of courts, Facebook, Facebook Messages, retrials, jury, custodial sentence, Sex and the law, Lord Chief Justice  
•       •       •

6505 clicks; posted to Main » on 30 Jul 2013 at 10:25 AM (38 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



64 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-07-30 09:31:38 AM
What an idiot.
 
2013-07-30 09:32:40 AM

miss diminutive: What an idiot.


He can't even spell.
 
2013-07-30 10:11:46 AM
I think he meant paedawan.  Which is weird because claiming to be a Sith is a good way to get out of jury duty.
 
2013-07-30 10:17:20 AM

UberDave: I think he meant paedawan.  Which is weird because claiming to be a Sith is a good way to get out of jury duty.


mjcdn.motherjones.com
 
2013-07-30 10:30:58 AM
so is paedophilia a positive or negative word, or neutral since there is no verdict
 
2013-07-30 10:31:41 AM
I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.
 
2013-07-30 10:33:28 AM
guilty or not, if you are even ACCUSED of being a pedo... your life is done. If you are guilty... theres no chance you are allowed to achieve a status of rehabilitation.

I'm not an advocate for such things but I think its pretty farked up that someone possessing a few pictures of kiddy porn can serve more time than someone who slaughters a family of five.

/DNRTFA
//He was probably guilty
 
2013-07-30 10:33:30 AM

Waldo Pepper: I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.


'headed'?
 
2013-07-30 10:33:34 AM

Waldo Pepper: I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.


Haven't they always been doing that? I sincerely doubt it's anything new.
 
2013-07-30 10:33:44 AM

Waldo Pepper: I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.


So the jury system is headed for where it has been already forever?
 
2013-07-30 10:36:12 AM
i love how it's illegal to use the internet for research like that.
 
2013-07-30 10:39:35 AM

Waldo Pepper: I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.


After?
 
2013-07-30 10:40:50 AM

Fluid: Haven't they always been doing that? I sincerely doubt it's anything new.


Pretty much. What's new is social media giving members of juries a way of communicating their biases to the public at large. In the past, after serving on a jury, most would mention it to a couple of friends or family members and that'd be it. With Facebook and other social sites, the façade of juries being a good way of impartially determining a person's guilt or innocence is crumbling. Juries probably haven't changed much. We're simply getting a chance to see what has always been.

Not sure what can be done about it but you all know all jazz about the first step being able to admit there is a problem...
 
2013-07-30 10:41:36 AM

utah dude: i love how it's illegal to use the internet for research like that.


All evidence that you will legally need to reach a verdict will be presented to you during the case. Doing independent research can expose you to someone else's agenda instead of actual evidence. I hope you never get selected for jury duty if you think it's a-ok to research the case on your own.
 
2013-07-30 10:41:46 AM

utah dude: i love how it's illegal to use the internet for research like that.


You're not supposed to research anything involving the case you're no but can look at anything unrelated, at least that's how I understand it. Commenting on the case anywhere while the case is ongoing is a dumbass move.
 
2013-07-30 10:44:16 AM

utah dude: i love how it's illegal to use the internet for research like that.


During a trial where only the evidence presented is to be used to determine guilt, not irrelevant facts, opinions or hearsay one might find on the web? Well shiat, why hold court at all? If'n ya look guilty, why ya must be! String 'em up!
 
2013-07-30 10:48:13 AM
tvquotes.net
Who's a paedophile?
 
2013-07-30 10:48:55 AM
is this where we defend the youngster by saying the judge is mean old fart and these rules just aren't meant for today's wired generation and who cares he wasn't hurting anything peple in power are stupid and the cops were just a bunch of psychos on a power trip free everything for anybody under 30!!!

what a douche
 
2013-07-30 10:50:58 AM

Waldo Pepper: I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.


Sit down before reading any court case, especially Supreme court 5-4 decisions.

I think the recent voting rights (a unanimous vote in congress does not show a congressional decesion) even beats Gore vs. Florida (on the right: "we found this previously unknown amendment", on the left "but, but, states rights!").
 
2013-07-30 10:57:02 AM
He accepted he was not meant to discuss the case but believed he was only prohibited from using the internet to carry out research

Where's my facepalm pic?
 
2013-07-30 11:01:49 AM
I looked it up in an encyclopaedia, and a paedophile can not be cured with orthopaedic surgery.
Weirdos in Britain.  The lot of them.
 
2013-07-30 11:02:27 AM
This is the problem with being judged by a "jury of my peers" since my "peers" are by and large vindictive morons.
 
2013-07-30 11:10:52 AM

ToastTheRabbit: guilty or not, if you are even ACCUSED of being a pedo... your life is done.


www.litkicks.com
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-07-30 11:11:20 AM
This is the problem with being judged by a "jury of my peers" since my "peers" are by and large vindictive morons.

Massachusetts has a commitment process where the DA can sue to have a person locked up for life as a sexually dangerous person. At first the law allowed the defendant to request jury trial. Defendants routinely waived jury trials because jurors are by and large vindictive morons. The judge will make a fair decision instead of saying "OMG pedophile guilty can we go home now?" So the legislature changed the law so the DA can insist on a jury trial to boost his chance of a guilty verdict.
 
2013-07-30 11:16:14 AM

Jon iz teh kewl: so is paedophilia a positive or negative word, or neutral since there is no verdict


i'm thinking Canadian.  here in 'murica we spell orthopedics...in canada they spell it orthopaedics.
 
2013-07-30 11:16:39 AM
That's why I would be an awful pick for a jury.

I really do respect the law and would try to do the right thing, but I know if it was a case of rape or child abuse or pedophilia, if I listened to a victim cry, I'd want them to see justice and my emotions toward that sort of thing would take over.

As for pedophiles being branded for life, as I've said on here many times, I think if someone does their time, the are free of their debt to society, but the ones who try to argue that pedophilia is a valid sexual orientation really don't do any favors to these people NOT being branded for life.
 
2013-07-30 11:18:09 AM

yet_another_wumpus: Waldo Pepper: I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.

Sit down before reading any court case, especially Supreme court 5-4 decisions.

I think the recent voting rights (a unanimous vote in congress does not show a congressional decesion) even beats Gore vs. Florida (on the right: "we found this previously unknown amendment", on the left "but, but, states rights!").


Seeing as how Supreme Court cases are by definition opinions...I don't see how that relates to a jury trial where they are (supposed to be) judging evidence.
 
2013-07-30 11:20:14 AM

BafflerMeal: Waldo Pepper: I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.

'headed'?


is that wrong?
 
2013-07-30 11:21:14 AM

yet_another_wumpus: Waldo Pepper: I fear our own jury system is headed this way after the Zimmerman verdict. Folks will be hoping to right social ills or vote for a verdict based on their own agenda instead of the evidence.

Sit down before reading any court case, especially Supreme court 5-4 decisions.

I think the recent voting rights (a unanimous vote in congress does not show a congressional decesion) even beats Gore vs. Florida (on the right: "we found this previously unknown amendment", on the left "but, but, states rights!").


In all fairness the Supreme Court doesn't use the jury system
 
2013-07-30 11:25:58 AM

ZAZ: Massachusetts has a commitment process where the DA can sue to have a person locked up for life as a sexually dangerous person. At first the law allowed the defendant to request jury trial. Defendants routinely waived jury trials because jurors are by and large vindictive morons. The judge will make a fair decision instead of saying "OMG pedophile guilty can we go home now?" So the legislature changed the law so the DA can insist on a jury trial to boost his chance of a guilty verdict.


Wow, that's horrible.  What really irritates me about this is that I imagine that local politicians spin this by running a stat like, "Since passing of the Child Endangerment Law, Child Sex Abuse convictions have gone up x%" to completely cloak what they did.
 
2013-07-30 11:30:37 AM

balki1867: ZAZ: Massachusetts has a commitment process where the DA can sue to have a person locked up for life as a sexually dangerous person. At first the law allowed the defendant to request jury trial. Defendants routinely waived jury trials because jurors are by and large vindictive morons. The judge will make a fair decision instead of saying "OMG pedophile guilty can we go home now?" So the legislature changed the law so the DA can insist on a jury trial to boost his chance of a guilty verdict.

Wow, that's horrible.  What really irritates me about this is that I imagine that local politicians spin this by running a stat like, "Since passing of the Child Endangerment Law, Child Sex Abuse convictions have gone up x%" to completely cloak what they did.



Never forget this is easy money too.  Various federal agencies as well as state and locals (in the US) get special funds for prosecuting sex crimes.  So their depts get money for bringing people in under these charges and the various elected officials get another pip for being tough on crime.  And no one is ever going to stand up and defend the right to a fair trial or presumption of innocence.  It's a win-win-win really, unless you happen to be the accused.  Then you will lose your home, savings, family, future job prospects, and the ability to actually live or function in most municipalities.
 
2013-07-30 11:32:55 AM

mooseyfate: utah dude: i love how it's illegal to use the internet for research like that.

All evidence that you will legally need to reach a verdict will be presented to you during the case. Doing independent research can expose you to someone else's agenda instead of actual evidence. I hope you never get selected for jury duty if you think it's a-ok to research the case on your own.


oh, wait, so porn is still o.k. ?
 
2013-07-30 11:33:46 AM

miss diminutive: What an idiot.


This is what keeps me from being a criminal: the possibility that I would one day be subject to the judgements of the irreconcilable contradiction that is "a jury of my peers".

Also, see "why democracy doesn't work".
 
2013-07-30 11:38:12 AM

mooseyfate: utah dude: i love how it's illegal to use the internet for research like that.

All evidence that you will legally need to reach a verdict will be presented to you during the case. Doing independent research can expose you to someone else's agenda instead of actual evidence. I hope you never get selected for jury duty if you think it's a-ok to research the case on your own.


honestly, i would never get selected in the first place, given my tweaked out political leanings and educational background.

holy spit, trayvon was buying skittles?! I love skittles, they're RAINBOWY! NOT GUILTY! THIS KID ROCKS! FULL SCHOLARSHIP!
 
2013-07-30 11:38:59 AM

ToastTheRabbit: guilty or not, if you are even ACCUSED of being a pedo... your life is done. If you are guilty... theres no chance you are allowed to achieve a status of rehabilitation.

I'm not an advocate for such things but I think its pretty farked up that someone possessing a few pictures of kiddy porn can serve more time than someone who slaughters a family of five.

/DNRTFA
//He was probably guilty


Some years ago, the wife of a children's entertainer of my acquaintance, seeking a divorce, encouraged their 11 year old daughter to falsely claim that said entertainer was a daughter-fiddler, and probably a neighbour-kiddie fiddler.

Although it never even got as far as a charge for him, and all was recanted, it doesn't take much of an imagination to imagine the effects of such whisperings on the man's career, nor to wonder that the wife got away scot-free with her vile mischief.

I feel that REAL kiddie-fiddlers should be beaten to death with the frozen corpses of those who are malicious enough to bear false witness of kiddie-fiddling. A two-fer of sorts. Or a win-win.
 
2013-07-30 11:42:20 AM

Valiente: ToastTheRabbit: guilty or not, if you are even ACCUSED of being a pedo... your life is done. If you are guilty... theres no chance you are allowed to achieve a status of rehabilitation.

I'm not an advocate for such things but I think its pretty farked up that someone possessing a few pictures of kiddy porn can serve more time than someone who slaughters a family of five.

/DNRTFA
//He was probably guilty

Some years ago, the wife of a children's entertainer of my acquaintance, seeking a divorce, encouraged their 11 year old daughter to falsely claim that said entertainer was a daughter-fiddler, and probably a neighbour-kiddie fiddler.

Although it never even got as far as a charge for him, and all was recanted, it doesn't take much of an imagination to imagine the effects of such whisperings on the man's career, nor to wonder that the wife got away scot-free with her vile mischief.

I feel that REAL kiddie-fiddlers should be beaten to death with the frozen corpses of those who are malicious enough to bear false witness of kiddie-fiddling. A two-fer of sorts. Or a win-win.


You can accuse an innocent man of pretty much anything and when proven beyond the shadow of a doubt that it isn't true overtime He can regain his credibility except in the kiddie diddler cases.
 
2013-07-30 11:43:57 AM
They said it made clear to his Facebook friends "he would use his prejudices in deciding the case" and his choice of words "underlined his disregard of the duties he had undertaken as a juror".
-=-
I'd guess he's a Tea Party Republican type.
 
2013-07-30 11:47:59 AM

Valiente: miss diminutive: What an idiot.

This is what keeps me from being a criminal: the possibility that I would one day be subject to the judgements of the irreconcilable contradiction that is "a jury of my peers".


There's no requirement in American jurisprudence for a jury of one's peers.

Sadly, this makes it even worse, as at least some of the people on juries are blithering idiots, or firm believers that the cops are always right, and can do no wrong
 
2013-07-30 11:49:23 AM

ToastTheRabbit: guilty or not, if you are even ACCUSED of being a pedo... your life is done. If you are guilty... theres no chance you are allowed to achieve a status of rehabilitation.

I'm not an advocate for such things but I think its pretty farked up that someone possessing a few pictures of kiddy porn can serve more time than someone who slaughters a family of five.

/DNRTFA
//He was probably guilty


u can BE a pedo if your innocent.  in fact probably all of us our.  with the exception of the guys who molest children
 
2013-07-30 11:54:44 AM

Rev. Skarekroe: ToastTheRabbit: guilty or not, if you are even ACCUSED of being a pedo... your life is done.

[www.litkicks.com image 257x320]


You can like The Who and Pete Towshend's solo work without actually liking Pete Townshend.  I'll probably never buy another Who album in my life.  Why should I?  I already bought most of them.

Pictures of Lily, indeed.

And apparently he really liked those rough boys.

Oh, and Roger Daltrey's not off the hook either.  He may not be a paedophile, but he's a flamboyant narcissistic asshole.

Oh shiat - I guess I just blew my chances for backstage passes the next time they come to my town.  That's okay, it isn't the same without the Ox and Moonie - and Daltrey can't sing like he used to anyway.

I only ever listened to the Who for research anyway.
 
2013-07-30 12:05:25 PM
If the requirement were that I not be permitted to look up for myself at a government website (or in a print library in the courthouse) the exact wording of a law relevant to the case, I'd demand to be excused.

I will not be ordered to operate in ignorance of the laws passed by the legislature that I as a juror am charged with applying to the defendant; I take my duty as a juror too seriously to permit a robe-wearing egotist to interfere with it.

If not excused I would not violate the order, but I would hint strongly to the other jurors that the judge is hiding something and might be biased in his explanation of the law.
 
2013-07-30 12:06:08 PM

ToastTheRabbit: I'm not an advocate for such things but I think its pretty farked up that someone possessing a few pictures of kiddy porn can serve more time than someone who slaughters a family of five.


Citation please.
 
2013-07-30 12:12:05 PM

utah dude: mooseyfate: utah dude: i love how it's illegal to use the internet for research like that.

All evidence that you will legally need to reach a verdict will be presented to you during the case. Doing independent research can expose you to someone else's agenda instead of actual evidence. I hope you never get selected for jury duty if you think it's a-ok to research the case on your own.

honestly, i would never get selected in the first place, given my tweaked out political leanings and educational background.

holy spit, trayvon was buying skittles?! I love skittles, they're RAINBOWY! NOT GUILTY! THIS KID ROCKS! FULL SCHOLARSHIP!


Yeah, I get it. You're one of those people that describes themselves as "creative" because you wore mis-matched socks in High School. Moving on...
 
2013-07-30 12:19:17 PM

Stoker: They said it made clear to his Facebook friends "he would use his prejudices in deciding the case" and his choice of words "underlined his disregard of the duties he had undertaken as a juror".
-=-
I'd guess he's a Tea Party Republican type.


Annnnnd here's our first irrlevant political shiatpost of the thread.
 
2013-07-30 12:21:37 PM

mooseyfate: utah dude: mooseyfate: utah dude: i love how it's illegal to use the internet for research like that.

All evidence that you will legally need to reach a verdict will be presented to you during the case. Doing independent research can expose you to someone else's agenda instead of actual evidence. I hope you never get selected for jury duty if you think it's a-ok to research the case on your own.

honestly, i would never get selected in the first place, given my tweaked out political leanings and educational background.

holy spit, trayvon was buying skittles?! I love skittles, they're RAINBOWY! NOT GUILTY! THIS KID ROCKS! FULL SCHOLARSHIP!

Yeah, I get it. You're one of those people that describes themselves as "creative" because you wore mis-matched socks in High School. Moving on...


if i was walking down the street eating shredded wheat i probabyl wouldn't have been accosted by Zimmerman.  drinking milk maybe..
 
2013-07-30 12:55:49 PM
Who here <b>isnt</b> guilty of wanting to screw pedos (in a figurative sense)? Pedos are the most worthless pathetic scum in existence, these peoples own families wish them ill. In locales where pedos are detained with other criminals and their crimes are exposed to the populace, they are almost always violently assaulted, sexually assaulted, and or/murdered by their peers. Nobody from any walk of society really gives a shiat about a pedo, they really just are that pathetic.

I may or may not have violently assaulted a known pedo myself years ago when I was much younger and it was one of the most invigorating experiences of my life. To watch one of these cowards writhe in pain and helplessly endure a volent beating was one of the times in life I felt some very real sense of ironic justice. Although he wasnt sexually violated, he was still restrained against his will while he lay helpless and forced to accept the ruthles punishment. Very raw justice to be sure, but a justice that couldnt otherwise be exacted by our law and punishment system.

They all deserve the same, really. Someone who preys on innocent children is worse than a serial killer. Why they should be let out of prison is a sad question, and every single one of them should be forced to undergo chemical or physical castration to prevent recurrence in these cases, if not death. Any single raped child is one too many, and allowing them out afterwards to possibly mangle more kids lives/minds is lunacy.

/lol at the Fark pedos who just got upset by this comment!
//hopefully your types will be "welcomed" into general population soon!
 
ZAZ [TotalFark]
2013-07-30 12:58:41 PM
AndreMA: If the requirement were that I not be permitted to look up for myself at a government website (or in a print library in the courthouse) the exact wording of a law relevant to the case, I'd demand to be excused.
I will not be ordered to operate in ignorance of the laws passed by the legislature that I as a juror am charged with applying to the defendant; I take my duty as a juror too seriously to permit a robe-wearing egotist to interfere with it.


Such conduct by a juror can violate the U.S. constitution. That is why Maryland is freeing a bunch of lifers. Maryland's constitution has language saying that juries are judges of law and fact. Jury nullification advocates love to quote it. But it was declared unconstitutional as applied to criminal cases in the 1970s. Federal courts have said it is illegal to suggest to jurors that they could interpret the law any way other than exactly how the judge tells them to. Anybody convicted by a jury given pre-1980 standard jury instructions has a get out of jail free card.
 
2013-07-30 01:09:09 PM
It's spelled pædophile.
 
2013-07-30 01:28:44 PM

super_grass: Stoker: They said it made clear to his Facebook friends "he would use his prejudices in deciding the case" and his choice of words "underlined his disregard of the duties he had undertaken as a juror".
-=-
I'd guess he's a Tea Party Republican type.

Annnnnd here's our first irrlevant political shiatpost of the thread.


I'm not sure it would be irrelevant if the case at hand were in the US, but calling a Brit a "tea-partier" is just hilarious.
 
2013-07-30 01:34:46 PM

D_Evans45: Who here <b>isnt</b> guilty of wanting to screw pedos (in a figurative sense)? Pedos are the most worthless pathetic scum in existence, these peoples own families wish them ill. In locales where pedos are detained with other criminals and their crimes are exposed to the populace, they are almost always violently assaulted, sexually assaulted, and or/murdered by their peers. Nobody from any walk of society really gives a shiat about a pedo, they really just are that pathetic.

I may or may not have violently assaulted a known pedo myself years ago when I was much younger and it was one of the most invigorating experiences of my life. To watch one of these cowards writhe in pain and helplessly endure a volent beating was one of the times in life I felt some very real sense of ironic justice. Although he wasnt sexually violated, he was still restrained against his will while he lay helpless and forced to accept the ruthles punishment. Very raw justice to be sure, but a justice that couldnt otherwise be exacted by our law and punishment system.

They all deserve the same, really. Someone who preys on innocent children is worse than a serial killer. Why they should be let out of prison is a sad question, and every single one of them should be forced to undergo chemical or physical castration to prevent recurrence in these cases, if not death. Any single raped child is one too many, and allowing them out afterwards to possibly mangle more kids lives/minds is lunacy.

/lol at the Fark pedos who just got upset by this comment!
//hopefully your types will be "welcomed" into general population soon!


is downloading a bittorrent sponsored by the FBI a crime worthy of being  violently assaulted, sexually assaulted, and or/murdered by their peers
 
Displayed 50 of 64 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report