Forum - View topicHandley's Attorney Comments on Obscene Manga Case
|
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 Next Note: this is the discussion thread for this article |
| Author | Message | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
braves
 Posts: 2309 Location: Puerto Rico (but living in Texas) |
|
|||||
I believe that it depends on the state that you live in. I know that in Texas you get on the list once you register to vote or when you apply for a driver's license. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
bemused Bohemian
Posts: 404 Location: central Mizzou (Moral Oralville) |
|
|||||
|
Possibly a rep from a franchise lawyer service like Prepaid Legal should start attending future Cons and operate a table along side literature, dvd, or manga vendors. I'm not posting this to be snarky, cute, or darkly comic. Decades ago while helping a close friend negotiate a minor misunderstanding (or so we thought) with a civil servant I found myself in a situation where I got to witness through his ordeal how a Texas judicial system (El Paso) operates from actual booking to eventual release after posting bond the next day.
My recommendation is you thoroughly familiarize yourselves with the laws in your area and the practicality of "lawyering up" before answering any question(s). Should the unthinkable occur and you find yourself in a situation having to deal with the law no matter how innocuous you think 100% cooperation with authority figures at point of contention may buy you the politic of police/sheriff protocol may work against you. Plus anything you "willingly" volunteer without advice of legal counsel during candid conversations, answering of questions, or an interview with the police may also work against your case when you appear before a judge. Television and reality shows do not reflect how this process works. Some aspects of the show COPS are accurate re point of arrest. Several years ago lie detector tests were determined to be neither valid or reliable (Is this finding still true?). Believe me, unless you are into S-M, self-loathing, or a fan of negative reinforcement curtailing perceived bad behavior you don't want to ever endure this process. The comments Handley's lawyer made re a prosecutor being granted extortion-like power to legally coerce concessions or a confession from a potentially incarcerated individual is dead on correct. This was true in my friend's case back then also. I recall an earlier posting made commenting on Handley's supposed defensive behavior while "thoughtfully" answering prosecutor inquiries. Prosecutors are not shrinking violets. Truth (whose?) acquisition is invasive and adversarial, not an enabling or supportive process. Figuratively speaking, the deck will always seem stacked against you. How many people can maintain extraordinary inner strength withstanding continuous intensive intrusions on their sense of self-worth? I can understand why Handley chose to cave. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
bonfire123
Posts: 16 |
|
|||||
yea thats how it is in texas. I was summoned to jury but can't attend because I'm in college and very busy, its not like me going to jury would delay my homework / test due dates. Plus I would be very harsh on criminals, except for the innocent ones like chris |
||||||
|
||||||
|
jsyxx
|
|
|||||
|
Can anyone explain what this concept of "receipt" he refers to actually means? Does that mean an actual proof of purchase for buying something? Is that different that evidence that you just agreed to receive something for free?
|
||||||
Cait
 Posts: 503 |
|
|||||
What jurors are paid is different depending on where you are. Here you are not paid for the first five days of jury service (in fact, your employer is legally obligated to pay you your regular wage during this time). After the five days are up, you're paid, I believe, $50/day (up to $250/week). But that's not even the point. Jury service isn't about how you are going to be financially compensated. It's about serving your country through its justice system. Furthermore, if the issue is related to my own freedoms as a citizen of this country, I'm not exactly going to care one bit if I am upsetting the other jurors who "just want to go home." If they "just want to go home" then it shouldn't matter to them the outcome of the trial at all, and better for me for arguing my case in deliberations. However, I will concede that the likelihood of actually getting picked for a jury trial for a similar case to Handley's would be slim. If we are going to be honest about what we know and how we feel going into it, anyway (and we probably should be). If the prosecutor knows you know about the Handley case and they know you believe the whole "obscenity" thing is ridiculous, he'll be more likely to want to dismiss you (however, the defense will be more likely to want you on the jury). |
||||||
|
||||||
|
bemused Bohemian
Posts: 404 Location: central Mizzou (Moral Oralville) |
|
|||||
|
Re jury duty: you might never get to serve if your job, physical condition, or character record (arrests, etc) legally sidelines your availability. I was in my late '30's when I finally got summoned. Getting past the perspective juror questioning involves convincing either the prosecutor or defense attorney that you will be tableau rosa (blank slate, unbiased, fair) if you are chosen to be a juror. If you appear to have a burning sense of righteousness the prosecutor may choose you but the defense attorney will reject you as a logical choice. Sadly, many jurors chosen from a pool are influenced easily by less than stellar evidence or lawyer commentary presented in a court case. Smarter jurors are usually never available or rejected. I was always loved by defense attorneys (previous posting would explain why) but despised by prosecutors; I have never been chosen.
There will also be situations where you will spend hours waiting in a prospective pool to be interviewed but the case to be reviewed gets settled out of court that day. You get thanked, told to go home, no pay. In Missouri once you receive the call and you accept you are placed in a pool of prospective jurors. If you are not chosen the first time you will not be called again for at least 2 years. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
configspace
Posts: 3717 |
|
|||||
|
I appreciate Chase's explanation. I understand now the rationale for pleading and seeing the catch-22 Handley was in.
Agree that he would not want a jury trial. But disagree with the deliberation. It would've taken them like 1 min. I've served jury duty before and maybe it was my case but I wouldn't want to serve again. Not because of the time or hassle (I still get paid from work and it's a break, sort of). But just in dealing with other jurors during deliberation. Call me arrogant, pot-meet-kettle and all that, but people are idiots; either that, or highly biased, emotional, irrational creatures. And of course, the lawyers are going to pick their jury pool based on that. Just look at the Max Hardcore case, In fact, I would wager for most obscenity cases, your chances are nill. Perhaps your best chance is to hope for a more liberal trial location, with perhaps more libertarian jurors (likely very low). But given that jurors are instructed to prosecute based on what they judge is offensive, that may not help.
At the risk of soapboxing, this is the reason why America was intended to be a republic and not a democracy. |
||||||
|
||||||
|
Inspector88
|
|
|||||
|
I'm really glad that Eric Chase cleared things up, but it got me thinking. If the work in question is harmless, as in drawings, there really should be some kind of "public indecency" aspect added to the evaluation. It's understandable that people would be upset if someone was looking at depictions of child pornography in public, but if it's in private, it really is no one else's concern. There are no victims, because the material does not involve real people, and the only person who views it is doing so willingly. This is just another case of someone being punished because he's different from the norm. It's too bad that from what everyone is posting, the jury almost seems bound to be composed of "normal" people.
|
||||||
daggerbob
 Posts: 52 Location: Colorado, US |
|
|||||
I believe, imo, the concept of "receipt" is just that. You cannot have something from someone else without receiving it first, even if you picked it up out of a trash can for free. Since having/possessing the material was not illegal they just made getting it illegal instead. About the only way they could not get you for "receipt" is if you made it yourself. |
||||||
|
||||||
Joe Mello
 Posts: 2258 Location: Online Terminal |
|
|||||
Agreed. Between my law school friend and myself, we had though someone on the defense had "dropped the ball." There is one aspect of this whole case I'm hung up on, but it may just be misinformation on my part. |
||||||
|
||||||
Daimao Raki
 Posts: 593 Location: Dark Side of the Moon |
|
|||||
|
One key thing I found while reading the article is the attorney stated: "What would have you done?". "Copin" a plea was probably the only good thing he could have done considering the situation.
|
||||||
|
||||||
grave_digger18
 Posts: 106 Location: quebec city |
|
|||||
|
I wonder if Mr. Handley will get a criminal record for this... Was otherwise a great explanation of what happened and certainly helped to clear some smoke up. I've been following this case for awhile and hope it resolves in the end with a better understanding of the law for collecters
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Daimao Raki
Posts: 593 Location: Dark Side of the Moon |
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
grave_digger18
Posts: 106 Location: quebec city |
|
|||||
|
I should have been more clear. I meant to say a permanent criminal record. I know that here in Quebec, if one has a minor conviction then you can be pardoned after several years by the courts. Also if the other case wins, it could affect the outcome on Mr. Handley's situation as well
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Daimao Raki
Posts: 593 Location: Dark Side of the Moon |
|
|||||
|
||||||
|
||||||
 |
All times are GMT - 5 Hours |
|
|
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group