sleepy | Wed 20-Sep-17 09:10 PM |
Member since 24th Jul 2007
223 posts
| |
|
#68960, "RE: Exactly"
Edited on Wed 20-Sep-17 09:16 PM
|
My prior posts, that you might not have read, have made it perfeclty clear that while I favor one interpretation of the law, both are perfectly reasonable. What I'm asking boils down to whether or not a person has to actively avoid a situation in order to prevent a tribunal from thinking they are "aiding" a criminal.
I did look at your 8 point timeline of events. I'm saying that you're only viewing it from your POV. From your POV, sure, that might be blatant assisting. From the group's POV, it could literally be them wanting to catch you, and a criminal suddenly taking advantage of that situation. Which is why I ask what your standard of evidence is. Do you just have to think "damn, this looks like aiding to me!" Or do you actually have a higher burden you need to meet, which is, "I know from the facts that this is in fact collusion of some sort between the two parties involved, and there is no reasonable doubt within my mind."
|
|
|
Trib Law for Murphy
[View all] , Lhydia, Tue 12-Sep-17 05:22 AM
Law vs. Man,
Saagkri,
21-Sep-17 05:49 PM, #62
RE: Law vs. Man,
Jarmel,
25-Sep-17 10:48 PM, #70
Trib Law and Consequences,
Tac,
21-Sep-17 04:00 PM, #60
That's my main issue with creative flagging,
Kstatida,
21-Sep-17 04:08 PM, #61
I think that's universally true. No one argues their m...,
Tac,
22-Sep-17 11:32 AM, #65
RE: Trib Law and Consequences,
Jarmel,
25-Sep-17 10:55 PM, #71
Yeah that's what I do,
Murphy,
26-Sep-17 01:09 AM, #72
RE: Yeah that's what I do,
Kstatida,
26-Sep-17 02:26 AM, #73
RE: Trib Law and Consequences,
Tac,
26-Sep-17 10:49 AM, #74
Epic fail Murphy,
Lhydia,
21-Sep-17 08:26 AM, #57
RE: Epic fail Murphy,
Kstatida,
21-Sep-17 08:59 AM, #58
Good for you. Move along.,
Murphy,
21-Sep-17 09:51 AM, #59
Not everything is free to be reinterpreted,
Murphy,
18-Sep-17 08:18 AM, #1
RE: Not everything is free to be reinterpreted,
Jarmel,
18-Sep-17 08:59 AM, #2
You're making no sense, please stay on topic.,
Murphy,
18-Sep-17 09:18 AM, #4
Was that before or after he left the game forever? n/t,
Lhydia,
18-Sep-17 09:05 AM, #3
i feel like you know this,
laxman,
18-Sep-17 11:16 PM, #5
Exactly,
Murphy,
19-Sep-17 12:52 AM, #6
Any IMM care to weigh in here? (n/t),
Current challenge (Anonymous),
19-Sep-17 02:22 PM, #7
Sure.,
Ishuli,
20-Sep-17 12:16 PM, #8
Do you take into account,
Kstatida,
20-Sep-17 12:58 PM, #9
You're assuming,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 03:50 PM, #10
As someone who was around at the time...,
Lhydia,
20-Sep-17 03:52 PM, #12
RE: As someone who was around at the time...,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 04:11 PM, #13
I don't think CF's trib laws were written by lawyers,
lasentia,
22-Sep-17 09:22 AM, #64
RE: Do you take into account,
Ishuli,
20-Sep-17 03:49 PM, #11
Flagging someone who defends their cabal,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 04:33 PM, #14
RE: Flagging someone who defends their cabal,
Ishuli,
20-Sep-17 04:43 PM, #15
So being off-duty matters after all?,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 04:59 PM, #16
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
Ishuli,
20-Sep-17 05:38 PM, #17
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 08:02 PM, #21
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
Ishuli,
20-Sep-17 08:13 PM, #22
What do you mean it doesn't specify jurisdiction?,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 08:52 PM, #26
RE: What do you mean it doesn't specify jurisdiction?,
Ishuli,
20-Sep-17 09:20 PM, #39
Holy Molly!,
Kstatida,
21-Sep-17 04:56 AM, #54
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 09:00 PM, #28
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
Ishuli,
20-Sep-17 09:17 PM, #35
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 09:34 PM, #42
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
Ishuli,
20-Sep-17 09:53 PM, #45
Fellow 2L checking in!,
Andrlos,
21-Sep-17 05:51 AM, #56
Three law students? You poor bastards :),
lasentia,
22-Sep-17 08:56 AM, #63
RE: Fellow 2L checking in!,
sleepy,
22-Sep-17 02:34 PM, #66
RE: Fellow 2L checking in!,
Andrlos,
22-Sep-17 05:29 PM, #67
RE: Fellow 2L checking in!,
sleepy,
22-Sep-17 10:38 PM, #68
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
Kstatida,
21-Sep-17 05:15 AM, #55
RE: So being off-duty matters after all?,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 09:04 PM, #30
I mean...,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 09:15 PM, #33
RE: I mean...,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 09:33 PM, #41
RE: I mean...,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 09:38 PM, #43
RE: I mean...,
Jarmel,
21-Sep-17 12:38 AM, #50
My example was terrible Criminal A Criminal B,
Jarmel,
21-Sep-17 12:43 AM, #51
Tribunal library. Look for Precedents :-D,
Quixotic,
20-Sep-17 07:00 PM, #19
RE: Exactly,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 06:22 PM, #18
4b with some investigation can allow a flag. 8 doesn't,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 07:54 PM, #20
RE: 4b with some investigation can allow a flag. 8 does...,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 08:45 PM, #24
Are you just deliberately misinterpreting my words?,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 09:05 PM, #31
I simply quoted you first and questioned what was said,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 09:18 PM, #36
See post #37.,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 09:27 PM, #38
RE: See post #48.,
Jarmel,
21-Sep-17 12:54 AM, #52
RE: Exactly,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 08:33 PM, #23
He argues that your intent doesn't matter,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 08:49 PM, #25
Focus on my example first ...,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 09:00 PM, #29
RE: Exactly,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 08:58 PM, #27
RE: Exactly,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 09:16 PM #32
RE: Exactly,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 09:16 PM, #34
That doesn't really answer the Q,
sleepy,
20-Sep-17 09:24 PM, #40
RE: That doesn't really answer the Q,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 10:06 PM, #46
That line in the sand cannot be drawn the way you draw ...,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 09:19 PM, #37
RE: That line in the sand cannot be drawn the way you d...,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 09:48 PM, #44
Here's what I imagined that can justify a flag:,
Murphy,
20-Sep-17 10:31 PM, #47
I can see your point,
Jarmel,
20-Sep-17 11:57 PM, #48
What if...,
sleepy,
21-Sep-17 01:42 AM, #53
RE: What if...,
Jarmel,
25-Sep-17 10:36 PM, #69
Ok I have got this now,
Jarmel,
21-Sep-17 12:18 AM, #49
| |
|