Also, when soliciting hitmen, look for lowlife losers whose testimony can be easily discredited.
(I actually have no opinion on the guilt or non-guilt of Mr. Blakely.)
Yeah, as opposed to those prominent citizen hitmen.
nyuck nyuck
I don’t know if he was exaggerating, but Blake says that he’s spent $10 million on legal fees in the last two years and is broke and desperately needs a job. It will be very interesting to see what this does for his career (i.e. will he be back and bigger than he’s been since Baretta or will he be a total untouchable).
Lost Highway II?
It’d be the most popular post-spousal-death career decision since Rosemary’s Baby!
Since you hail from Alabama, does that mean she’s retarded or not?
Also what if supposed hired gunman hangs arround for more money/extortion. What better than killing the gunman who just killed your wife to silence the person you contracted, and prove your innocense in not wanting your wife killed?
Zoe - Just wanted to say thanks for that quote!! I LOVE that phrase.
And yet somehow
you give the impression of appearing to disagree with it.
I think that it’s clear that the loved phrase is “commendable homicide,” not Zoe’s observation that such a concept ought not to used in an actual court of law.
Good point, that, Larry. My bad to have missed it.
On a double jeopardy note, let us postulate that in a re-opened investigation, the triggerman in the late Ms Bakeley’s death is apprehended, and strong evidence is obtained to implicate Mr. Blake as having paid for the murder to take place.
Is he subject to prosecuton on a charge of solicitating a homicide?
Preview twice, submit once.
soliciting a homicide.
:o
Yes, they can charge him with soliciting Person X to commit murder. What they can’t do is charge him with murder again.
If caring about the course of the nation is a crime, then let me be guilty.
If they thought they could make it stick I imagine they would have charged him already, and probably tried to get those charges included in the murder trial. Since they laid it out as an accusation but didn’t charge him I would think the evidence is pretty flimsy.
Yes, but kaylasdad99 is postulating that the actual triggerman is found. If they could come up with evidence specifically linking Blake to this actual person, they can certainly charge him with it. I used Person X to refer to an unknown person who would have to be identified for this scenario to fly.
Doesn’t all this mean we need a new verdict? Is it England that uses it? Some other country does.
Guilty
Innocent
Not proven
Not exactly the point, rjung. I bow to no man in my disdain for George Bush the Lesses and all his works, but I can acknowledge that a conversation can continue to be about its original subject. Check out Rilchiam’s post above, where she lampoons your behavior in putative threads in non-political forums. Some people are mocking you for the tendency, others are decrying it; you may be sure that others not bothering to post are rolling their eyes in annoyance.
I can’t tell you how often I rolled my eyes in annoyance when Liberal would take the slightest reference to governmental activity in any thread and come charging in with his defense of “peaceful and honest” free agents. To this observer, your behavior appears similar.
You go ahead and do what you have to do. But (IMHO) you would be well-served to contemplate the extent to which making yourself a caricature of the Enraged Citizen dilutes the effectiveness of your opposition to the present regime. We require allies, not gawkers.
I’ve been hoping for that as well. And it is England. Part of the problem is that people think “not guilty” equals “innocent”. Like the OJ case, why not offer jurors the option of rendering a verdict that basically says, “Forget the defense lawyers. YOU screwed up the case.”
Ah, I see. Try not to make fine distinctions on St. Paddy’s Day, it’s hard to keep up while you’re bombed.
Since he was already acquitted of murder, I don’t see how they could-that would be double jeopardy. Perhaps they’d charge him with soliciting a murder, but not murder directly.