- This topic has 32 replies, 11 voices, and was last updated 12 years, 7 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
The conviction of one of the brothers has proven beyond a shadow of a doubt that Our civil rights that was given to us in the Constitution no longer exists if PC is in the way. PC can take away the concept of self-defense & put innocent people through convictions and possibly jail!
Based on the public facts of the story it is reasonable to assume that he was stepping overboard his call of being a shomrim member. there were numerous instances before the attack where he should have thought about what he was doing and have called the police. I’m not saying he’s guilty but he did cross the line and it wasn’t a miscarriage of justice. Shomrim is to assist the police , not to replace it. Does anyone know if he’s going to serve time in prison?
He’s rachmana ltzlan facing up to 10 years behind bars.
Baltimore is one of the most corrupt cities in America, but I won’t even mention some of the atrocities on YWN, as much as I would love to, to save other people from their own possible downfalls in the Maryland quagmire.
But meanwhile, I would recommend that no-one gets involved in any patrol group. Between this case & the other episode in FL, let society find out the hard way, without being a guinea pig on a patrol organization, jeopardizing your own freedom & innocence.
1. One was acquitted.
2. Due to denial of a jury trial and use of hearsay evidence, the appeal of the convictiom has a good chance.
3. The kid who was convicted doesn’t seem all that innocent. He was seriously violating Shomrim’s policies. Note that when the Shomrim arrived, they appear to beieve the “victim” had been wrongfully attacked.
Akuperma, They were not denied a jury trial. They elected to have a bench trial in the probably correct belief that a Baltimore jury would have thrown the book at them and a bench trial was their best chance of a fair hearing and aquittal. As a matter of procedure and law, a confrontation that leads to a fight is the fault of the one who initiated the confrontation. What the defendants should have done is stay in the car and radioed the police as was there approved procedure. Even if they were concerned about the woman pedestrian’s safety, The law did not permit them to intervene with force unless they witnessed an actual assuault.
Why did the boys leave their car? That’s never supposed to happen and they wouldn’t be in this mess ( as neither would be Zimmerman ) if they had stayed in the car. I’m not saying the boys are guilty, but they put themselves into this situation
“Baltimore is one of the most corrupt cities in America”
Based on what measurement? If it’s so corrupt, why do so many heimish families live there? Why has the community grown so much over the past years?
“Seems to any non-prejudiced observer that the Judgment would have to be Non-Guilty due to self-defense. Any other Judgment would not be based on any rules of law. This would be called a miscarriage of justice!”
Health, I thought you were a health professional. When did you graduate law school? Were you in the court room for the trial? Have you reviewed the transcript? Tell us some the actual rules of law you know that were used in this case, as well as those that were violated.
Although the testimony of the victim was stricken from the record, the 911 call wasn’t. The judge had to make a facts call, what story makes more sense based on all the evidence. Although self defense is a justification, there is some shifting of the burden of proof, making the “innocent until proven guilty” less applicable. With all that in mind, there is nothing that I have read that comes close to showing that there was a miscarriage of justice (with no conclusive evidence to the contrary either). Therefore, a judge has more credibility to me.
My question to you Health: If there was a Jewish kid walking in a black neighborhood, was approached by two intimidating folks in a car saying you don’t belong here or the like, then a few minutes later seeing those two folks approaching him, the kid picks up the nearest thing he finds, then gets beaten. How would you feel about a self-defense argument then?
Obviously you’re claiming to be some lawyer or legal expert, just FYI I don’t respond to demands.
I’m not claiming I am an expert – I’m claiming you’re not. Claiming knowledge about a legal case from reading media quotes is ridiculous.
Hi Health, I haven’t been around for a while but I see that you have remained consistant in your position. My statement was correct. the instigator of the confrontation is the one at fault. Whether or not the shomrim guy instigated a confrontation was a matter for the court to decide. The court apparently decided that he was, in fact the instigator. In any event, getting out of the car to “talk” to the “victim” was a bad idea. The Shomrim kid should have reported to the police and followed the “victim”. He would only be justified in taking further action if he witnessed an assault taking place.
P.S. I do, in fact, believe that the kid was tried fairly and the anit-semitism that you and others on this blog perceive to exist in the U.S. is in your mind. That is not to say that there are no anti-semites in America. It’s just that institutional and social anti-semitism simply does not exist in the U.S. I know you believe otherwise, but you believe a lot of other things that I see differently. Biz 120, we’ll find out who was right. Mestammeh we’ll find that we were both wrong.
if they did not convict certain “minority” populations in Baltimore would riot and call in their “reverends”.
Health – discriminating against a person who won’t work Saturday when one has a reason why having an employee who works on Saturday fills a need, has nothing to do with anti-semitism. Nothing. Why should the Government or an employer give you special treatment? What about the next person, who doesn’t want to work on Saturday b/c they just want off? Must they be hired too?
As far as your attack on who has more ahavas yisroel for whatever sect, the irony is that your stereotyping of the sects is so hateful.
There is a question of fact here as to what happened. The judge was supposed to be the fair and objective fact-finder. Having seen all the evidence, and having made CREDIBILITY calls, the Judge ruled on the facts. Nothing in the judge’s story is far-fetched. In the judge’s story, a beloved Jew did an understandable, yet illegal act, and now must face the consequences.
Caring for someone does NOT mean that you believe they can never do something illegal. Does it?
I am not a member and don’t intend to remain. I sometimes have a bit of time between classes and will gaze over some threads. But, this thread went too far and, I felt I had to respond.
1. People here are probably not residents of the baltimore community. This took place across the street from a giant dangerous public school next to two shuls. The students in this school are responsible for many episodes in the community. Just personally, two robbed my parent’s shed- two blocks from this incident. The cops came two days later despite the fact we called when they were in the shed. A few of these kids beet up my brother’s 12 year old friend on his way to my house- 15 min walk from the school. We did not call the cops until after shabbos because a rav said they won’t come. This was before the days of Shomrim. Shomrim are essential to our community. It’s not black and jewish neighborhoods here. They are all mixed.
2. You don’t know this special family nor what this silly case has done to them. You have no idea of the pain it has caused. Don’t forget the “guilty” older brother was just recently married and may spend some time in jail leaving his new bride alone as he sits in a cell while he is in school full time.
3. Primarily, so many are so quick to put another poster/member of klal yisroel down. I’ve seen it in so many threads which is why I refrain from posting along my spouse and children who keep me really busy. Why do people bash others? Does Health’s profession really invalidate him from feeling badly for these boys? Who cares is he isn’t a lawyer? Neither am I. But, I wouldn’t speak that way to another person because I would not appreciate someone speaking like that to me. As a rav in my community said in a shabbos drasha –when people love themselves, they are by definition kinder to others. And, my guess is he is an MD. MDs and PhDs are trained in a way that when they state a medical opinion, there is a recognition that people with certain backgrounds can pick up. RN, techs and medics are trained differently. It’s about how and not why to respond. And, I am not putting any profession down; they are all absolutley required in order to save lives!
Health the “Federal Law” you quoted is far from simple. It’d be different if you were discussing a gov. employer (a fact missing from your story).
Th1 – I personally suspect that Health is a male nurse.
I’m sorry that there were criminal incidents in Baltimore. I’m sure Shomrim do a great, essential job.
The boys likely meant well. This isn’t the question. The question is whether they violated the law. Many stories were told in and out of court. The Judge was required to asses the credibility of all the evidence – including the 911 call – and decide what happened.
I wasn’t there. Neither were you.
I find the judge’s version of the facts to be the most likely one. Even if you disagree, surely there is no basis for stating that it’s “a miscarriage of justice” like Health did.
Feeling badly for the boys, and blaming the judge, are two entirely different things.
I hope that the boys have a happy and healthy life, and that nothing bad ever happens to them.
Health – Your “synopsis” of the law – “They must accommodate religious beliefs unless they can prove doing so will cause them minimal hardship” – is wrong.
The law is that may not discriminate based on religion. They discriminated based on you not working on Saturday (a day that they needed employees to work on). Likely, the case was dismissed. Correctly.
The only thing you could possibly contend is that they really aren’t hiring you because you’re an orthodox jew, and the fact that they blamed it on Saturday is a lie as proven by the fact that they could have somehow accommodated you as an exception.
Such a contention is obviously silly and wrong. It’s a pain to make exceptions, and likely would get the other employees rightfully upset. No one wants to work on Saturday.
As far as credibility calls, the finder of fact (in this case the judge – by choice of the defendant) is obligated, repeat obligated, to make judgment calls like I buy this or I don’t buy that, or I’m not sure etc., based on the evidence presented. The Judge’s job is to apply the facts to the existing legal standards.
Implicit in this obligation is to read expressions, context, and demeanor of all the witnesses and testimony, and to consider all the evidence.
The facts seemingly not in dispute (that the defendant was the initiator of the altercation, justified or not) shift some of the burden of proof on the on the defendant here.
Was there a legit case of self-defense? Legally, the one who concededly assaults another must prove this. Did they sufficiently? I doubt it. The Judge decided not.
After all this, you came along and made your own decision about the Judge’s motive. The burden of proof of this extreme statement is on you, just like the burden of proving justification is on the instigator. You have not come close.
I told you a different time and I’ll tell you again I never went to YU. I’m not MO.
The controlling case here is Stuart v QD inc…Hardison (I’m giving you the befit of the doubt and assuming that’s what you meant) actually hurts your case. (I was vague on purpose here.)
I will concede to you that the accommodation doctrine is more extensive than I initially thought constitutional. And that my previous statement of the law is misleading.
The concept of burden of proof is crucial. If you don’t get it, what does that say about Touro?
No one has ever questioned WHETHER there was an assault, rather if the assault was justified. (There was a kid that went to the hospital you know)
In such a case, the assumption (as it should be) is that assaults are illegal UNLESS you can PROVE otherwise. Is my English simple enough?
Nothing here is black and white, and I wouldn’t be surprised
There’s (at least) one question you didn’t answer me: How do you KNOW that NOTHING could have given the judge the conclusion she reached other than political pressure etc.?
Have you ever heard of hodoas ball din? That applies in secular court. Migu – not as much. It’s really a credibility question. The 911 call is not hearsay as A) it was emotions at the time of the incident, and B) there was no better source as the victim refused to testify.
Laws of evidence and hearsay are complicated.
Since you asked for it, this is the case I was referring to.
Aron v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., CIV.A.03-2581 JSH, 2005 WL 1541060 (D.N.J. June 30, 2005) aff’d sub nom. Aron v. Quest Diagnostics Inc., 174 F. App’x 82 (3d Cir. 2006)
I originally disguised the name of the case in case it was you. Look it up. Some eery similarities to your story. Coincidence it must be… Anyway, we’re going in circles. Here’s a hypo: the kid was bought off (or the like), and the Shomrim were (correctly) trying to cover it up. My money’s there personally. Obviously yours isn’t. It’s not hilchos eidus, its whether self-defense was proved by sufficient evidence, so as to justify the undisputed act of violence that all sides and all witnesses concur on. The prosecution represents the state not the kid.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.