• 0 Posts
  • 59 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
cake
Cake day: August 30th, 2023

help-circle






  • I don’t think those are the ones you need to worry about—or, should I say, that are the more professional ones. The real ones are the ones who act like people, not businesses. You get random messages that say “hey! I lost my work phone and transferred the numbers, but I don’t remember whose number this is.” Or find a way to send a picture of a pretty girl and say, “remember me? We exchanged numbers a while ago!” Or some shit like that. I think those are the more effective and dangerous ones. I get a lot of those.





  • Yeah, it’s not magical or flawless. Because the relationships between the wealthy prosecutors and the judges and the overburdened courts system lead to almost all poor defendants being threatened into taking a plea deal as opposed to going to trial, regardless of their guilt because a jury trial is expensive as fuck and also brings with it the chance to be put away for way longer. That’s how it works out when it doesn’t work out the way it’s laid out in the owners manual.

    Not to mention cash bail. Or municipal violations literally only affecting those without money to make it disappear. And political judges. And groups like the heritage foundation.

    I’m just saying, I don’t know how Romanian justice really works in practice, but in the US, we have quite the fucking shit system.


  • Well, it could be depending on how robust their anti corruption practices are. Because what really makes more sense, 12 citizens, uneducated in law and its application, getting manipulated by differing levels of millionaire depending on the wealth of the defendant/plaintiff? Or a legal expert weighing the facts to determine their strength?

    Because, both are open to corruption. The jury of your peers is open to corruption in the ways I’m sure most people on lemmy are familiar with, but the other way, with robust anti corruption laws, would arguably be better.


  • Okay. So then prosecute the shit out of her. That’s my point. If she deserves it, don’t throw some sort of honorary sentence at her. She either deserves it because of her part, and you don’t sort of have some vague notion of her being guilty if she weren’t so old, or you don’t prosecute her. See what I’m saying? I’m not saying she’s surely culpable or not, it’s just that this feels so half-assed and performative. Two year suspended sentence? So they’re just gonna let this person guilty of being an accessory to 10,500 murders off on a light sentence. Get ere I’m coming from? I see the argument going both ways. This just felt like they couldn’t decide which way to take and they’re going for appearances and that’s all.


  • I mean, fuck all nazis, obviously. But a woman who was a secretary in the 1930s/1940s? And she got a two year suspended sentence? This just sorta reeks of performative.

    I get it, she was a secretary at a camp. So it’s not like she didn’t know. But either do it for real or don’t because she’s old and gonna die soon. This sort of honorary prison time thing—especially for a woman in that era? It’s just a strange…way of for the cards to fall. I don’t know how to describe it. Nor how to really feel about it. Seems like, for 10,500 murders, it’s light. But for a woman under the Nazi regime? I mean…how much agency did she really have? I dunno. Like I said, just feels weird.