[lnkForumImage]
TotalShareware - Download Free Software
Confronta i prezzi di migliaia di prodotti.
Asp Forum
 Home | Login | Register | Search 


 

Forums >

comp.lang.ruby

sell-jordan-shoes-air force1-nike-dunk-clothes

Jordan 2323

4/6/2007 1:43:00 PM

(www.sell-jordan-shoes.com) Feipeng shoes trade co.,ltd.is a
wholesaler specialized in various world brand products.such as Lacoste
bbc t-shirts,bape,EVISU,BAPE,RMC,POLO,BBC,LRG,10deep,Red Monkey jeans,lv
Gucci handbags,Adidas,Nike(Jordan I-XXI, Air Max
90/91/95/97/03/04/05/06/TN/TN6,Shox TL/TL2TL3/Turbo/NZ/R4/R5/R6,Air
Force 1,dunk),Timberland,prada,Bape,etc You are welcome to enter our
website for learn more information of our products.
please visit our website: www.sell-jordan-shoes.com
or chat with me on MSN sell_jordan_shoes@hotmail.com
or email to me: sell_jordanshoes@yahoo.com.cn
cheap hot air jordan shoes-air force1-max tn-dunk-adidas
cheap hot air jordan shoes-air force1-max tn-dunk-adidas
air jordan shoes cheap price-max tn-dunk-bape-jeans
air jordan shoes cheap price-max tn-dunk-bape-jeans
sell jordan shoes-nike jordan-af1-dunk-air max tn
sell jordan shoes-nike jordan-af1-dunk-air max tn
nike shoes hot sell-jeans-shoes-low price
nike shoes hot sell-jeans-shoes-low price
http://www.sell-jordan-shoes.com/Nike-jor...
http://www.sell-jordan-shoes.com/nike-other/air-fo...
http://www.sell-jordan-shoes.com/Other-brand/A...
http://www.sell-jordan-shoes.com/brand-clothes/...
http://www.sell-jordan-shoes.com/nike-air-max/...
http://www.sell-jordan-shoes.com/Other-brand/BAPE...
http://www.sell-jordan-shoes.com/nike-air-m...
sell-jordan-shoes&nike shoes-max tn&bape bbc bmc jeans france italy

--
Posted via http://www.ruby-....
7 Answers

Scout

12/3/2013 3:23:00 AM

0



"Dhu on Gate" <campbell@neotext.ca> wrote in message
news:jVbnu.293190$5W.133986@fx11.iad...
> On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 20:51:35 -0500, Scout wrote:
>
>> <ramon@conexus.net> wrote in message
>> news:33fcc$529d2de5$414e828e$8688@EVERESTKC.NET...
>>> The Zimmerman partisans mob know there is a difference between the two
>>> terms.
>>
>> And yet according to the dictionary if you are acquitted, then you've
>> been
>> exonerated.
>>
>> Facts you can't refute with mere opinion pieces.
>
> That's why the binary verdict demanded in our legal system is bullshit:
> there is often the case of insufficient evidence to prove either
> innocence OR guilt.

So what solution do you suggest?

The Daring Dufas

12/3/2013 5:29:00 AM

0

On 12/2/2013 9:17 PM, M.I.Wakefield wrote:
> "Dhu on Gate" wrote in message news:jVbnu.293190$5W.133986@fx11.iad...
>
>> That's why the binary verdict demanded in our legal system is bullshit:
>> there is often the case of insufficient evidence to prove either
>> innocence OR guilt.
>
> I always liked the Scottish option of "Not proven" ... aka "Not guilty,
> and don't do it again".

Does the Scottish system of law prohibit double jeopardy? o_O

TDD

GOP_Decline_and_Fall

12/3/2013 5:52:00 AM

0

On Tue, 03 Dec 2013 03:06:55 GMT, Dhu on Gate <campbell@neotext.ca>
wrote:

>On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 20:51:35 -0500, Scout wrote:
>
>> <ramon@conexus.net> wrote in message
>> news:33fcc$529d2de5$414e828e$8688@EVERESTKC.NET...
>>> The Zimmerman partisans mob know there is a difference between the two
>>> terms.
>>
>> And yet according to the dictionary if you are acquitted, then you've been
>> exonerated.
>>
>> Facts you can't refute with mere opinion pieces.
>
>That's why the binary verdict demanded in our legal system is bullshit:
>there is often the case of insufficient evidence to prove either
>innocence OR guilt.

The Scots have a third option for such cases as Zimmerman's.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...

Not proven is a verdict available to a court in Scotland. As with
other judicial systems, the burden to prove guilt rests with the
prosecution.

Under Scots law, a criminal trial may end in one of three verdicts:
one of conviction ("guilty") and two of acquittal ("not proven" and
"not guilty").[1][2]

Historically, the two verdicts available to Scots juries were that the
case had been "proven" or "not proven". However in a dramatic case in
1728 the jury asserted "its ancient right" to bring in a "not guilty"
verdict even when the facts of the case were proven (see jury
nullification). As the "not guilty" verdict gained wide acceptance
amongst Scots juries, Scots began to use "not guilty" in cases where
the jury felt the "not proven" verdict did not adequately express the
innocence of the person on trial. Shrewd defence then further
encouraged this interpretation in order to persuade juries unwilling
to bring in a "not guilty" verdict that the "not proven" could be
brought in as a lesser or "third verdict".

The result is the modern perception that the "not proven" verdict is
an acquittal used when the judge or jury does not have enough evidence
to convict but is not sufficiently convinced of the accused person's
innocence to bring in a "not guilty" verdict. Essentially, the judge
or jury is unconvinced that the suspect is innocent, but has
insufficient evidence to the contrary. In popular parlance, this
verdict is sometimes jokingly referred to as "not guilty and don't do
it again".[3]

Barry Bruyea

12/3/2013 9:20:00 AM

0

On Mon, 02 Dec 2013 23:28:36 -0600, The Daring Dufas
<the-daring-dufas@stinky-finger.net> wrote:

>On 12/2/2013 9:17 PM, M.I.Wakefield wrote:
>> "Dhu on Gate" wrote in message news:jVbnu.293190$5W.133986@fx11.iad...
>>
>>> That's why the binary verdict demanded in our legal system is bullshit:
>>> there is often the case of insufficient evidence to prove either
>>> innocence OR guilt.
>>
>> I always liked the Scottish option of "Not proven" ... aka "Not guilty,
>> and don't do it again".
>
>Does the Scottish system of law prohibit double jeopardy? o_O
>
>TDD

No. The U.K. in general has no 'Double Jeapardy" protection, nor does
Canada.

§?amßuster

12/3/2013 8:34:00 PM

0

On 12/2/2013 7:17 PM,
Kim Dobranski aka M.I.Wakefield wrote:
>> That's why the binary verdict demanded in our legal system is bullshit:


============================================================================

I KNOW I'M A STUPID SPAMMER . . . . AND THAT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO
WITH CANADIAN POLITICS

============================================================================

Path: not-for-mail
From: "M.I.Wakefield" <none@present.com>
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.democrats,talk.politics.guns,can.politics,tx.guns,misc.survivalism
Subject: Re: Acquittal vs exoneration
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2013 22:17:30 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <l7jigc$j8f$1@dont-email.me>
References:
<33fcc$529d2de5$414e828e$8688@EVERESTKC.NET><l7jdf9$ssf$2@dont-email.me>
<jVbnu.293190$5W.133986@fx11.iad>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
format=flowed;
charset="UTF-8";
reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 03:17:32 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="3f3a87d3ea3ba58ebe84772eb5436b41";
logging-data="19727";
mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/2DqSQcndpxPpI1Zn0BieX"
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3555.308
In-Reply-To: <jVbnu.293190$5W.133986@fx11.iad>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3555.308
Importance: Normal
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Y3YkaJ2PgIm1biXdNNYVehSo5BM=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Received-Bytes: 1754
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2336776896
Xref: e alt.politics.democrats:1833556 talk.politics.guns:1815351
can.politics:1497154 tx.guns:279979 misc.survivalism:1135602

§?amßuster

12/3/2013 8:39:00 PM

0

On 12/2/2013 9:28 PM, The Daring Dufas wrote:


============================================================================

I KNOW I'M A STUPID SPAMMER . . . . AND THAT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO
WITH CANADIAN POLITICS

============================================================================

Path: not-for-mail
From: The Daring Dufas <the-daring-dufas@stinky-finger.net>
Newsgroups:
alt.politics.democrats,talk.politics.guns,can.politics,tx.guns,misc.survivalism
Subject: Re: Acquittal vs exoneration
Date: Mon, 02 Dec 2013 23:28:36 -0600
Organization: Veterans of International Fart Wars
Lines: 13
Message-ID: <l7jq64$gig$1@dont-email.me>
References:
<33fcc$529d2de5$414e828e$8688@EVERESTKC.NET><l7jdf9$ssf$2@dont-email.me>
<jVbnu.293190$5W.133986@fx11.iad> <l7jigc$j8f$1@dont-email.me>
Reply-To: the-daring-dufas@peckerhead.net
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2013 05:28:36 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx05.eternal-september.org;
posting-host="3078fca1879ac88812463f2b60117ab1";
logging-data="16976";
mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";
posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18wMPYNnS6JL2+3J7Ml+Q6FoRPdtJYNFqrhLeDVz8Dz2A=="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/24.1.1
In-Reply-To: <l7jigc$j8f$1@dont-email.me>
Cancel-Lock: sha1:43Un20tT6GS+RLe0TuzLej2x4J0=
X-Received-Bytes: 1883
X-Received-Body-CRC: 2193051197
Xref: e alt.politics.democrats:1833590 talk.politics.guns:1815381
can.politics:1497176 tx.guns:279993 misc.survivalism:1135622

§?amßuster

12/3/2013 8:40:00 PM

0

On 12/3/2013 1:19 AM, Barry Bruyea wrote:
>>> I always liked the Scottish option of "Not proven" ... aka "Not guilty,
>>> and don't do it again".

============================================================================

I KNOW I'M A STUPID SPAMMER . . . . AND THAT THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO
WITH CANADIAN POLITICS

============================================================================