Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 71
  1. #61
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    156

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    If you believe that, then you must believe that jokes that portray African-Americans as inferior, Hispanics as lazy, Polish people as stupid, Jewish people as money grubbers, etc., are all based on truth too, right? I reject that notion because I have seen that such jokes are, in fact, not based on truth. Jokes that target particular groups of people are generally based on prejudice, bias, and misinformation or lack of information.
    Most ethnicities have strong and weak points. To not be aware of them or to deny them shows a person's ignorance. But, I was not talking about ethnicities. I was referring to jokes on say a Comedy Central Roast of a celebrity. They are mostly based on reality, as silly, vulgar and insulting they are.

    BTW - Your statement of "If you believe that, then you must believe..." is a highly prejudicial statement. In case you were unaware.

    No, they are not, just as those jokes against other groups that I mentioned are not based on truth.
    I hold trial lawyers and lawyers in general in such low regard now that I would probably agree with most lawyer jokes from personal experience. Just because you find them insulting and undeserving is your personal, biased opinion of them.

    You ignored the logical argument I put forward earlier and deflected it. Much like some lawyers would do. You may not be as different from most lawyers as you think. That's not an insult, by the way. Contrary to your assertion, most lawyers do not lie in the course of their representation of their clients (though some certainly do) but they are skilled in logic, argument, and persuasion. At least the good ones anyway.[/SIZE][/FONT]
    I consider myself very logical so please refer me to the post where you challenge that?

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    I consider myself very logical so please refer me to the post where you challenge that?
    well there’s a big part of your problem. You have not shown yourself to be logical. Actually rhetoric and histrionics is more accurate.

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,710

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    Most ethnicities have strong and weak points. To not be aware of them or to deny them shows a person's ignorance. But, I was not talking about ethnicities. I was referring to jokes on say a Comedy Central Roast of a celebrity. They are mostly based on reality, as silly, vulgar and insulting they are.
    Nice try at trying to limit the general statement you made earlier, but I'm not buying it. Your comment about jokes suffers from the logical deficiency that I pointed out earlier. It is demonstrably untrue. Now you wish to say that jokes about ethnic groups may not be based on truth but that jokes about lawyers must nevertheless be based on truth but you offer no logical argument or proof for that distinction. So I'm calling BS on that one. You are simply trying to rationalize your hatred of lawyers but it fails to pass the logic test.

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    BTW - Your statement of "If you believe that, then you must believe..." is a highly prejudicial statement. In case you were unaware.
    Not prejudicial in the least. It was simply a logical argument, which if you are as logical as you say you would recognize. But instead of presenting a logical counter argument against it, you resort to insult. That's a tactic that the opposing attorney in your case would probably be proud, from what you say of him.

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    156

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting Taxing Matters
    View Post
    Nice try at trying to limit the general statement you made earlier, but I'm not buying it. Your comment about jokes suffers from the logical deficiency that I pointed out earlier. It is demonstrably untrue. Now you wish to say that jokes about ethnic groups may not be based on truth but that jokes about lawyers must nevertheless be based on truth but you offer no logical argument or proof for that distinction. So I'm calling BS on that one. You are simply trying to rationalize your hatred of lawyers but it fails to pass the logic test.
    You speak in broad generalities. I have positive and negative views of most ethnicities. Run a few of your jokes past me and I'll gladly tell you if I hold those beliefs. But the ones you mentioned like hispanics being lazy is far from true. They happen to have a better work ethic than Whites or Blacks. Or maybe you'd like me to rattle off a bunch of my observations about different ethnicities because you're too politically correct to tell any of yours.

    Not prejudicial in the least. It was simply a logical argument, which if you are as logical as you say you would recognize. But instead of presenting a logical counter argument against it, you resort to insult. That's a tactic that the opposing attorney in your case would probably be proud, from what you say of him.
    You seem to like the word "logic", as though it always leads to the same conclusion.

    I know logic very well, I grew up around it and still am surrounded by it today. After conversing with about eight lawyers during my trial I can tell you they are not logical thinkers, they are emotional thinkers operating from the other hemisphere. I even spent 8 years of my life working with aerospace engineers and can say they are a totally different breed than lawyers. Lawyers are bullsh*ters, engineers are far from that. Lawyers are full of ego, engineers are not. Lawyers will say anything as you are doing now to change another person's thinking. Engineers are the farthest thing from BS'rs. Engineers speak mainly facts, lawyers twist words to manipulate people. The closest occupation to a lawyer would be a real estate agent.

    Lawyers and engineers are stark opposites that operate from different sides of the brain. You even change your font and size for some strange reason...probably to set yourself apart or above...to manipulate. Not an engineers choice at all.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    6,701

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    Why do you assume I am very possibly a person with low ethics and morals?

    I am going to assume you are a lawyer or aspire to be an attorney. Is it because you work or admire an arena permeated with those type of people?

    I was asked going into this "what amount of money do you want to take away?" I said I don't care if it is $10K or $500K. I just do not want to lose 100% because I was wronged and I lost a function of my body because of it.

    Hint: Now is when you discredit me again in typical lawyer fashion.
    I do not assume you are a person with low ethics or morals. It is you that is making all the assumptions in suggesting that I am judging you. I am only making these arguments because there is always l two sides to a situation and which side you fall on, depends on your perspective. If you won your case, the actions of the opposing attorney would be of no concern to you. But because you lost the case, you blame the attorney for doing his job all to well for his client. There was a trier of fact (the judge) and a jury that heard the case and you lost. You want to blame the opposing attorney. Why don't you want to blame your own attorney for not making a more compelling case? The judge and the jury can figure out what the facts are and what the bluster was.

    You morphed into an argument about logic in response to other posters. I think you are making an empty argument. The classic definition of right-brain and left-brain is:


    It is thought that people prefer one type of thinking over the other. For example, a person who is “left-brained” is thought to be more logical, analytical, and objective. A person who is “right-brained” is said to be more intuitive, creative, emotional, thoughtful, and subjective.
    Just because you are an engineer that has to deal with the design of something, doesn't make you left-brained person. Indeed, your posts suggest that you are right-brained because your analysis is more intuitive and emotional and subjective than logical or objective.

    If you design a beam to support a structure, you analyze it based on if it is in compression or tension, its span, the material it is made of. That is all a matter of physics and math. It does not make you a left-brained person.

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    156

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting budwad
    View Post
    I do not assume you are a person with low ethics or morals. It is you that is making all the assumptions in suggesting that I am judging you.
    If you are not assuming I am person of low ethics and morals why do you assume I would not care if me and my witnesses lied to win a case. That does not make sense.

    I am only making these arguments because there is always l two sides to a situation and which side you fall on, depends on your perspective.
    What side you fall on determines your perspective.

    If you won your case, the actions of the opposing attorney would be of no concern to you.
    Possibly true. If I won I would not spend the time rerunning all the testimony in my mind. But when you lose, that person WILL spend the time replaying the whole scenario to figure out what swayed the jury to that decision. It doesn't mean I am wrong about my analysis. When a person designs something and it doesn't work he will keep analyzing until it does. Once it works he stops analyzing so much. My analysis of the defense counsel and his witnesses was spurred by losing but it does not make it wrong.

    But because you lost the case, you blame the attorney for doing his job all to well for his client.
    He did do a very good job but his witnesses lied and so did he. Do you believe winning using any tactic is OK and should be seen as "doing your job well"?

    There was a trier of fact (the judge) and a jury that heard the case and you lost. You want to blame the opposing attorney.
    I don't see the judge as a "trier of fact" because he does not determine what evidence and lies are told to the jury. Opposing counsel regulates that with their objections and their cross. But the judge was deficient in explaining negligence per se and comparative negligence to the jury. The judge did say to me after the jury left the room following the verdict that "******* County Juries can be heartless." Furthermore, my neighbor is a personal friend with the judge and had dinner with him two weeks after the trial. I asked her to ask him his opinion of my case. He said "he was surprised at the verdict."

    Why don't you want to blame your own attorney for not making a more compelling case? The judge and the jury can figure out what the facts are and what the bluster was.
    I saw a lot of fault in my attorney during the trial and asked to be put back on the stand to counter the BS that was being said. He would not. He let them do damage to me and said "the jury did not listen to that." So I hold him accountable too but that is a separate issue to the lying on the stand.

    I know how the debating game goes. You look for the low hanging fruit and blow it up. If I said my lawyer did not do his job well, which was part of the problem, it would be end of story to anyone here. But what I have learned throughout this ordeal is that people cannot think in duality. They cannot separate fault and think along lines of comparative negligence, which is why attorneys alway claim 0% fault. Juries see one person's fault and stop thinking and analyzing. Just as you and TM will now say that I lost because my lawyer didn't do his job well. When that is only part of the problem.

    You morphed into an argument about logic in response to other posters. I think you are making an empty argument. The classic definition of right-brain and left-brain is:
    I did not bring up logic, TM did. IMO "logic" is a misused word.

    Just because you are an engineer that has to deal with the design of something, doesn't make you left-brained person. Indeed, your posts suggest that you are right-brained because your analysis is more intuitive and emotional and subjective than logical or objective.
    I am not an engineer but I do work with my hands, I design and problem solve physical issues. But as I said, I've been surrounded by engineers my whole life. As to this case, their lies are in black and white. That is hardly an emotional or intuitive analysis.

    If you design a beam to support a structure, you analyze it based on if it is in compression or tension, its span, the material it is made of. That is all a matter of physics and math. It does not make you a left-brained person.
    But spending a lifetime doing that will rub off on a person and make him more of a left-brain person. Lawyers are shapers of perspective. Engineers are shapers of matter. Very different!

    .

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    They happen to have a better work ethic than Whites or Blacks.
    . That’s a very broad brush you paint with. I’ve known hard working and lazy members of all of those ethnicities. To suggest any ethnicity is either lazy or hardworking shows your bigotry and prejudice.

    Or maybe you'd like me to rattle off a bunch of my observations about different ethnicities because you're too politically correct to tell any of yours.
    more prejudice and bigotry



    I know logic very well, I grew up around it and still am surrounded by it today.
    you’re a perfect example of being surrounded by something and it not “rubbing off”.


    After conversing with about eight lawyers during my trial I can tell you they are not logical thinkers, they are emotional thinkers operating from the other hemisphere.
    actually good lawyers are logical. Laying out a winning case requires the organizational skills that demand logic. Don’t mistake creativity, knowledge, experience, or wisdom for fanciful thought.

    Lawyers are full of ego, engineers are not.
    ha ha ha. Engineers are not egotistical? Apparently you haven’t been hanging around with engineers. When an engineer is challenged on his calculations he is generally very oFfended. Engineers often believe their conclusions are above reproach, especially by those they deem to be below them.

    Lawyers will say anything as you are doing now to change another person's thinking.
    . Part of a lawyers job is to convince people his opinion is the correct interpretation of the situation at hand. It isn’t to change the jurors mind but to lead them to the conclusion the lawyer wants them to make. Ya see, a juror isn’t supposed to have an opinion prior to hearing the case presentation. A lawyer needn’t change the jurors minds but present them with facts and applicable law to Taxing matters isn’t trying to change your mind. He is telling you the facts and letting you come to whatever conclusion you wish. Given you are so closed minded, I think his efforts are wasted as you have already made up your mind and closed it.




    You even change your font and size for some strange reason...probably to set yourself apart or above...to manipulate. Not an engineers choice at all.
    Ya, sure. An engineer would change the font and argue it was more efficient as it uses less space or some other BS justification that allows the engineer to attempt to prove his claimed superior knowledge. Lawyers tend to exhibit less egotistical behavior as their job requires them to control emotional responses. If they appear to be egotistical, they risk offending jurors, or even judges, which can result in negative responses. An engineer can actually benefit by displaying his ego. He can improve his standing in his group by claiming superiority even if it is not totally justified.


    in the end, all I read here is you are one pissed off plaintiff that thinks he should have won his case and didn’t and wants to blame somebody for it. There is a LOT of whining coming from your side of the screen. Maybe, just maybe, the facts of your case when subjected to the rule of law, didn’t support your claim. Apparently the jury believed they didn’t.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Dec 2019
    Posts
    156

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting jk
    View Post
    . That’s a very broad brush you paint with. I’ve known hard working and lazy members of all of those ethnicities. To suggest any ethnicity is either lazy or hardworking shows your bigotry and prejudice.

    more prejudice and bigotry

    you’re a perfect example of being surrounded by something and it not “rubbing off”.

    actually good lawyers are logical. Laying out a winning case requires the organizational skills that demand logic. Don’t mistake creativity, knowledge, experience, or wisdom for fanciful thought.

    ha ha ha. Engineers are not egotistical? Apparently you haven’t been hanging around with engineers. When an engineer is challenged on his calculations he is generally very oFfended. Engineers often believe their conclusions are above reproach, especially by those they deem to be below them.

    Part of a lawyers job is to convince people his opinion is the correct interpretation of the situation at hand. It isn’t to change the jurors mind but to lead them to the conclusion the lawyer wants them to make. Ya see, a juror isn’t supposed to have an opinion prior to hearing the case presentation. A lawyer needn’t change the jurors minds but present them with facts and applicable law to Taxing matters isn’t trying to change your mind. He is telling you the facts and letting you come to whatever conclusion you wish. Given you are so closed minded, I think his efforts are wasted as you have already made up your mind and closed it.

    Ya, sure. An engineer would change the font and argue it was more efficient as it uses less space or some other BS justification that allows the engineer to attempt to prove his claimed superior knowledge. Lawyers tend to exhibit less egotistical behavior as their job requires them to control emotional responses. If they appear to be egotistical, they risk offending jurors, or even judges, which can result in negative responses. An engineer can actually benefit by displaying his ego. He can improve his standing in his group by claiming superiority even if it is not totally justified.

    in the end, all I read here is you are one pissed off plaintiff that thinks he should have won his case and didn’t and wants to blame somebody for it. There is a LOT of whining coming from your side of the screen. Maybe, just maybe, the facts of your case when subjected to the rule of law, didn’t support your claim. Apparently the jury believed they didn’t.
    I'm glad I give you something to do here. But as said before, you made accusations toward me that you were unable to back up so you will not get a response from me. Nor will I read your posts.

    I know, you don't care.

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Posts
    38,867

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    I'm glad I give you something to do here. But as said before, you made accusations toward me that you were unable to back up so you will not get a response from me. Nor will I read your posts.

    I know, you don't care.
    ignoring facts doesn’t mean there was lack of proof. You show more and more why you are having such a hard time accepting your loss in court. You refuse to accept facts.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Posts
    7,710

    Default Re: Why Would a Public Defender Choice to Make Plea Bargin

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    You speak in broad generalities.
    I was responding your very broad generality that "Most jokes are based on truth." I gave you categories jokes that are not based on truth. A very logical response to your very general statement.

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    I have positive and negative views of most ethnicities.
    I don't. I've lived in areas with a lot of different races and cultures for many years and as a result I've learned race doesn't determine a person's characteristics. I've met smart and stupid people of every race. I've met hard workers and lazy people of every race. I've met warm and welcoming people as well as jerks of every race. So now I make no assumptions about a person I've just met based on his or her race. That was a lesson that took me some time to learn, but once learned it has served me well.

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    You seem to like the word "logic", as though it always leads to the same conclusion.
    Surely you know that given a certain set of facts the proper application of logic will indeed lead you to a particular outcome or conclusion, right? That is, after all, the value of it.

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    I know logic very well, I grew up around it and still am surrounded by it today.
    But you aren't demonstrating that logic here. You hatred of lawyers is not coming from logic, it is coming from emotion because of how you fared in just one case going up against one particular lawyer. I've given you the logical argument that shows why basing your views off just that very limited data set is not logical and you've not really rebutted that.

    Look, I understand that you are upset after losing your case. You thought it was a good case. That's why you pursued it. And it's very disappointing to lose your case. But understand that even with a great case it is still possible to lose. Juries are notoriously unpredictable. And also understand this: in every case that goes to trial there is a winner and a loser. The losers are of course not going to be happy. And it is not uncommon for them to lash out at lawyers afterwards, just as you have done here. That happens even when all the lawyers involved were outstanding lawyers. That emotional response is about having lost more than anything else. It's understandable. It's a very human reaction. But the views those losing parties have about lawyers after are not based on logic. They are based on emotion. And I see that here with you, too. It's an emotional response, much as you wish to frame it as a logical one. Nothing wrong with that. Emotion is part of being human.


    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    Lawyers are full of ego, engineers are not. Lawyers will say anything as you are doing now to change another person's thinking. Engineers are the farthest thing from BS'rs. Engineers speak mainly facts, lawyers twist words to manipulate people. The closest occupation to a lawyer would be a real estate agent.
    Again, more generalities by you. I've known a lot of engineers and architects; have several in my circle of family and friends. And I can tell you that some of them are in fact full of ego and pride, contrary to your assertions. Any attempt to make such sweeping generalizations about any large group of people is going to fail because each person is different and doesn't fit into some neat pre-determined set of characteristics based on their race or their occupation.

    Quote Quoting CONNOR99
    View Post
    You even change your font and size for some strange reason...probably to set yourself apart or above...to manipulate. Not an engineers choice at all.
    Not a strange reason at all. And it has nothing to do with setting myself apart. I happen to like the font that I use and got in the habit of using it for much of my work because studies show that, in general, for reading larger chunks of text a serif font like the Georgia font I use is often easier to read than sans-serif fonts like the default font used by this site. It's more complicated than that, of course, since some serif fonts are horribly difficult to read. There is also debate over whether sans serif fonts are actually better to use for reading on a computer screen even though the serif fonts are easier to read on printed page. So I chose it because (1) I like the font and (2) in general it may be an easier font to read for longer replies (though acknowledging the differing views about font use for reading on computer). But it has nothing to do with wanting to set myself apart and certainly not to manipulate people. This site offers various font and other options. That most people choose not to use them and just go with the default is their own choice. But I don't feel compelled to base my choices just off what everyone else does. I mean, if everyone was running off a cliff, I wouldn't feel compelled to join in just because every one else is doing it.

    1. Sponsored Links
       

Page 7 of 8 FirstFirst ... 5 6 7 8 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Sex Offenses: Can My Public Defender Force Me to Plea Bargain
    By whyme4 in forum Criminal Charges
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-10-2010, 09:54 PM
  2. Drunk and Impaired Driving: Aggravated DUI Plea Bargain with a Lazy Public Defender
    By shlyann in forum Drunk and Impaired Driving Charges
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 05-06-2009, 11:32 AM
  3. Court-Appointed Lawyers: Do I Really Need a Public Defender
    By nomic in forum Criminal Defense Lawyers
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 03-18-2009, 09:33 AM
  4. Court-Appointed Lawyers: Getting A New Public Defender
    By gusby in forum Criminal Defense Lawyers
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 10-16-2008, 10:13 AM
 
 
Sponsored Links

Legal Help, Information and Resources