Politics Thread

[noteggs]

I am reading the appeal as I cannot find the original trial judge's ruling. Part of it maintains that she received a notice of cancellation of voter registration at her home address while she was serving her sentence for fraudulently completing tax returns. She served 60 months, how was she supposed to sift through five years of mail.

And, it's right in the opinion. Texas only needs to prove that the defendant voted knowing of the condition that precluded them from voting only and not that the condition itself made it illegal to vote. They basically removed intent as part of this and left it merely the action.

I would like to read the original judge's ruling. I also find it interesting that you can remove requiring the prosecution to prove intent for something like this.

Can’t find actual ruling, but this article has his decision on she knew without a reasonable doubt. Third to the last paragraph (of course).

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/l...241367696.html

[noteggs]

I am reading the appeal as I cannot find the original trial judge's ruling. Part of it maintains that she received a notice of cancellation of voter registration at her home address while she was serving her sentence for fraudulently completing tax returns. She served 60 months, how was she supposed to sift through five years of mail.

And, it's right in the opinion. Texas only needs to prove that the defendant voted knowing of the condition that precluded them from voting only and not that the condition itself made it illegal to vote. They basically removed intent as part of this and left it merely the action.

I would like to read the original judge's ruling. I also find it interesting that you can remove requiring the prosecution to prove intent for something like this.

Obviously had trouble posting lol

[noteggs]

I am reading the appeal as I cannot find the original trial judge's ruling. Part of it maintains that she received a notice of cancellation of voter registration at her home address while she was serving her sentence for fraudulently completing tax returns. She served 60 months, how was she supposed to sift through five years of mail.

And, it's right in the opinion. Texas only needs to prove that the defendant voted knowing of the condition that precluded them from voting only and not that the condition itself made it illegal to vote. They basically removed intent as part of this and left it merely the action.

I would like to read the original judge's ruling. I also find it interesting that you can remove requiring the prosecution to prove intent for something like this.

Can’t find the actual judge’s ruling, but here is an article that states he found that she knew without a reasonable doubt (of course, 3rd to last paragraph)

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/l...241367696.html

[noteggs]

I am reading the appeal as I cannot find the original trial judge's ruling. Part of it maintains that she received a notice of cancellation of voter registration at her home address while she was serving her sentence for fraudulently completing tax returns. She served 60 months, how was she supposed to sift through five years of mail.

And, it's right in the opinion. Texas only needs to prove that the defendant voted knowing of the condition that precluded them from voting only and not that the condition itself made it illegal to vote. They basically removed intent as part of this and left it merely the action.

I would like to read the original judge's ruling. I also find it interesting that you can remove requiring the prosecution to prove intent for something like this.

Can’t find the actual judge’s ruling, but here is an article that states he found that she knew without a reasonable doubt (of course, 3rd to last paragraph)

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/l...241367696.html

[paulxu]

I'm just guessing here, but probably for her to accept probation offered, she had to plead guilty.
Maybe she just didn't want to plead that, thinking that she had done nothing wrong, and her provisional ballot was never counted.

If you don't understand that Southern states have long tried to suppress minority voting, and still do today after the Shelby case, I'm not going to convince you. You'll just have to read more, or live in an area affected.

Here's on illustrative example: The number of drop boxes for Georgia's four most populous counties, Fulton, Cobb, DeKalb and Gwinnett, will drop from 94 in 2020 to 23 in 2022, according to The Times.
They will now be located inside county offices, so instead of driving up to drop your ballot, you find parking and go inside.
What did that help?

[ArizonaXUGrad]

Can’t find the actual judge’s ruling, but here is an article that states he found that she knew without a reasonable doubt (of course, 3rd to last paragraph)

https://www.star-telegram.com/news/l...241367696.html

That is only a quote from the DA who can spin the ruling any way they want. The judge may have actually put that in his/her ruling, but I would like to read that. Both appeals read differently unfortunately. As said before, the media is a spin machine for both sides. More and more especially with court rulings, I go straight court filings and read them for myself.

To Paul, many legal avenues of appeal are lost once you plead guilty. It's possible that yes she sought a verdict to keep the appeals open.

[noteggs]

That is only a quote from the DA who can spin the ruling any way they want. The judge may have actually put that in his/her ruling, but I would like to read that. Both appeals read differently unfortunately. As said before, the media is a spin machine for both sides. More and more especially with court rulings, I go straight court filings and read them for myself.

To Paul, many legal avenues of appeal are lost once you plead guilty. It's possible that yes she sought a verdict to keep the appeals open.

Yes spin on both sides. It would be nice to see how judge and court of appeals agreed and came up with a without a reasonable doubt decision.

Curious and not trying to be confrontational, but where did you here “she both did not know that a condition of her supervised release was that she could not vote” if you didn’t see the ruling?

[Smails]

If you don't understand that Southern states have long tried to suppress minority voting, and still do today after the Shelby case, I'm not going to convince you. You'll just have to read more, or live in an area affected.

This guy makes a completely nonsensical comparison between 2 cases that have NOTHING to do with minority voter suppression..gets called out on it and then proceeds to tell his detractors to 'read more'. Paul, you had an awful take. It's okay, just own it and move on.

[Xville]

This guy makes a completely nonsensical comparison between 2 cases that have NOTHING to do with minority voter suppression..gets called out on it and then proceeds to tell his detractors to 'read more'. Paul, you had an awful take. It's okay, just own it and move on.

Once he got called out on it, he went and read "Liberal Playbook 2021," and boom minority voter suppression. Good try on moving those goalposts, Paul.

[paulxu]

My comments on voter suppression were in response to a poster indicating that the old and new South were different.
In many ways, in regard to voter suppression, they are still the same. That's what I was addressing. The voting rights act overturned by Shelby was overwhelmingly applied to Southern states and their oppressive voting laws.

In regard to the application of justice in our system, there are also disparities when it comes to sentencing. Different issue, but unfortunately some of the same prejudices seem to apply.