|
Post by snow on Sept 14, 2022 13:50:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
What!!
Sept 14, 2022 15:05:03 GMT -5
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 14, 2022 15:05:03 GMT -5
She's lucky she didn't get pregnant -- she'd have to carry and raise the product too. She'll also undoubtedly not be permitted to vote until she pays the last penny of her restitution settlement.
|
|
|
What!!
Sept 14, 2022 15:15:27 GMT -5
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 14, 2022 15:15:27 GMT -5
I confess -- while reading the article, and before I saw any pictures, I had a very sneaking suspicion of what the teen murderer looked like.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 14, 2022 15:20:53 GMT -5
She's lucky she didn't get pregnant -- she'd have to carry and raise the product too. She'll also undoubtedly not be permitted to vote until she pays the last penny of her restitution settlement. Yes, I thought about that. Making a 10 year old rape victim carry to term is their gig isn't it. Disgusting. I do not understand how these people sleep at night with their draconian mindsets. No one in their right mind should think it's okay to make a 10 year old rape victim carry to term. It's insane. I watched a Republican senator being questioned about whether he thought parents should be able to give consent to their children to get married at 16 or 17 and he said yes. Then he was asked if he thought that these same parents should be able to give their 16-17 year old children consent for birth control and he said no. His reason was because sex leads to babies and babies need parents and 16 -17 year old's aren't mature enough to use contraception. So that's why he's against birth control!!! But they are mature enough to get married?? What!!! I am beginning to think there is nothing but morons in the Republican party. You can't make this stuff up! www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/teens-having-sex-should-get-married-not-use-birth-control-republican/ar-AA11z1Pg
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 14, 2022 15:25:18 GMT -5
She's lucky she didn't get pregnant -- she'd have to carry and raise the product too. She'll also undoubtedly not be permitted to vote until she pays the last penny of her restitution settlement. Yes, I thought about that. Making a 10 year old rape victim carry to term is their gig isn't it. Disgusting. I do not understand how these people sleep at night with their draconian mindsets. No one in their right mind should think it's okay to make a 10 year old rape victim carry to term. It's insane. I watched a Republican senator being questioned about whether he thought parents should be able to give consent to their children to get married at 16 or 17 and he said yes. Then he was asked if he thought that these same parents should be able to give their 16-17 year old children consent for birth control and he said no. His reason was because sex leads to babies and babies need parents and 16 -17 year old's aren't mature enough to use contraception. So that's why he's against birth control!!! But they are mature enough to get married?? What!!! I am beginning to think there is nothing but morons in the Republican party. You can't make this stuff up! www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/teens-having-sex-should-get-married-not-use-birth-control-republican/ar-AA11z1PgIt's dogmatic theological legalism in action, where the law trumps mercy and morality.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 14, 2022 15:29:58 GMT -5
Yes, I thought about that. Making a 10 year old rape victim carry to term is their gig isn't it. Disgusting. I do not understand how these people sleep at night with their draconian mindsets. No one in their right mind should think it's okay to make a 10 year old rape victim carry to term. It's insane. I watched a Republican senator being questioned about whether he thought parents should be able to give consent to their children to get married at 16 or 17 and he said yes. Then he was asked if he thought that these same parents should be able to give their 16-17 year old children consent for birth control and he said no. His reason was because sex leads to babies and babies need parents and 16 -17 year old's aren't mature enough to use contraception. So that's why he's against birth control!!! But they are mature enough to get married?? What!!! I am beginning to think there is nothing but morons in the Republican party. You can't make this stuff up! www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/teens-having-sex-should-get-married-not-use-birth-control-republican/ar-AA11z1PgIt's dogmatic theological legalism in action, where the law trumps mercy and morality. trumps good old common sense too if you ask me.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 14, 2022 18:35:14 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 14, 2022 18:35:14 GMT -5
You are seeing the results of lefties who are in charge of a lot of prosecutorial power that go after the victims rather than the criminals.
|
|
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 1:20:39 GMT -5
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 15, 2022 1:20:39 GMT -5
You are seeing the results of lefties who are in charge of a lot of prosecutorial power that go after the victims rather than the criminals. Don't complain. It's to your benefit.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 1:30:29 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2022 1:30:29 GMT -5
You are seeing the results of lefties who are in charge of a lot of prosecutorial power that go after the victims rather than the criminals. Don't complain. It's to your benefit. Projecting seems to be your hobby, you are quite good at it...
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 15, 2022 1:32:33 GMT -5
Don't complain. It's to your benefit. Projecting seems to be your hobby, you are quite good at it... That's how come I know what you're up to.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 1:39:02 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2022 1:39:02 GMT -5
Projecting seems to be your hobby, you are quite good at it... That's how come I know what you're up to. That is not what projection means...keep up
|
|
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 1:40:29 GMT -5
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 15, 2022 1:40:29 GMT -5
That's how come I know what you're up to. That is not what projection means...keep up Well I'll be darned.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 15, 2022 12:06:57 GMT -5
You are seeing the results of lefties who are in charge of a lot of prosecutorial power that go after the victims rather than the criminals. I don't know how you can blame lefties when Republicans rule Iowa
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 13:45:28 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2022 13:45:28 GMT -5
You are seeing the results of lefties who are in charge of a lot of prosecutorial power that go after the victims rather than the criminals. I don't know how you can blame lefties when Republicans rule Iowa That doesn't necessarily include all gov't positions outside the legislature like prosecutors/DA's...
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 15, 2022 14:42:44 GMT -5
I don't know how you can blame lefties when Republicans rule Iowa That doesn't necessarily include all gov't positions outside the legislature like prosecutors/DA's... Legislature make the rules do they not?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 16:29:07 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2022 16:29:07 GMT -5
That doesn't necessarily include all gov't positions outside the legislature like prosecutors/DA's... Legislature make the rules do they not? A prosecutor/DA has some discretion on who to prosecute or not. Along with disregarding the law. Been going on for awhile now. Some agencies make their own rules.
|
|
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 17:17:51 GMT -5
snow likes this
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 15, 2022 17:17:51 GMT -5
I don't know how you can blame lefties when Republicans rule Iowa That doesn't necessarily include all gov't positions outside the legislature like prosecutors/DA's... The DA has no control over the sentencing of accused people. And judges are bound by the laws made by legislatures. In this case the judge was bound by the republican legislature's laws. Just saying.
|
|
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 17:20:30 GMT -5
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 15, 2022 17:20:30 GMT -5
Legislature make the rules do they not? A prosecutor/DA has some discretion on who to prosecute or not. Along with disregarding the law. Been going on for awhile now. Some agencies make their own rules. Suck rednecks frequently lose their positions for their disregard of the law.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 20:19:52 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2022 20:19:52 GMT -5
That doesn't necessarily include all gov't positions outside the legislature like prosecutors/DA's... The DA has no control over the sentencing of accused people. And judges are bound by the laws made by legislatures. In this case the judge was bound by the republican legislature's laws. Just saying. Sentencing only comes after prosecution which is not happening to criminals but is happening to victims...Just sayin'
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 20:21:39 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 15, 2022 20:21:39 GMT -5
A prosecutor/DA has some discretion on who to prosecute or not. Along with disregarding the law. Been going on for awhile now. Some agencies make their own rules. Suck rednecks frequently lose their positions for their disregard of the law. Lefties rarely do. That is called a double standard.
|
|
|
What!!
Sept 15, 2022 21:53:46 GMT -5
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 15, 2022 21:53:46 GMT -5
The DA has no control over the sentencing of accused people. And judges are bound by the laws made by legislatures. In this case the judge was bound by the republican legislature's laws. Just saying. Sentencing only comes after prosecution Exactly -- after the prosecutor/D.A. has finished with the prosecution. That's when the other branch of government, the judge, takes over. If the prosecutor doesn't get what he wants -- tough titti Some people elect redneck yahoo judges. However, if the judge in Iowa wants to keep his job, he is required to give the sentence he gave that young girl. Just saying.
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 15, 2022 21:54:46 GMT -5
Suck rednecks frequently lose their positions for their disregard of the law. Lefties rarely do. That is called a double standard. You forgot to check my spelling.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 16, 2022 0:46:20 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2022 0:46:20 GMT -5
Sentencing only comes after prosecution Exactly -- after the prosecutor/D.A. has finished with the prosecution. That's when the other branch of government, the judge, takes over. If the prosecutor doesn't get what he wants -- tough titti Some people elect redneck yahoo judges. However, if the judge in Iowa wants to keep his job, he is required to give the sentence he gave that young girl. Just saying. You are not getting it...
|
|
|
What!!
Sept 16, 2022 0:51:05 GMT -5
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 16, 2022 0:51:05 GMT -5
Exactly -- after the prosecutor/D.A. has finished with the prosecution. That's when the other branch of government, the judge, takes over. If the prosecutor doesn't get what he wants -- tough titti Some people elect redneck yahoo judges. However, if the judge in Iowa wants to keep his job, he is required to give the sentence he gave that young girl. Just saying. You are not getting it... Of course not. I wasn't involved.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 16, 2022 12:13:04 GMT -5
Legislature make the rules do they not? A prosecutor/DA has some discretion on who to prosecute or not. Along with disregarding the law. Been going on for awhile now. Some agencies make their own rules. So the judge just upheld an Iowa law. They didn't make their own law when sentencing. 910.3B Restitution for death of victim. 1. In all criminal cases in which the offender is convicted of a felony in which the act or acts committed by the offender caused the death of another person, in addition to the amount determined to be payable and ordered to be paid to a victim for pecuniary damages, as defined under section 910.1, and determined under section 910.3, the court shall also order the offender to pay at least one hundred fifty thousand dollars in restitution to the victim’s estate if the victim died testate. If the victim died intestate the court shall order the offender to pay the restitution to the victim’s heirs at law as determined pursuant to section 633.210. The obligation to pay the additional amount shall not be dischargeable in any proceeding under the federal Bankruptcy Act. Payment of the additional amount shall have the same priority as payment of a victim’s pecuniary damages under section 910.2, in the offender’s plan for restitution. 2. An award under this section does not preclude or supersede the right of a victim’s estate or heirs at law to bring a civil action against the offender for damages arising out of the same facts or event. However, no evidence relating to the entry of the judgment against the offender pursuant to this section or the amount of the award ordered pursuant to this section shall be permitted to be introduced in any civil action for damages arising out of the same facts or event. 3. An offender who is ordered to pay a victim’s estate or heirs at law under this section is precluded from denying the elements of the felony offense which resulted in the order for payment in any subsequent civil action for damages arising out of the same facts or event. 4. An award under this section made to the victim’s estate or heirs at law shall not be reduced by any third-party payment, including any insurance payment, unless the offender is a named or covered insured. 97 Acts, ch 125, §11; 2003 Acts, 1st Ex, ch 2, §63, 209; 2018 Acts, ch 1103, §1 Referred to in §915.100
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
What!!
Sept 16, 2022 15:40:48 GMT -5
Post by Deleted on Sept 16, 2022 15:40:48 GMT -5
A prosecutor/DA has some discretion on who to prosecute or not. Along with disregarding the law. Been going on for awhile now. Some agencies make their own rules. So the judge just upheld an Iowa law. They didn't make their own law when sentencing. 910.3B Restitution for death of victim. 1. In all criminal cases in which the offender is convicted of a felony in which the act or acts committed by the offender caused the death of another person, in addition to the amount determined to be payable and ordered to be paid to a victim for pecuniary damages, as defined under section 910.1, and determined under section 910.3, the court shall also order the offender to pay at least one hundred fifty thousand dollars in restitution to the victim’s estate if the victim died testate. If the victim died intestate the court shall order the offender to pay the restitution to the victim’s heirs at law as determined pursuant to section 633.210. The obligation to pay the additional amount shall not be dischargeable in any proceeding under the federal Bankruptcy Act. Payment of the additional amount shall have the same priority as payment of a victim’s pecuniary damages under section 910.2, in the offender’s plan for restitution. 2. An award under this section does not preclude or supersede the right of a victim’s estate or heirs at law to bring a civil action against the offender for damages arising out of the same facts or event. However, no evidence relating to the entry of the judgment against the offender pursuant to this section or the amount of the award ordered pursuant to this section shall be permitted to be introduced in any civil action for damages arising out of the same facts or event. 3. An offender who is ordered to pay a victim’s estate or heirs at law under this section is precluded from denying the elements of the felony offense which resulted in the order for payment in any subsequent civil action for damages arising out of the same facts or event. 4. An award under this section made to the victim’s estate or heirs at law shall not be reduced by any third-party payment, including any insurance payment, unless the offender is a named or covered insured. 97 Acts, ch 125, §11; 2003 Acts, 1st Ex, ch 2, §63, 209; 2018 Acts, ch 1103, §1 Referred to in §915.100We were talking about the prosecution of a victim instead of a criminal not the sentencing. Victims are not offenders and criminals are not victims. As for sentencing 910.3b is clearly about victims of crime not criminals getting their butt handed to them. So the left wing policy of going after victims is at play here...
|
|
|
Post by BobWilliston on Sept 16, 2022 22:59:49 GMT -5
So the judge just upheld an Iowa law. They didn't make their own law when sentencing. 910.3B Restitution for death of victim. 1. In all criminal cases in which the offender is convicted of a felony in which the act or acts committed by the offender caused the death of another person, in addition to the amount determined to be payable and ordered to be paid to a victim for pecuniary damages, as defined under section 910.1, and determined under section 910.3, the court shall also order the offender to pay at least one hundred fifty thousand dollars in restitution to the victim’s estate if the victim died testate. If the victim died intestate the court shall order the offender to pay the restitution to the victim’s heirs at law as determined pursuant to section 633.210. The obligation to pay the additional amount shall not be dischargeable in any proceeding under the federal Bankruptcy Act. Payment of the additional amount shall have the same priority as payment of a victim’s pecuniary damages under section 910.2, in the offender’s plan for restitution. 2. An award under this section does not preclude or supersede the right of a victim’s estate or heirs at law to bring a civil action against the offender for damages arising out of the same facts or event. However, no evidence relating to the entry of the judgment against the offender pursuant to this section or the amount of the award ordered pursuant to this section shall be permitted to be introduced in any civil action for damages arising out of the same facts or event. 3. An offender who is ordered to pay a victim’s estate or heirs at law under this section is precluded from denying the elements of the felony offense which resulted in the order for payment in any subsequent civil action for damages arising out of the same facts or event. 4. An award under this section made to the victim’s estate or heirs at law shall not be reduced by any third-party payment, including any insurance payment, unless the offender is a named or covered insured. 97 Acts, ch 125, §11; 2003 Acts, 1st Ex, ch 2, §63, 209; 2018 Acts, ch 1103, §1 Referred to in §915.100We were talking about the prosecution of a victim instead of a criminal not the sentencing. Victims are not offenders and criminals are not victims. As for sentencing 910.3b is clearly about victims of crime not criminals getting their butt handed to them. So the left wing policy of going after victims is at play here... And the farmer hauled another load away.
|
|
|
Post by snow on Sept 17, 2022 13:32:35 GMT -5
So the judge just upheld an Iowa law. They didn't make their own law when sentencing. 910.3B Restitution for death of victim. 1. In all criminal cases in which the offender is convicted of a felony in which the act or acts committed by the offender caused the death of another person, in addition to the amount determined to be payable and ordered to be paid to a victim for pecuniary damages, as defined under section 910.1, and determined under section 910.3, the court shall also order the offender to pay at least one hundred fifty thousand dollars in restitution to the victim’s estate if the victim died testate. If the victim died intestate the court shall order the offender to pay the restitution to the victim’s heirs at law as determined pursuant to section 633.210. The obligation to pay the additional amount shall not be dischargeable in any proceeding under the federal Bankruptcy Act. Payment of the additional amount shall have the same priority as payment of a victim’s pecuniary damages under section 910.2, in the offender’s plan for restitution. 2. An award under this section does not preclude or supersede the right of a victim’s estate or heirs at law to bring a civil action against the offender for damages arising out of the same facts or event. However, no evidence relating to the entry of the judgment against the offender pursuant to this section or the amount of the award ordered pursuant to this section shall be permitted to be introduced in any civil action for damages arising out of the same facts or event. 3. An offender who is ordered to pay a victim’s estate or heirs at law under this section is precluded from denying the elements of the felony offense which resulted in the order for payment in any subsequent civil action for damages arising out of the same facts or event. 4. An award under this section made to the victim’s estate or heirs at law shall not be reduced by any third-party payment, including any insurance payment, unless the offender is a named or covered insured. 97 Acts, ch 125, §11; 2003 Acts, 1st Ex, ch 2, §63, 209; 2018 Acts, ch 1103, §1 Referred to in §915.100We were talking about the prosecution of a victim instead of a criminal not the sentencing. Victims are not offenders and criminals are not victims. As for sentencing 910.3b is clearly about victims of crime not criminals getting their butt handed to them. So the left wing policy of going after victims is at play here... Yes the laws made by republican legislature in Iowa are the ones that target victims. It's a republican law that in this case did target a victim. Judges have to rule by the laws in place. Paying restitution to the victim of a death caused by anyone, whether it was justified or not, (which it was in her case btw) still has to pay for that killing. They should take a look at their law and make sure that exemptions to that law be there for cases such as this one. A raped child killing her rapist to get away.
|
|