The most maddening class I took in law school was Wrongful Convictions, which went in-depth into

1. The coercive, abusive and purposefully misleading “interrogation” process for suspects

2. The pseudoscience of a number of forensic science categories used to convict people, including “signs a suspect is lying” and hair analysis; and

3. The nearly impossible challenge of freeing someone even when it is PROVEN that they are innocent

The American “justice” system is infinitely more fucked up than you can imagine. For every horrorshow act you get exposed to, there’s a very good chance you’ll be greeted with a “but wait! There’s more!”

The Supreme Court handed down a decision on Wednesday which effectively gives Border Patrol agents who violate the Constitution total immunity from lawsuits seeking to hold them accountable.

Justice Clarence Thomas’s majority opinion in Egbert v. Boule, moreover, has implications that stretch far beyond the border. Egbert guts a seminal Supreme Court precedent, Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents (1971), which established that federal law enforcement officers who violate the Constitution may be individually sued — and potentially be required to compensate their victims for their illegal actions.

Egbert is a severe blow to the broader project of police accountability. While it does not target lawsuits against state law enforcement officers who violate the Constitution, it all but eliminates the public’s ability to sue border patrol officers — and possibly all federal officers — who commit similar violations.

In fairness, Egbert does indicate that people who believe their rights were violated by federal law enforcement may file a grievance with the law enforcement agency that employs the officer who allegedly violated the Constitution. But such grievances will be investigated by other law enforcement officers, and no court or other agency can review a law enforcement officer’s decision to exonerate a fellow officer.

And, perhaps most importantly, Egbert most likely shuts down a civil rights plaintiffs’ ability to be compensated if their rights are violated.

Holy shit it just keeps getting worse with every paragraph. I was expecting it to be bad but YIKES.

Is Amber Heard a victim?

people will spin the wheel as much as they can to get their desired result, Amber Heard has to be shown as a victim or all the money and time people spent praising her will be for nothing. Most of the public turned on her due to her own testimony on the stand, exaggerated accounts with no medical records to back her claims (she never signed her HIPPA form so those were never brought in) and photoshopped pictures she had the nerve to upload multiple versions up of the same pictures for different dated incidents she claimed had happened. 

The trial was televised after it was requested and granted by the previous judge that was on the case, it was to allow actual transparency between the court and public so everyone could see everything without the need for MSM misconstrue evidence and testimony to the public.

I understand a lot of people are worried about the implications of this case on future cases with abuse but people should understand and remember that this was a defamation case that dealt with accusation of abuse from one person to another. If this was a criminal trial and the evidence we had seen during the 6 weeks were used then Amber would still have lost and gone to prison for however long they’d send her....probably for a couple of months due to good behavior. 

A lot of activist and “woke” heads are on trying to find ways to defend this woman and her legal team but it was clear with the evidence she presented she lied to the public. Audio tapes came from her and were played for people to hear, her trying to gaslight people on the stand when we clearly heard her attack Depp on tape and berate him and belittling him to start fights. 

Her expert witnesses like  Forensic psychologist Dawn Hughes and  Dr. David R. Spiegel, unethical behaviors towards Depp was troubling, ignoring physical evidence and diagnosing Depp based off the characters he’s played in film only.....come to the conclusion Depp did it because you watched him in Sweeney Todd?? Ed Wood? Pirates of the Caribbean?? Dawn Hughes use of gender based language and refusing to answer if she’s ever treated hetero couples where the male was the victim of IPV and agreeing Amber has PTSD because she said so? incorrectly use your testing forms, didn’t vet to see if anything amber said was true to you from previous behavior from her personal doctor? 

Her medical records she claims were not admitted into evidence? therapist notes that were hearsay and could not be used in court, she has yet to supply her legal team with her actual medical records to show medical treatment for her alleged physical injuries. 

Amber Heard had her acting coach testimony that was previously used in the UK trial play in court, her coach said she can’t cry when acting and unfortunately for Amber, allowing this in actually worked against her. Amber’s testimony was uncomfortable for me to watch, not because of the sexual assault she claimed but odd details random things that had nothing to do with her injuries but how obvious it was that she was lying. She didn’t cry, she couldn’t cry, she wiped her face repeatedly while no tears flowed down her face. She made the faces you make when tears are to come out but nothing flowed out, her constant touching, rubbing of the eyes and face seemed like she was trying to create irritation to create tears for her testimony.....was a strange thing to watch honestly. 

After her testimony, her credibility was completely destroyed and she did that all to and by herself, not because she spoke for abuse victims but because she lied and couldn’t keep up with her lies anymore. Most of the public have shown their disgust and distain for Amber Heard after her testimony and did not hold back from the online roasting of Amber Heard, it was much and many but so were the roast of the men accused of abuse during the height of #metoo with no complaints before.  

 I’ve seen a lot of articles online labeling this trial as the end of #metoo, devastating to other abuse victims and will silence them in the future if they speak out against their abuser(s) but when you ask these people how does that happen you get blocked or harassed by checkmarks. Nothing about this case will change anything regarding #metoo, it is exactly like it was before this trial, ran by those of the Hollywood powerful and used for profit. The right for abuse victims to speak out will still be here, all it’s done was put a little light on male abuse victims and hopefully, starting the conversation in hearing their stories. 

So can we read someone their Miranda Rights if we see them being arrested?

The US has this fascinating legal system where all laws are applied to you whether or not you know about them, but many rights are only granted to you if you know about them and demand them.

Recent or current US bills being debated to be signed into law by mostly republican state governments in 2023.

South Carolina: wants to make a woman seeking an abortion a capital offence. Not the only state considering this.

Minnesota and Iowa: wants to deal with workers demanding higher wages by lowering the definition of an “adult” worker to 14, allowing 14 year olds to work as delivery drivers, in construction, mining, ranching, or in meat-packing plants to get around labour shortages.

Idaho: wants to have a ban of drag performances that is so vague, that anyone or any gender wearing any makeup or “Glamorous clothing” while publicly performing in any way could be arrested and added to the sex offenders register. Montana, Arizona, Arkansas, Missouri, Nebraska, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas and West Virginia are also seeking drag show bans.

Florida is considering giving courts “Emergency powers” to forcibly take children into care if any adult in their household (including older siblings) comes out as trans or genderfluid. It’s also considering legalizing parental abduction allowing Floridians to cross state lines to kidnap their children if they are receiving gender affirming care in other states, even if they no longer have legal custody over said children.

Texas is trying to block any and all gender affirming healthcare or cosmetic procedure, including reconstructive surgery for after mastectomy on trans Texans, for residents of the state, even if they go out of state for said treatment.

And getting in on this republican madness, Democrat Massachusetts considered letting prisoners sell organs or bone marrow in exchange for sorter sentences. Just... like.... fucking hell.

 https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/jan/21/anti-drag-show-laws-bans-republican-states

https://www.wyomingpublicmedia.org/2023-02-26/child-labor-violations-are-on-the-rise-as-some-states-look-to-loosen-their-rules

https://www.businessinsider.com/south-carolina-gop-state-bill-make-death-penalty-punishment-abortion-2023-3?r=US&IR=T

https://xtramagazine.com/power/politics/florida-bill-trans-custody-247101

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-bill-ban-gender-affirming-care-transgender-adults/

https://www.usnews.com/news/health-news/articles/2023-02-09/massachusetts-bill-would-let-prisoners-donate-organs-in-exchange-for-shorter-sentence

https://www.npr.org/2018/08/03/635203037/allegations-of-sexual-abuse-surface-at-arizona-shelters-for-migrant-children

Study: U.S. judges give harsher sentences when their football team loses From "Emotional Judges and Unlucky Juveniles," a study published in the American Economic Journal: Employing the universe of juvenile court decisions in a U.S. state between 1996 and 2012, we analyze the effects of emotional shocks associated with unexpected outcomes of football games played by a prominent college team in the state. — Read the rest https://boingboing.net/2023/02/06/study-u-s-judges-give-harsher-sentences-when-their-football-team-loses.html

AP News: Colorado baker loses appeal over transgender birthday cake

It would be funny if this guy won in the Supreme Court over gay marriage but then went back over transgender rights and lost.

Justice has prevailed - Justice for Johnny Depp.

Depp won on all counts against Amber Heard, Amber won on 1 count in her counterclaim pertaining to Adam Waldman statement. Depp was able to prove he was defamed by Amber Heard, proved he was an abuse victim and not the abuser that Amber and her friends that created photoshop evidence suggest. She lost, no matter what people say now, she lost using the fake evidence she used to supply NGN with in the UK. Her evidence was looked over and analyzed, shit was called out during direct and cross and was shown to be photoshopped. You also have the 4 police officers and body camera video, the building staff, no medical records from AH team and her throwing them under the bus when questioned on why some of her evidence was not admitted. People need to start asking questions about the UK trial if both had the same evidence then what gives? it can’t be Depp is a powerful man bullshit anymore, people need to accept that the woman they’ve been supporting for all these years is an abuser of mental, emotional and physical abuse and issue some apologies to many that publicly supported Depp or even questioned Amber’s tall tails of stories she’s been spinning in the press for all these years. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/celebrity/jury-reaches-verdict-johnny-depp-wins-libel-trial-amber-heard-partially-wins-countersuit/ar-AAXYaGn?ocid=entnewsntp&cvid=1d3eb5e182784aa4aa55675e26b3e30d

i think it would be funny if people occasionally arose from the dead. like if that was a real-life one-in-a-million but well-documented Thing That Sometimes Happens, and the entire legal system around death (laws on inheritance & marriage & murder etc) had to include caveats for the unlikely-but-scientifically-possible event that the dead person in question might spontaneously self-resurrect, even years or decades after death. it would raise so many inconvenient and absurd possibilities