#still protected under that general prosecutor

[jesusagrees]

I am so sorry, Hara. South Korea really failed you. Everyone failed you. I hope you realize how brave you were. Thank you for showing compassion and doing everything you could to help these victims. I'm sorry no one was there for you! Rest well now, you've done well! 💔🩷

Not all heroes wear capes!

Thank you, Park Hyo Sil and Kang Kyung Yoon, for your bravery in releasing this story. For exposing what was right in front of us! Your bravery and courage going up against the Goliaths is admirable. Thank you for what you did to help these victims and take down these scum. May your lives flourish. May you always be healthy and safe!

[amarynthian-chronicles]

Hello, hello!

Welcome, make yourself comfortable, here are some cakes, tea and hot chocolate, and enjoy your stay. In this little pocket dimension of a blog, you will mostly find posts about our Celestial Jesters and other FNAF content, along with space-themed aesthetic, writing, some silly whimsical quotes, comfy vibes and similar.

I shall be tagging my own writing posts under "jester's privilege chronicles" (these are especially for my longer works) and "amary's chronicles" (these are especially for my shorter little scenes), to make it easier to navigate or find them. For answered asks the tags are "amary answers" and "amary speaks", to find them easily in case they get buried in reblogs. As of recent, I made the tag "amary's art" for my doodles, although I am still a beginner.

Under the cut are links to my AO3 fics and summaries of the current ones, if you are interested!

Have a lovely day and enjoy your stay!

Jester's Privilege Chronicles series:

Sound the Bells: You are a mermaid in charge of the daunting task of managing the sea and your court consists of playful twin Leviathans and an uncooperative Kraken. You also have the disadvantage of being an utter disaster at this mermaid business and you live on land in human form, having the swimming skills of a rock.

Your sea monsters are not too thrilled with you living on land, so they love to cause shipwrecks and general mayhem to get your attention. You try to place a stop to this by having them spend a month with you in the town of Celestial Bay disguised as animatronics.

Sun is thrilled to explore human technology, Moon prowls the night threatening city council members into making better legal acts to protect the sea against pollution, and Eclipse's natural protective Kraken instincts are getting a tad bit out of hand and making him the friendly neighbourhood serial killer. He loves quick solutions to complex problems.

Officer Vanessa is the only one brave enough to keep knocking on your door for some explanations. She is also in charge of a very confused police unit that really needs to get some sleep.

Extended Contract: You are a witch that fell for the oldest trick in the book by giving your name to the mischievous Fae princes of the Celestial Court. Such an inconvenience on what was supposed to be a typical office night. You are honestly not having it. They, however, do seem quite happy about having you. You decide to make a deal with the Fae King to regain your freedom. The only thing that is functional in the whole situation is your phone signal in the Fae Kingdom.

Tip the Scales: You are a charismatic defense lawyer in a constant competition with two ruthless prosecutors that do not understand your ideals about criminals deserving a second chance. You are also housemates with a certain bitter and retired judge, who has a habit of operating at night as a cloaked figure known as the Judge of the Damned, serving justice as he deems fit according to his own moral ideals. In order to solve his frequent habit of going after your clients, you two had established a game of Tip the Scales to keep a balance of which person deserves redemption and who is condemned to damnation. Things get complicated when an old friend gets wrongfully accused. You do all in your power to convince your prosecutor rivals to secretly cooperate with you and help clear his name before you lose the game.

Our Guest: You arrive at a sinister and luxurious castle with the innocent intention of checking why its mysterious residents haven't been paying any taxes or utilities for the past several centuries. Very useful excuse for a vampire hunter to have when trying to do some good old infiltrating. The three vampire lords, however, fully intend to capture and seduce you, possibly give your pretty neck a bite or two, but all of that does get a bit complicated when you are being such a tease and constantly asking them about their financial books. Will they succeed in the task of making you theirs, dear Y/N? And are they onto your little schemes?

[catierambles]

Blood Moon Ch.21

The rest of the night was uneventful and they crashed into bed around 4am after taking a shower. Annalisa immediately took her position against his chest, and his arm came around her, keeping her close.

"Babe?" He asked, his eyes closed, and she hummed. "How do you know Tiffanys’ parents?"

"I introduced them."

"They got married back in the seventies."

"I know." She said, "Toby worked for the city as a junior Prosecutor, Janice worked in one of my restaurants that he held a lot of meetings in. She was going to school to become a Paralegal at the time so I suggested to Toby that he talk to her, maybe give her a peek behind the curtain so to speak. I also thought they'd be cute together."

"So they know you're..."

"They figured it out eventually when I didn't age and I told them when Toby became an ADA." She said, "We don't see each other as nearly as often as we used to, which is why Tiffany didn't know I knew her parents. Last time I saw them in person, she was still in diapers and Daniel hadn't even been thought of yet."

"And the whole Governor's Ball thing?"

"I don't go every year, for reasons I hope would be obvious as it's highly publicized, but I make an appearance every couple decades." She said, "Whoever is in the current seat always makes sure to invite me as a matter of tradition and, more likely than not, obligation. Like I said, I don't always attend."

"And the current Governor? Wasn't there some big thing with the guy before? What happened with him?"

"Man had skeletons he didn't think I knew about. They weren't bad; a mistress, gambling debts, those kinds of things, and they didn't impact his job performance at the time. But when he dipped into the public education budget to the tune of over a million dollars so he could go to Atlantic City and pay off his bookie, I made sure his days in office were numbered and his successor actually did his job right." She said and he cracked an eye, looking down at her.

"Should I be scared of you?" He asked and she chuckled, kissing his chest.

"Absolutely not." She said, "This city is my home, and I'm very protective of it."

A few days later and they pulled up in front of a non-descript building downtown in Annalisa’s SUV, parking in a slanted spot. They paused for a moment after she turned the engine off and she turned to him.

"Are you sure you're ready?" She asked and he nodded.

"I need to. They're gettin' worse." The nightmares were almost a nightly occurrence now and he often woke feeling as if he had just run a marathon, gasping for breath, tears running down his face. Annalisa held him after he woke up, muttering comfort words, her hands moving over his back soothingly until he fell asleep again. A couple times he woke up as he shifted, the wolf bursting almost violently out of his skin in response to the fear and panic he had been feeling. Thankfully, she managed to calm him before he hurt himself in that state, holding him until that side of his brain realized that they weren’t in danger and he didn’t need to protect her from some unseen force.

They got out of the truck, Annalisa locking it with the fob, and went into the building, heading for the elevator to take it to the correct floor. The hallway was quiet as they stepped out into it, going to an office with a single plaque on the wall.

Dr. Melody Wyatt

Advanced Specialized Psychotherapy

No shit.

Heading inside, they went to the front desk, the receptionist looking up at them with a smile.

“Name?” She asked.

“Kyle Syverson, I have a 2pm with Dr. Wyatt.” He said and she turned in her chair, flicking through the files next to her, taking out a few pages and attaching them to a clipboard along with a pen.

“Go ahead and fill out the new patient paperwork. Do you have insurance?”

“Uh...”

“I’ll take care of it.” Annalisa said and she looked up at her.

“Of course, Ms. Caulfield.” She said with a small smile, “Am I placing his file under your organization? Or as a general patient?”

“Under my organization.” She said and the receptionist nodded.

“Yes, ma’am.” She took out a couple different pieces of paper from another drawer, attaching them to the clipboard with the others. “Please fill out all pages to the best of your knowledge and bring them back. Once I have them, I’ll let Dr. Wyatt know you’re here.”

“Thank you.” Sy said as he took the clipboard from her and they moved away, sitting down into the waiting room. “Organization?”

“The coven.” Annalisa said, leaning back in the chair. “Let’s her know ahead of time what she might be dealing with so she can plan accordingly.”

“A lotta members come here?”

“A couple.” She said, “But Melody works with more than just mine from the surrounding cities.” He just hummed, continuing to fill out the paperwork, but paused as he reached one of the pages that the receptionist had added last.

Affiliated Xenospecies:

Vampire

Lycanthrope

He put a check next to Lycanthrope before moving on, following the instructions to skip to the related section asking when he was infected (approximately), how often he shifts, if his transformations were tied to the lunar cycle, and when was the (approximate) date of his last transformation.

He brought the clipboard back up to the desk when he was done and sat back down again with a sigh, closing his eyes as he leaned his head back against the wall. Annalisa's hand slid around his knee and he took it in his own, tangling their fingers. He was tired. Between the nightmares and work at the clubs, he was exhausted.

“Kyle Syverson?” He heard and opened his eyes, picking his head up. The woman was kind looking, with thick black hair shot with silver, wearing a casual looking suit. Pushing up from the chair, he looked at Annalisa briefly. “She can come with, if you want.”

“Babe?”

“As if you have to ask.” She said and got up, following them back through the door into the back offices. Her office was large, overlooking the city, a plush couch against one wall. It honestly reminded him of Annalisa’s office back at the house and he wondered if they had the same decorator.

“Do you have a name you prefer to go by?” She asked, sitting behind her desk as they sat down in the large wingback chairs across from it.

“Sy.” He said simply and she nodded, making a note in his file.

“Before we get started, do you have any questions for me?” She asked.

“How long you been doin’ this?” Sy asked.

“Since I had to pretend to be a man in order to do so.” She said with a small smile.

“Well, damn, okay then.” He said, “So you’re...”

“A vampire.” Melody said simply.

“She’s independent, though.” Annalisa said, “Not a member of any coven.”

“How long have you been a wolf?” Melody asked, looking through his paperwork again.

“Almost a year now.” Sy said and she nodded. “Don’t have a date nailed down of when it happened, but we’re comin’ up on the month.”

“So what brings you in today?”

“I’ve been havin’...nightmares of when I was infected.” He said, looking down at his hands. “It happened a lot the first couple weeks after, but it’s been a while.”

“Have you been having any...auditory or visual hallucinations while awake?”

“Seein’ things?” He asked and she nodded, “Nope, just dreams, but they changed.”

“How so?”

“I was in the Army, Green Beret.” He explained, “It happened while I was patrol with my team in Syria, we were attacked. They didn’t make it, I did.”

“Okay.”

“But it ain’t my boys in the dreams, it’s—it’s my family, my brothers, Annie, and it ain’t the wolf that attacked us. It’s—it’s me. It’s me killin’em in it and I—” He stopped with a grimace and Annalisa reached over, taking his hand.

“Are you afraid you might hurt them while awake?” She asked and he looked at her quickly.

“Absolutely not.” He said, shaking his head. “I’d sooner eat a bullet than lose control like that.”

“Kyle...” Annalisa said and he looked at her, squeezing her fingers.

“I’ve been talkin’ to another wolf about how I am right after I shift.” He said, “Bartender at Annie’s clubs. He said that the more I shift without needin’ to, the more I’ll be myself when I do.”

“He’s right.” Melody said, “When you’re forced to shift because of the full moon, you’re being controlled by your wolf, but if you shift on your own volition, you’re taking control back. So when you have to shift due to the phase, you keep that control. You know how to keep that control. I’m not saying every night, but maybe once or twice a week on your own should help diminish the side effects. If you want to increase it until every night, that’s your choice and it’s whatever would make you comfortable.”

“I’ll think about it.” Sy said and she nodded.

“Now, what do you remember about the night you were attacked?”

“Everythin’.” He said, “The sound of their screams, the gunfire, the smell of the blood.”

“You said your men didn’t make it?”

“I’m the only one.”

“Do you know who found you?” She asked but he shook his head, “It may have been the one who attacked you.”

“You think—you think the wolf that attacked us snapped out of it and made sure I got to help?”

“It’s a possibility.” She said.

“That—that makes a lotta sense.” Sy said, “I talked to the docs at the hospital, they said no one was there when they got to me, no one with a pulse, anyway, but I had a belt on my leg like a tourniquet, tryin’ to slow the bleedin’. It wasn’t mine, or any of my boys.”

“Truly feral wolves are rare, Sy.” Melody said, “Or else we’d be hearing about attacks every day, there’d be attacks in broad daylight with witnesses. I have a feeling the wolf that attacked you lost control, and when they came back to themselves, they saw what they had done and tried to make sure at least one person survived. I’m not trying to diminish what happened to you, Sy. It was highly traumatic. You’re still dealing with the fallout and I’m here to help you process it, but I can almost promise you that it was highly traumatic for you and them. If they hadn’t been affected by what had happened, they wouldn’t have tried to save your life.”

“I don’t know what’s worse.” Sy said, “Believin’ it was a monster that did it, or the idea that it wasn’t.”

[haggishlyhagging]

As the fetus's rights increased, mother's just kept diminishing. Poor pregnant women were hauled into court by male prosecutors, physicians, and husbands. Their blood was tested for drug traces without their consent or even notification, their confidentiality rights were routinely violated in the state's zeal to compile a case against them, and they were forced into obstetrical surgery for the "good" of the fetus, even at risk of their own lives.

Here are just a few of the many cases from the decade's pregnancy police blotter and court docket:

• In Michigan, a juvenile court took custody of a newborn because the mother took a few Valium pills while pregnant, to ease pain caused by an auto accident injury. The mother of three had no history of drug abuse or parental neglect. It took more than a year for her to get her child back.

• In California, a young woman was brought up on fetal neglect charges under a law that, ironically, was meant to force negligent fathers to pay child support. Her offenses included failing to heed a doctor's advice (a doctor who had failed to follow up on her treatment), not getting to the hospital with due haste, and having sex with her husband. The husband, a batterer whose brutal outbursts had summoned the police to their apartment more than a dozen times in one year alone, was not charged —or even investigated.

• In lowa, the state took a woman's baby away at birth even though no real harm to the infant was evident—because she had, among other alleged offenses, "paid no attention to the nutritional value of the food she ate during her pregnancy," as an AP story later characterized the Juvenile Court testimony. "[S]he simply picked the foods that tasted good to her."

• In Wyoming, a woman was charged with felony child abuse for allegedly drinking while pregnant. A battered wife, she had been arrested on this charge after she sought police protection from her abusive husband.

• In Illinois, a woman was summoned to court after her husband accused her of damaging their daughter's intestine in an auto accident during her pregnancy. She wasn't even the driver.

• In Michigan, another husband hauled his wife into court to accuse her of taking tetracycline during her pregnancy; the drug, prescribed by her physician, allegedly discolored their son's teeth, he charged. The state's appellate court ruled that the husband did indeed have the right to sue for this "prenatal negligence."

• In Maryland, a woman lost custody of her fetus when she refused to transfer to a hospital in another city, a move she resisted because it would have meant stranding her nineteen-month-old son.

• In South Carolina, an eighteen-year-old pregnant woman was arrested before she had even given birth, on the suspicion that she may have passed cocaine to her fetus. The charge, based on a single urine test, didn't hold up; she delivered a healthy drug-free baby. Even so, and even though the Department of Social Services found no evidence of abuse or neglect, State prosecutors announced that they intended to pursue the case anyway.

• In Wisconsin, a sixteen-year-old pregnant girl was confined in a secure detention facility because of her alleged tendencies "to be on the run" and "to lack motivation" to seek prenatal care.

Certainly society has a compelling interest in bringing healthy children into the world, both a moral and practical obligation to help women take care of themselves while they're pregnant. But the punitive and vindictive treatment mothers were beginning to receive from legislators, police, prosecutors, and judges in the 80s suggests that more than simple concern for children's welfare was at work here. Police loaded their suspects into paddy wagons still bleeding from labor; prosecutors barged into maternity wards to conduct their interrogations. Judges threw pregnant women with drug problems into jail for months at a time, even though, as the federal General Accounting Office and other investigative agencies have found, the prenatal care offered pregnant women in American prisons is scandalously deficient or nonexistent (many prisons don't even have gynecologists)—and has caused numerous incarcerated women to give birth to critically ill and damaged babies. Police were eager to throw the book at erring pregnant women. In the case of Pamela Rae Stewart of San Diego the battered woman charged with having sex against her doctor's orders—the officer who headed up the investigation wanted her tried for manslaughter. "In my mind, I didn't see any difference between born and unborn," Lieutenant Ray Narramore explains later. "The only question I had was why they didn't go for a murder charge. I would have been satisfied with murder. That wouldn't have been off-base. I mean, we have a lady here who was not following doctor's orders."

Lawmakers' claims that they just wanted to improve conditions for future children rang especially false. At the same time that legislators were assailing low-income mothers for failing to take care of their fetuses, they were making devastating cuts in the very services that poor pregnant women needed to meet the lawmakers' demands. How was an impoverished woman supposed to deliver a healthy fetus when she was denied prenatal care, nutrition supplements, welfare payments, and housing assistance? In the District of Columbia, Marion Barry declared infant health a top priority of his mayoral campaign—then cut health-care funding, forcing prenatal clinics to scale back drastically and eliminate outright their evening hours needed by the many working women. Doctors increasingly berated low-income mothers, but they also increasingly refused to treat them. By the end of the decade, more than one-fourth of all counties nationwide lacked any clinic where poor women could get prenatal care, and a third of doctors wouldn't treat pregnant women who were Medicaid patients. In New York State, a health department study found that seven of the state's counties had no comprehensive prenatal care for poor women whatsoever; several of these counties, not so coincidentally, had infant mortality rates that were more than double the national average. In California in 1986, twelve counties didn't have a single doctor willing to accept the state's low-income MediCal patients; in fact, the National Health Law Program concluded that the situation in California was so bad that poor pregnant women are "essentially cut off from access to care."

-Susan Faludi, Backlash: the Undeclared War Against American Women

[rapeculturerealities]

Fatal shooting of Karina Gonzalez once again highlights difficulty of seizing guns from spouse accused of abuse -

Two weeks before Karina Gonzalez was fatally shot in her Little Village home, she walked into the Ogden district police station and said her husband had threatened to kill her.

“You do not know who I am,” Jose Alvarez had yelled to his wife, according to her complaint, which also noted Alvarez had a gun in the home.

In the days that followed, Gonzalez was granted an order of protection against Alvarez banning him from their home. Chicago police filed a clear and present danger report on him, and Illinois State Police revoked his firearm owners identification card.

Yet Alvarez was still in the home and still had his Glock 9mm handgun on July 3 when prosecutors say he fatally shot his wife and 15-year-old daughter and wounded his 18-year-old son.

Under current state law, there is no clear process for removing a gun after an order of protection has been issued, according to domestic violence prevention advocates. The law also does not dictate how quickly it must be done.

[beardedmrbean]

SAVANNAH, Ga. (AP) — Three years after a former Georgia district attorney was indicted on charges alleging she interfered with police investigating the 2020 killing of Ahmaud Arbery, the case's slow progression through the court system has sputtered to a halt, one the presiding judge insists is temporary.

Jackie Johnson was the state's top prosecutor for coastal Glynn County in February 2020, when Arbery was chased by three white men in pickup trucks who had spotted him running in their neighborhood. The 25-year-old Black man died in the street after one of his pursuers shot him with a shotgun.

Johnson transferred the case to an outside prosecutor because the man who initiated the deadly chase, Greg McMichael, was her former employee. But Georgia's attorney general says she illegally used her office to try to protect the retired investigator and his son, Travis McMichael, who fired the fatal shots.

Both McMichaels already have been convicted and sentenced to prison in back-to-back trials for murder and federal hate crimes. So has a neighbor, William “Roddie” Bryan, whose cellphone video of the shooting triggered a national outcry over Arbery’s death. A court heard their first appeals six months ago.

The criminal misconduct case against Johnson has moved at a comparative crawl since a grand jury indicted her on Sept. 2, 2021, on a felony count of violating her oath of office and a misdemeanor count of hindering a police officer.

While the men responsible for Arbery's death are serving life sentences, the slain man's family has insisted that justice won’t be complete until Johnson stands trial.

“It’s very, very important,” said Wanda Cooper-Jones, Arbery's mother. “Jackie Johnson was really part of the problem early on.”

Johnson has pleaded not guilty and denied wrongdoing. After losing reelection in 2020, she told The Associated Press that she immediately recused herself in the handling of Arbery's killing because of Greg McMichael's involvement.

Johnson's case has stalled as one of her attorneys, Brian Steel, has spent most of the past two years in an Atlanta courtroom defending Grammy-winning rapper Young Thug against racketeering and gang charges. Jury selection in the case took 10 months, prosecutors began presenting evidence last November and they are still calling witnesses.

Senior Judge John R. Turner, who was assigned to Johnson’s case, insists there is nothing he can do but wait.

“If anyone’s concerned that the case is being shuffled under the rug, I can guarantee you it’s not,” Turner told the AP in a phone interview. “It’s moving at a snail’s pace, but it will move forward eventually.”

After Arbery was killed, Greg McMichael told police that he and his son had armed themselves and chased the Black man, suspecting he was a fleeing criminal. Bryan, who didn't know any of the men, made a similar assumption after seeing them pass his home and joined in his own truck.

The indictment against Johnson alleges she told police they shouldn't arrest Travis McMichael. It also accuses her of “showing favor and affection” to Greg McMichael by calling on George Barnhill, a district attorney in a neighboring judicial circuit, to advise police about how to handle the shooting.

Georgia Attorney General Chris Carr appointed Barnhill four days later to take over as outside prosecutor. Carr has said he picked Barnhill without knowing he already had advised police that he saw no grounds for arrests in Arbery's death.

Barnhill stepped aside after a few weeks, but not before he sent a letter to police captain arguing the McMichaels acted legally and Arbery was killed in self-defense.

After Johnson was charged, she reported to jail for booking and was released without having to post bond. Her attorneys waived a formal reading of the charges before a judge and she has yet to appear in court. The judge denied legal motions by Johnson’s lawyers to dismiss the case last November. Court records show no further developments over the past 10 months.

“Securing an indictment is just one step in our ongoing pursuit of justice for Ahmaud Arbery and his family," Carr said in a statement. "We have never stopped fighting for them, and we look forward to the opportunity to present our case in court.”

Johnson's attorneys, Steel and John Ossick, did not respond to emails and a phone message seeking comment. They have argued in court filings there is “not a scintilla of evidence” that she hindered police.

Prosecutors responded with a court filing that listed 16 calls between phones belonging to Johnson and Greg McMichael in the weeks following the shooting.

Two legal experts who aren't involved in the case said there is no deadline for Johnson to stand trial. She hasn't been jailed, so there is little pressure to expedite her case.

Steel's prolonged absence because of the Atlanta gang trial likely isn't the only factor slowing the case, Atlanta defense attorney Don Samuel said.

Courts remain saddled with a backlog of cases since the COVID-19 lockdowns, he said. And the attorney general's office has a limited staff of criminal prosecutors with their own busy caseloads.

Samuel also questioned whether prosecutors have a strong case against Johnson. Even if she opposed charging the McMichaels in Arbery's death, he said, prosecutors haven't accused her of taking bribes or similar blatant corruption.

District attorneys “have a huge amount of discretion to make decisions about what cases to pursue,” Samuel said. “The notion that we’re going to start prosecuting DAs for prosecuting or not prosecuting strikes me as really being on the edge of propriety.”

Danny Porter, the former district attorney for Gwinnett County in metro Atlanta, said prosecutors like Johnson have a legitimate role in advising police on whether or not to arrest suspects before an investigation is complete.

As for Johnson's recommendation in 2020 that the attorney general replace her with another prosecutor who concluded Arbery's killing was justified, Porter said: “I don’t think that’s a violation of the law, though it might have made them mad.”

[uboat53]

Well, the Trump trial is officially over and the reaction to it sparked an idea I need explore. SHORT RANT (TM) time?

INTRODUCTION

Anyone else notice something interesting about the Republican response to the verdict? They's lots of talk about "rigged trials" and "election interference", but there's not a lot of talk about the evidence. I mean, if you really thought that someone wasn't guilty of something, wouldn't you want to make a case for it? Heck, if you really thought that a trial was rigged or that the other party was interfering in the election, wouldn't you be able to put up some evidence for that?

There's a reason for that, though, the Republican response has nothing to do with the evidence. Many of them DO, in fact, seem to think he's guilty, but they still think he shouldn't be convicted. The reasons for this are pretty interesting.

THE WORLDVIEW

In 2018, a composter named Frank Wilhoit from Ohio came up with a definition of conservatism. It goes like this:

"Conservatism consists of exactly one proposition, to wit: There must be in-groups that the law protects but does not bind, alongside out-groups whom the law binds but does not protect."

And, here's the thing, he's not wrong. Just look at how the conservative response to campus or BLM protests varies from their response to the attack on the US Capitol. Look at how their statements about law enforcement in general deviate from their statements about Trump's legal travails. None of these statements make sense if you hold a belief in the American concepts of equal justice under law, but they make perfect sense if you believe that Trump and his followers are part of the in-group and the law isn't supposed to bind them.

THE EVIDENCE

The great thing about the American legal system is that, in order to convict someone of a crime, you have to be very clear about what they did and why you think they did it. In other words, you have to lay out the evidence.

In this case, jurors believed, based on Stormy Daniel's testimony as well as corroborating evidence, that (a) Trump had an affair with her, they believed, based on financial records and corroborating evidence, that (b) Michael Cohen paid her in order to capture her story and prevent it from coming out, they believed, based on financial records, written records, and corroborating evidence that (c) Trump paid Cohen back for this, they believed, based on testimony by Hope Hicks, Michael Cohen, and others, that (d) the story was prevented from coming out because it was believed it would harm Trump's chances of being elected, and they believed, based on all of this and other corroborating evidence, that (e) Trump's business records were falsified in order to conceal the nature of this payment which would constitute an illegal campaign contribution.

Whether you understand the evidence as the jury did or not, the evidence is laid out for all to see. Also, each decision the judge and prosecutor made was a matter of public record. It is striking that no Republican in the country seems to think there was anything wrong with the evidence, what the jury interpreted from it, or with any specific decision made by the DA or judge during the trial. In fact, it's becoming more obvious that many of them don't seem to have any issues at all with what the jury found or with any of the schedules or procedures of the trial itself.

THE UNAMERICAN TRUTH

Fundamentally, American law is premised on the idea of equal justice under law; this is the concept that the law should apply equally to every person no matter their station. This type of conservatism is, therefore, at odds with one of the most basic premises of American law and has been since the founding.

And, like most bad things in America, this worldview goes back to racism. This is exactly the same worldview that allowed people to justify enslaving black people purely on the basis of the color of their skin. It's the same worldview that allowed people to justify hanging a black man merely on the accusation that he had whistled at a white woman but to refuse to convict a white man who had clearly murdered a black one. It's the worldview behind slavery, the KKK, and Jim Crow.

Republicans and conservatives today aren't arguing that Trump is innocent of the charges he's been convicted on, they seem to largely accept the evidence on that front. What they're arguing is far more dangerous to our country, they're arguing that no law should ever be enforced against Donald Trump or any member of their in-group no matter how guilty they are.

[enchiibean]

Now I'm curious about what Narumitsu things you go "he would not fucking say that" about :0 Alternatively go ahead and give out the Narumitsu/Tasutsumu thoughts >:3

HELP OKAY. These will both be sooo incoherent and will contains spoilers so I will put this all under a read more just in case.

I will admit that I haven’t read any Narumitsu fics in a hot minute but I feel like a lot of the ones I TRIED to read back in the summer felt kinda like they were. Like. Stripped of the things that I personally like about them like the complexity and the admiration and how much they CARE for and will support each other despite being “rivals” on opposite sides of the court. And I’m not saying that every depiction of them has to be super complicated or emotionally life-changing or anything because I love reading just. Fluff or silly stuff. But I feel like they were being replaced by some generic yaoi pair where one of them is super dominant and possessive while the other one is super woobified, if that makes sense? And I would just stare and be like that is NOT them!!!! I feel like this happens to a lot of mlm ships though, especially when they’re popular. The nuance is taken away and the yaoi effect takes its place. Have you also seen this. Is this only in my imagination. Was I just bad at picking out fics (probably).

ANYWAY Narumitsu/Tasutsumu comparisons I am taking out my notes. This isn’t even necessarily romantic/from a shipping point of view, I just think they’re very similar!! First of all, they’re both pairs of childhood friends who had shared dreams. For Narumitsu, as children, they both wanted to become defence attorneys to protect truth and justice, while Tasutsumu wanted to become actors together. However, as they grow up, one of them changes paths, without warning, and not necessarily because they wanted to. Edgeworth ends up as a prosecutor instead of a defence attorney after being raised by Von Karma, while Tsumugi becomes a tutor instead of an actor. Meanwhile, Phoenix and Tasuku are both still working towards defence and acting but they both want to know what changed (although Tasuku has a lot better of an idea on that) and have no way of knowing.

Another thing is they both have a “divorced” arc where one of them had what they saw as a HUGE failure and then left to somewhere the other couldn’t follow. For Tasutsumu, this is the same situation above because Tsumugi abruptly changed paths BECAUSE this failure and Reni’s words affected him so much that he didn’t think he could act anymore. For Narumitsu, you could say that similarly, this aligns with the situation outlined before because Phoenix couldn’t contact Edgeworth in any way until they were on opposite ends of the court, but I was thinking more of the post-AA1 “PROSECUTOR MILES EDGEWORTH CHOOSES DEATH” era where Edgeworth got up and left to Europe. And I think these situations are more similar because in these, there’s more anger. Tasuku is angry that Tsumugi abandoned their dream, while Phoenix is angry at Edgeworth because he thinks that he’s quit being a prosecutor. I think that they both perceive this as selfish. For Tasuku, it feels like a betrayal to him because he thought that acting was so incredibly important to both of them and Tsumugi being able to quit after one failure is proof to him that it wasn’t as important to Tsumugi as it was to Tasuku. Plus, they’d been friends all their lives and he just leaves without a word!

Phoenix feels similarly betrayed because he went through SO MUCH to be reunited with Edgeworth and save him, to become his friend again, just for Edgeworth to disappear at the end of it all. In his eyes, Edgeworth is still operating on the basis that he needs to be perfect, and if he isn’t perfect at prosecution, then he might as well not be a prosecutor at all. To Phoenix, “Prosecutor Miles Edgeworth’s death” is him quitting prosecution for what he sees as a petty reason. By the end of Justice for All, we learn that for Edgeworth, this was not the case; “Prosecutor Miles Edgeworth’s death” was him abandoning his previous ways and becoming a new type of lawyer. He’d already been saved by Phoenix, and he was trying to learn how to become closer to that lawyer he dreamed of being as a child who fought for justice (rather than the ruthless prosecutor he’d been who was willing to do anything for a win and he also had to deal with the fact that he probably got innocent people convicted), which is what Phoenix had wanted. But can you blame Phoenix for thinking this? I mean, Edgeworth was vague as hell in that note and disappeared without a trace. Both him AND Tsumugi disappear without a trace, knowing where Phoenix and Tasuku are (Edgeworth reads about Phoenix’s cases in the news and Tsumugi goes to see Tasuku’s plays), but not letting them know where THEY are. Anyway, Tasuku and Edgeworth both thought that their respective friends were willing to give up on not only their dreams, their work, but also THEM because they were no longer perfect and were upset by this.

Also, this has less to do with their relationships, but a similarity between Tasuku and Edgeworth is that they were forced into “perfection” by their mentors. The ways their mentors made them act led them to becoming hated by their peers and also distanced them from why they were pursuing acting/law in the first place. Reni kept pushing Tasuku into the prince box and put him on a pedestal as the top actor, which painted a target on his back in God Troupe's competitive environment. This took away a lot of what Tasuku loved about acting; trying all types of new roles, doing it with people who share that passion, and just. Acting for the sake of acting!! And the way Reni had one idea of what “good” acting is and thought that he could only do princely roles, as well as his peers’ opinions on him and the way he couldn’t show weakness in front of them which furthered their opinion that he was cold and thought he was above them, when really he felt isolated and alone.

Von Karma hammered into Edgeworth since he was young that he has to be PERFECT, and that means a perfect win streak. I’m almost certain that he switched from defence to prosecution because of him (I just can’t remember if or where this was Actually Confirmed). He wants a perfect streak because of him. And similar to Tasuku, he’s kind of alienated by his peers because of it with the “demon prosecutor” image who’s willing to do ANYTHING to maintain that perfect win streak. And the fact that he’s been taught to care more about wins than anything else in his profession made him lose focus of his ideals and why he wanted to become a (defence) lawyer in the first place, which was to find out the truth behind a case and to bring justice and protect people!!

Also, they both eventually break away from those mentors!! Tasuku left Reni and God Troupe because he saw what he did with Taichi and Mankai in episode 3 and he couldn’t stay with a troupe that would be willing to sabotage others like this to stay on top of them. And after 1-4, after being on the defence podium, Edgeworth gets to see how Von Karma REALLY is and what he’s willing to do to maintain that streak and stay as the “best” prosecutor!! It puts things into perspective for him because he’s been taught to try to emulate Von Karma for most of his life but he realizes that if that means doing all of THIS then he doesn’t want to. They both decide they want to change. Perfection wasn’t either of their goals in the first place, they just wanted to improve and this is how they were taught to do that. And their morals lead them to changing for the better :)

[mariacallous]

Fake democracies take power by controlling who gives orders to public officials. During Hungarian elections, local polling station committees count the votes. Our research found that in 2018, committees that only had government members on them were far more likely to have irregularities in the count than those composed of both government and opposition. Surprising? Not especially. But it’s also the same reason that Israeli Justice Minister Yariv Levin wants to prevent the committee that appoints new judges from meeting. And it’s why the Israeli Supreme Court needs to hold the line to defend democracy.

In democracies, citizens elect people to make laws and also to supervise their execution. The catch is that in a parliamentary democracy, such as Israel’s, the same people take on both roles. When the people elected to make the law ignore that distinction and execute the laws they would like to have rather than the ones that exist, it amounts corruption or malpractice, and the judiciary is supposed to hold wayward officials to account. When the laws those officials would like to have concern the rules by which laws themselves are made—that is, when they are constitutional, or in the Israeli terminology, Basic Laws—conflating both roles threatens the survival of democracy itself.

Governments depend on appointed officials: civil servants, police, and soldiers to put laws into practice. These people depend for their livelihoods on a government paycheck and for promotion on a bureaucratic hierarchy. In a real democracy, their tasks are governed by the law, and they are protected from dismissal and reprisals if they follow it. In a fake democracy, the executive leadership takes control. That way, corrupt officials can intimidate opposition-aligned or simply foreign businesses (as happens in Hungary), or police officers taking orders from anti-democratic ministers can use excessive force against demonstrators (as they recently did in Israel).

Officials who don’t want to support the government line can resign, as Air Force reservists, soldiers, and even nuclear scientists have threatened to do in Israel. But resignations can never be enough because an honest official’s resignation gives the corrupt government a chance to appoint an obedient replacement. Officials who want to uphold democracy need to be able to do it when it matters—while they are still in their jobs.

The current crisis in Israel will come to a head in September, when the Supreme Court hears challenges to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s most recent judicial coup law. The law was written to change the way the Supreme Court interprets government actions by preventing it from blocking them by applying a test known as “reasonableness.”

Although Netanyahu—a man with a tenuous relationship to the truth—denies it, the new law would apply to decisions to fire the attorney general (Israel’s chief public prosecutor and an independent office, unlike in the United States) or not to convene the judicial appointments panel, where the government doesn’t have enough allies to exert control, or to dismiss the police chief on the grounds that he was insufficiently repressive.

The Supreme Court needs to be able to instruct officials not to obey illegal government orders, and to order security forces to protect officials from reprisals, which means the court needs to invalidate the law. (Such conflict is not unheard of in constitutional states: It nearly occurred in the United States under the administration of former President George W. Bush)

Unlike in Hungary, where constitutional weaknesses (the interaction of a majoritarian electoral system and the ability to change the constitution with a two-thirds majority of a unicameral parliament) gave Prime Minister Viktor Orban the formal constitutional authority to dismantle checks and balances, Israel’s constitution, like the United Kingdom’s, is uncodified. In Israel, the Supreme Court can test legislation against the country’s fundamental values (as expressed in the declaration of independence) and strike down incompatible laws.

In Hungary, the courts cannot review constitutional amendments, and European Court of Human Rights judgements, which are theoretically binding on Hungary, are often not implemented. The Hungarian judiciary did not ask the European Court of Justice to review Orban’s constitutional changes, even though the EU now thinks they have damaged judicial independence so much that it has demanded that Hungary undo them in order to be trusted with EU funds. Because of the timidity of the Hungarian judicial system, the EU had to wait several years, until the Polish government attempted a similar judicial coup, before it could develop the jurisprudence needed to stop takeovers of the judiciary.

Israel’s courts must not be so timid. Although it has never struck down a Basic Law, the Supreme Court has prepared the ground by developing jurisprudence that could be used to do so. It could question whether this reform really is a Basic Law or if it was just called one without justification. Alternatively, it could argue that the law breached the core values of the Israeli legal system by destroying the separation of powers. (Either something is so fundamental that it undermines the system; or it is only notionally, but not actually, fundamental. It can’t be both). In a tactic borrowed from major British constitutional cases, Israel’s court has now said it will meet as a full bench of 15 justices when it hears challenges to Netanyahu’s law.

Netanyahu has said that he would ignore the Supreme Court if it blocks the law. The court must not be deterred by his bluster. Indeed, this is the most serious constitutional crisis in Israel since June 1948, when the Irgun, a militia affiliated to those parts of the Zionist movement that would evolve into the Likud party, sought to import weapons on a ship called the Altalena for its own use in the War of Independence rather than channeling all military equipment to the recently established Israel Defense Forces.

After a tense standoff, then-Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion ordered the ship sunk. Future Prime Minister Menachem Begin, then the head of the Irgun who was aboard the ship as it was shelled, ordered his men not to fight back in order to prevent civil war from breaking out in the nascent Israeli state. Sixteen Irgun members and three Israel Defense Forces soldiers died.

Today, Israel faces another constitutional crisis. Justice Minister Yariv Levin is at the helm of an effort that threatens to splinter Israeli society just as the ship commanded by his great uncle Eliahu Lankin did in 1948.

The Supreme Court must command officials to disobey any attempts that Netanyahu or Levin might make to instruct them to ignore the court. Yoav Gallant, Israel’s defense minister and a Likud member, has made clear he would take inspiration from Begin’s statesmanship and “act according to law” if the Supreme Court strikes down Netanyahu’s legislation.

The power is in the court’s hands: When it hears the case, it will be the last constitutional bulwark of democracy in Israel. It is the court that must decide whether to hand over power to Netanyahu or order him to cease his attacks on Israeli democracy.

[grap3fru1t-b3ach]

i am now compelled to make my account useful again. So have some apocalypse bitches that I love so goddamn much.

*SHARP INHALE*

Starting with:

VANQUISH they/them

° the most responsible of the crew, but also the snobbiest.

° arrogant af! Talk shit, get hit. (With an execution axe)

° judgmental (fitting for a corrupt judge)

° they run a little kangaroo court, where they see the jury and the prosecutors as little marionettes they can play with for their little sick, twisted, and unfair puppet show.

ILLNESS he/him

°feeshy 💚💜💚

°likes to sing, uses it to lure ppl in.

°plays the role of an "angel of mercy" (for those who don't know, that's a type of serial killer who kills people under their care who are very ill and are suffering from their illness, even if they can still be healed) except here, he's not actually sympathetic for you at all :)

° the tallest of the harebringers, and the most plump.

°makes his own special plagues himself. The one he's carrying rn doesn't have a name just yet, but it's his favorite by far.

°DON'T let those droopy eyes and soft voice fool you, he can lose his temper at the drop of a hat.

°Can and will cry. Like, a lot.

°has his own diseases himself,but he's pretty immune.

°has pollen allergies.

HATRED she/it

°ANT LADY

°likes spreading rumors about ppl she finds "problamatic"

°will fight you with her bare hands if she finds you a nuisance

°her braid makes her explode like a bomb, but it doesn't hurt or kill her. (Not like any of them CAN die anyhow)

°axe crazy arsonist

°don't say shit bout her shit plzdontyouwilldiehorriblypleasedon-

WILT he/him

°can sap any energy from plants and crops for himself, yet he is unable to gain weight... Especially with how much he takes. (Daym)

°his ragdoll look is supposed to be some sort of irony, he's a toy himself, yet he sees the people around him as toys for himself.

°speaking of, he uses his ragdoll appearance to manipulate children into thinking he's a doll their parents secretly threw away years ago. (He usually does this to 4-9 year olds)

°he also manipulates authority figures and law makers into raising the prices of food and bevrages.

°like the others, his short tempered side comes to light when things don't go his way, but out of all of them, his tantrums are the most destructive.

°he's a bit insecure about his lazy right eye. (His right)

DECAY she/her

°gives souls who died in the hands of the others a little comfort before spiriting them away.

°LOVES animals! Especially cats and crows.

°Despite her being all sweet n cute n stuff, she also has a reputation of goading people into suicide at times.

°illness and hatred are VERY protective over her (they aren't her parents, they all treat each other like siblings) make her cry, see what happens. :)

°she complains about headaches alot. But she refuses to remove the knife from her head, she calls it her "good luck charm"

° can turn into a crow herself.

WORMWOOD he/them

°leader of the harbringers

° technically the harebringer of havoc?

° HAHAHA HOW ARW YOU THAT SHORT-

° he's kinda scary despite his tiny stature...

°heard some of yall like those stained glass angel wings, SAY NO MORE!

°one of the "cavern angels" which are basically evil angels that are like that naturally and haven't been cast aside like fallen angels.

° birch tree, worm, get it??? Ha! Haha, ha... I'm not funny :(

°BE AFRAID!

Height comparison!

congratulations on getting thus far! Have some lore as a reward!

So basically, wormwood was always very lonely, so he made these guys out of calamity energy, he also bosses them around quite a bit, so sometimes, they sneak off and do their own thing. (Usually ends in them getting in trouble) wormwood was feeling generous one day, and decides to conquer an island for his harebringers to rule over their own piece of land and make it to their liking! The harebringers had a fuckin field day with this, and used this as an advantage to leech off the residents' sufferings. So now, it's up to Elpis to save the residents and end wormwood's schemes once again. (I'll give y'all Elpis later tho, I'm still working on her)

That's everything, thanks for listening to me ramble about my children.🩷

TL;DR art of the 5 harebringers in my version along side wormwood! Including vanquish, illness, hatred, wilt and decay.

[onecornerface]

The FBI Paid a Violent Felon to Infiltrate Denver’s Racial Justice Movement

"What’s been publicly known about the federal government’s activity during the summer of 2020 is astonishing: The Justice Department charged hundreds of people for their roles in First Amendment-protected demonstrations; the Department of Homeland Security deployed more than 750 agents, dressed in military-style uniforms, to Portland and abducted demonstrators in unmarked vans; and the Drug Enforcement Administration, using surveillance powers intended to stop drug runners, spied on more than 50 racial justice groups nationwide, among them a peaceful group that held a vigil on a public university campus in Florida." "As Windecker [the FBI informant] gained prominence among the protesters, eventually rising to a leadership role, he was accusing real activists of being FBI informants. These baseless accusations sowed mistrust and undermined some of the most effective organizers in the community." "One rainy summer afternoon after becoming a paid informant, Windecker met with his FBI handler, Special Agent Scott Dahlstrom. The federal agent clicked on a hidden camera device. [...] Dahlstrom asked Windecker if he remembered his tasking orders — which involved enticing a Black racial justice activist into committing a felony." "Windecker introduced Shelby to his supposed outlaw biker buddy — an FBI undercover agent who went by the nickname “Red” — and together they drove to Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser’s home. As a hidden camera recorded them, the undercover agent encouraged Shelby to commit to a plot to assassinate Weiser, and even suggested they could hire a hitman for as little as $500. Still, Shelby refused to move forward with any plans and immediately cut off contact with Windecker and the undercover agent. Although Shelby was not charged with a crime, local prosecutors used the FBI’s undercover recordings to convince a judge to seize Shelby’s guns under Colorado’s red flag law." "Windecker had given Hall money days earlier and asked him to buy a gun. Hall had agreed and bought a Smith & Wesson handgun for Windecker, despite knowing that Windecker was a convicted felon. Hall didn’t think he had a choice in the transaction. He believed that Windecker, who made the looming prospect of violence part of his identity, would come after him if he refused. [...] federal agents arrested Hall. He pleaded guilty to a felony firearms violation — for buying a gun, with the government’s money, for the government’s informant — and received three years of probation." https://theintercept.com/2023/02/07/fbi-denver-racial-justice-protests-informant/

[reasoningdaily]

Donald Trump is expected to be indicted this week by a Manhattan grand jury following an investigation by Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg Jr. into whether Trump’s alleged payment of hush money to former porn star Stormy Daniels rose to felony-level criminality on the part of the ex-president. Once again, Trump is facing court over allegedly shady dealings, and his chief nemesis is a Black man, only this time that Bragg isn’t trying to rent one of Trump’s apartments, he’s seeking a historic conviction that could mark the first time a former president ends up incarcerated.

If it feels like Trump has spent the last 50 years being sued over his business practices and antagonizing Black people, your instinct isn’t far off. In 1973, the Justice Department sued Trump for discriminating against Black prospective tenants in his then rental real estate portfolio. Trump settled, and to this day claims he did nothing wrong. That lawsuit foreshadowed two themes in Trump’s life that this week could also begin his downfall: court battles over his business practices and tussles with Black folks who refused to be cowed by his racist public policy and rhetoric.

Since then, Trump been accused of jerking contractors who worked on his construction sites out of their money. The Trump Organization reorganized under federal bankruptcy protection three times. The company was convicted last year of tax fraud. He bought an infamous full-page New York Times ad asking for the death penalty (which didn’t exist in New York at the time) for five Black teenagers who were ultimately exonerated for the rape of a white woman who was jogging in Central Park. His presidential campaign and four years in the White House centered on anti-Black and anti-immigrant demagoguery.

So you’re not wrong if you also think it’s fitting that since leaving office, the biggest threats to his fortune and his freedom are investigations led by three Black prosecutors: Bragg, Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis, whose office could still indict Trump over his attempts to undo Georgia’s 2020 election results, and New York Attorney General Letitia James, who is suing the Trump Organization in civil court over the kind of accounting practices at the company’s criminal conviction.

Trump has tried hard to delay or derail all those investigations. He challenged subpoenas. He filed an unsuccessful countersuit against James. He made veiled threats against Willis. He was seen sticking a banana in the tailpipe of Bragg’s chauffeured SUV (ok, that didn’t happen but you can’t stop seeing the visual, can you?). As late as Monday morning, his legal team filed paperwork to try to get Willis thrown off the case and to seal her grand jury’s report, which recommends criminal charges against multiple, unnamed people. Wanna guess who one of those people just might be? So far, none of it has worked.

Still, that it’s Bragg whose investigation appears to have reached the finish line first is ironic. A year ago this week, I questioned whether Bragg was pulling punches on Trump after one of the former lead prosecutors from Bragg’s team wrote a scathing resignation letter that accused his ex-boss of ignoring overwhelming evidence that Trump had committed multiple felonies. Back then, it looked like if any of the investigations against Trump would implode, it would be Bragg’s.

I’ve interviewed Bragg several times since and asked him directly about the Trump investigation. Every time, he was measured and cautious with his words, demure about discussing an ongoing grand jury proceeding. But never once did he close the door on the idea that his office would prosecute Trump if evidence led the grand jury to indict. And as I noted in last year’s piece, it’s pretty easy for New York prosecutors to get grand juries to bring charges if they really want to.

Of course, an indictment is a long, long way from a conviction and the trial of a former president–especially one that would play out in a New York courtroom–would be a spectacle that would do more pay-per-view buys than a Floyd Mayweather fight. But if boxing is the appropriate metaphor for Trump’s current legal woes, maybe with all his antagonizing, he finally picked the wrong opponent, somebody he couldn’t push around the ring too easily. Somebody willing to punch back, or even go on the offensive. Maybe this time, he finally loses.

[rlyehtaxidermist]

I've talked about the polygraph a couple of times on this post, though I admit that the plants thing is new to me.

Technically, the polygraph isn't used in the US legal system - polygraph tests are almost never admissible in court. The Supreme Court, in US v. Scheffer, called the device unreliable but left it to individual jurisdictions to decide whether to use it; most ban it outright, some allow it only if the defense and prosecution both assent to the procedure.

The primary users of it are law enforcement, especially for employee screening; usage of polygraphy outside these sorts of positions is illegal under the Employee Polygraph Protection Act. However, the government still prosecutes people who claim to know how to "beat" a polygraph - and while it may be inadmissible, it's often used by prosecutors to attempt to force people to sign admissible confessions based on the results of the polygraph, as part of the general fuckedupedness of the US's plea deal based criminal courts.

My go-to piece on the polygraph is the HSCA testimony of CIA director Richard Helms, who is perhaps a bit more honest than he should have been about why he thinks the polygraph works:

Mr. HELMS - ...we discovered there were some Eastern Europeans who could defeat the polygraph at any time. Americans are not very good at it, because we are raised to tell the truth and when we lie it is easy to tell are lying. But we find a lot of Europeans and Asiatics can handle that polygraph without a blip, and you know they are lying and you have evidence that they are lying.

Chairman STOKES - I am advised that the CIA used polygraph tests on all its employees. Mr. HELMS - It works very well with Americans.

He later clarifies

Mr. HELMS - What I, in effect, was trying to say was that there is an occasional individual who lives in that part of the world who has spent his life lying about one thing or another and therefore becomes so good at it that he can pass the polygraph test. But this would be 1 individual in maybe 1 million or a 100,000, something of that kind. I imagine Americans, if they set their minds to it, could do it as well. I meant no offense to Eastern Europeans as a category or any individual Eastern European.

which just goes to show that cops have been using the same I'm-not-racist-but line for fifty years

one of the best academic paper titles

[drinkdrivingoffence]

Navigating the Consequences: Understanding Drug Driving Charges

In the realm of road safety, the focus has traditionally been on preventing accidents caused by drunk driving. However, with the increasing prevalence of drug use, particularly among younger demographics, drug driving has emerged as a significant concern. The consequences of driving under the influence of drugs can be severe, ranging from legal penalties to life-altering accidents. In this article, we delve into the nuances of drug driving charges, exploring the legal framework, potential consequences, and ways to navigate this complex issue.

Understanding Drug Driving Laws

Drug driving laws vary across jurisdictions, but they generally prohibit operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of drugs. Unlike alcohol, which has standardized blood alcohol concentration (BAC) limits, determining drug impairment can be more challenging. Law enforcement typically relies on field sobriety tests, drug recognition experts, and chemical tests to detect drug-impaired drivers. These tests may involve assessing physical symptoms, such as dilated pupils or lack of coordination, as well as conducting blood or saliva tests to identify specific substances.

Commonly Detected Drugs

The drugs that contribute to drug driving charges encompass a wide range of substances, including illegal drugs like marijuana, cocaine, and methamphetamine, as well as prescription medications and over-the-counter drugs. Even though some medications are legally prescribed, they can still impair driving ability and lead to charges if used improperly or in excessive quantities. It's crucial for drivers to be aware of the potential side effects of any medication they are taking and to heed warnings regarding driving or operating machinery while under its influence.

Legal Consequences

The legal consequences of drug driving can be severe and may vary depending on factors such as the driver's prior offenses, the presence of aggravating circumstances (e.g., accidents or injuries), and the type and amount of drugs involved. Penalties typically include fines, license suspension or revocation, mandatory drug education or treatment programs, community service, and even imprisonment in serious cases. Moreover, drug driving convictions can have long-term ramifications, such as higher insurance premiums, difficulty obtaining employment, and tarnished reputations.

Navigating the Legal Process

If you find yourself facing drug driving charges, it's essential to understand your rights and options. Seeking legal representation from an experienced attorney specializing in traffic or criminal law can greatly assist in navigating the legal process. A knowledgeable lawyer can review the evidence against you, challenge the legality of the traffic stop or arrest, negotiate with prosecutors for reduced charges or penalties, and represent you in court if necessary. Additionally, they can advise you on how to interact with law enforcement and the judicial system to protect your interests and ensure a fair outcome.

Prevention and Education

Preventing drug driving starts with raising awareness about the dangers of driving under the influence of drugs and promoting responsible behavior among motorists. Public education campaigns, school programs, and community outreach efforts play a crucial role in informing individuals about the risks associated with drug-impaired driving and encouraging them to make safer choices. Moreover, healthcare professionals have a responsibility to educate patients about the potential effects of medications on driving ability and to prescribe them judiciously.

[jandrewnelson-blr]

The Fallout of Falsehood: Brazil's Ex-President Accused of Faking COVID-19 Vaccination

The COVID-19 pandemic has tested the resilience and leadership of nations worldwide, and Brazil has been no exception. With over 600,000 lives lost and millions infected, the country has struggled to contain the virus and protect its citizens. Amidst this crisis, former President Jair Bolsonaro's response to the pandemic has been a subject of intense scrutiny and criticism. Now, a new chapter in this saga has emerged, as Bolsonaro faces formal accusations of falsifying his COVID-19 vaccination status, along with 16 others. This stunning development has not only called into question the former president's integrity but also highlighted the deep divisions within Brazilian society and the challenges that lie ahead in rebuilding trust in the nation's institutions.

In a nation still reeling from the devastating impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, a shocking accusation has emerged that threatens to shatter the public's trust in their former leader. Jair Bolsonaro, the ex-president of Brazil, now stands accused of falsifying his vaccination status, a revelation that has sent shockwaves through the country's political landscape and raised serious questions about the integrity of those in power.

Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro Accused of Falsifying COVID-19 Vaccination Status

In a shocking turn of events, former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has been formally accused of falsifying his COVID-19 vaccination status. The indictment, which also includes 16 others, alleges that Bolsonaro and his associates inserted false information into a public health database to appear vaccinated, despite the former president's open criticism of vaccines during the pandemic.

Throughout his term, Bolsonaro consistently downplayed the severity of the COVID-19 pandemic and openly expressed skepticism about the efficacy and safety of vaccines. He even went as far as ignoring offers to purchase vaccines for Brazil, putting the lives of millions of citizens at risk. This stance drew heavy criticism from health experts, opposition politicians, and the international community.

The accusations against Bolsonaro and his associates are serious, as falsifying vaccination records not only undermines public trust in the healthcare system but also puts the lives of others at risk. If proven guilty, this act of deception could have far-reaching consequences for the former president and his allies.

The final decision to file charges against Bolsonaro now lies with Brazil's prosecutor-general's office. While Bolsonaro's lawyer has called the indictment "absurd" and denied any wrongdoing, the evidence presented in the case will ultimately determine the outcome.

This indictment is not the only legal challenge facing the former president. Bolsonaro is also under investigation for allegedly smuggling jewelry into the country and selling luxury watches received as gifts during his tenure. These multiple investigations paint a picture of a leader who may have abused his power and engaged in unethical practices.

As the news of the indictment spreads, reactions from Bolsonaro's supporters and opponents have been polarized. Supporters view the accusations as politically motivated attacks designed to tarnish the former president's reputation, while opponents see them as a step towards holding Bolsonaro accountable for his actions during his time in office.

The case against Bolsonaro has the potential to set a significant precedent in Brazil's political landscape. If the charges are proven, it could demonstrate that even those in the highest positions of power are not above the law and must face consequences for their actions. On the other hand, if Bolsonaro is acquitted, it may embolden his supporters and raise questions about the impartiality of the justice system.

As the legal proceedings unfold, the Brazilian people will be watching closely, hoping for justice to be served in the various cases against the former president. The outcome of these investigations will not only impact Bolsonaro's personal future but also shape the political discourse and public trust in the country's institutions for years to come.

- Former Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro has been formally accused falsifying his COVID-19 vaccination status

- The indictment alleges that Bolsonaro and 16 others inserted false information into a public health database to appear vaccinated

- Bolsonaro openly criticized vaccines during the pandemic and ignored offers to purchase them for Brazil

- The final decision to file charges against Bolsonaro lies with Brazil's prosecutor-general's office

- Bolsonaro's lawyer called the indictment "absurd" and denied any wrongdoing

- Other investigations targeting Bolsonaro include allegations of smuggling jewelry into the country and selling luxury watches received as gifts

- Supporters and opponents of Bolsonaro have differing views on the indictment and hope for justice in various cases against him

Ready to turn your wanderlust into a life-changing adventure? Explore the world of expat living with me, Jerry Nelson, as your guide. 🌍✈️

🔍 Discover the Expat Lifestyle: Uncover the secrets, challenges, and joys of becoming an expat through my insightful blog posts. From navigating new cultures to finding your home away from home, each post is a step towards a life less ordinary.

🌐 Follow Jerry's Expat Chronicles: Embark on this journey of cultural exploration, personal growth, and the thrill of the unknown. Follow me, Jerry Nelson, as I share my experiences, tips, and stories from my life as an expat. Stay updated on the latest blog posts and be part of the global community embracing the expat lifestyle.

👣 Join the Expat Community: Ready to connect with like-minded individuals who share a passion for exploration and cultural immersion? Follow me on social media to join a community of fellow adventurers, expats, and curious minds. Share your own stories, ask questions, and be part of the conversation.

🚀 Start Your Expat Adventure Today: Whether you're considering expat life, already living it, or just curious about the possibilities, my blog is your passport to a world of experiences. Don't just dream about a life abroad—let's make it a reality together.

✉️ Contact Jerry Nelson: Have questions, want personalized advice, or just eager to share your own expat story? Reach out via email at jerry.nelson@gmail.com. I'm here to guide you on your expat journey.

🌟 Transform Your Life—Follow Jerry Nelson for a Front-Row Seat to the Expat Experience. Let's redefine the meaning of home and wander together!

Meet Jerry Nelson: An American Writer Embracing the Expat Adventure in Argentina

🌎 About Jerry Nelson: Jerry Nelson, a name synonymous with storytelling and exploration, has carved his niche as an internationally acclaimed American writer. Currently, he's not just living, but thriving in the enchanting landscapes of Argentina, adding a touch of adventure to his prolific writing journey.

📚 Literary Trailblazer: With a pen that weaves magic and words that paint vivid pictures, Jerry Nelson has captivated readers around the globe. His literary works stand as a testament to the power of storytelling, transporting audiences to worlds both familiar and uncharted.

🌍 Living the Expat Dream: Jerry's quest for inspiration led him to the vibrant tapestry of Argentina. As an expat, he embraces the culture, immerses himself in the local way of life, and channels these experiences into his writing. Living the expat dream isn't just a lifestyle; it's a profound source of creativity for Jerry.

[gudamor]

The federal prosecutors were able to bring charges because of the “Dual Sovereignty Doctrine.” The Supreme Court has ruled that because state and federal governments are different entities, a suspect can be charged separately in state and federal court for the same criminal act without violating Fifth Amendment protections against Double Jeopardy. [...]

Under current federal law, so long as you’ve been convicted on at least one charge, a judge can still sentence you for any or all of the crimes with which you have been charged, even if a jury specifically acquitted you of those crimes.