精华 “最近有点烦”同学的倡议书，请路过的朋友打下来，签上名，寄给媒体和政府

[渥太华的春天]

现在加拿大没有政府,正忙于选举.

 

[只在乎曾经拥有]

最初由 我亦有亭 发布
Nonetheless, it just happened in this nation that two young students were shot by a merciless man and died in a public place!

Support!

P.S. I would use the following expression instead:

- a merciless evil
- a merciless murderer
- a merciless criminal

 

[最近有点烦]

Re: Re: “最近有点烦”同学的倡议书，请路过的朋友打下来，签上名，寄给媒体和政府

最初由 只在乎曾经拥有 发布


Support!

P.S. I would use the following expression instead:

- a merciless evil
- a merciless murderer
- a merciless criminal

言之有理。非常感谢！

 

[nicyr]

 

[Viroy]

up

 

[我亦有亭]

Re: Re: “最近有点烦”同学的倡议书，请路过的朋友打下来，签上名，寄给媒体和政府

最初由 只在乎曾经拥有 发布


Support!

P.S. I would use the following expression instead:

- a merciless evil
- a merciless murderer
- a merciless criminal

thanks a million, changed already

 

[M_K*]

支持！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
代表党代表国家，支持~~~

 

[zengxiliang]

ding

 

[life]

顶

 

[Jingle]

顶,让大家都看到这个。

 

[jefffromuk]

顶

 

[只在乎曾经拥有]

Re: Re: Re: “最近有点烦”同学的倡议书，请路过的朋友打下来，签上名，寄给媒体和政府

最初由 DickStrong 发布


I wonder which side you are trying to help. Canadian justice system follows the "assumed innocent until proved guilty" rule. It will jeopardize the trial by publically labelling the suspect "murderer" or "criminal". The lawyer of the suspect may easily use this to challenge the fair selection of the jury. The judge may have no choice but to announce a mistrial.

Use your brain.

Please carefully read the original sentence which I quote here for your convenience:

"it just happened in this nation that two young students were shot by a merciless man and died in a public place".

It is evident that this sentence states a fact. The fact is that a murder/crime was committed here in Ottawa (hope you agree at this point). The individual who committed the murder/crime is a murderer, not a suspect.

The murderer, not a suspect is still at large. We call upon the the police to bring the murderer to justice. Your reasoning of a mistrial has no basis in any jurisdiction including Canada for being stating a fact.

To support your view, you may provide a jurisprudence in which a mistrial was ruled by a Canadian court for being stating a fact.

Failing to do so, may I suggest you review your logic and withdraw your comment?

 

[只在乎曾经拥有]

Re: Re: Re: “最近有点烦”同学的倡议书，请路过的朋友打下来，签上名，寄给媒体和政府

最初由 DickStrong 发布


It will jeopardize the trial by publically labelling the suspect "murderer" or "criminal".

Do we have a suspect charged by the police yet? If not, how can we publically label the suspect?

You have a very interesting logic.

 

[只在乎曾经拥有]

Re: Re: Re: “最近有点烦”同学的倡议书，请路过的朋友打下来，签上名，寄给媒体和政府

最初由 DickStrong 发布

The lawyer of the suspect may easily use this to challenge the fair selection of the jury. The judge may have no choice but to announce a mistrial.

Selection of the jury is a process prior to a formal trial while a mistrial is ruled by a court during or after the trial, not at the beginning of a trial.

A motion to challenge the fair selection of the jury can only take place at the beginning, or during the jury selection (i.e., at the beginning of the trial). Even though such a motion is sustained by the court it does not lead to a mistrial.

Such a challenge is usually resolved by moving the trial to another Canadian location.

 

[只在乎曾经拥有]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: “最近有点烦”同学的倡议书，请路过的朋友打下来，签上名，寄给媒体和政府

最初由 DickStrong 发布


To answer your questions:

1) For a criminal trial like this, a jury will be called to give a verdict from the evidence produced in court. The jurors are sworn to give a verdict ONLY by considering the evidence, and have no prejudie on the case before the trial. It is therefore a very strict process in selecting the jurors, such that they are in no way affected by the public opinion on the case.

2) To my understanding, the letter is intended to bring the public attention to the incident. The question is whether it will be popular enough to affect every single citizen's opinion (at least in Ottawa area). You definitely wish to do so, don't you?

3) Then here's the dilemma: If a selected juror considers (or in his/her subconscience), before the trial, that the suspect is a "murderer", s/he would be immediately disqualified. But how can s/he not have such an impression since your letter is so impressive? If the letter is not so impressive, what's the point of writing it?

The lawyer of the defendant will use any possible way to get a mistrial and I am just want to warn you about one of the possibilities. There's no "logic" in a justice system, just rules. For further legal opinion, please consult your own lawyer (not the one who did your mortgage, a criminal lawyer). Enough free lessons from me!

You have not answered any of my questions raised previously. For your information, I personally served as a juror in a criminal trial in the court room on Elgin Street, Ottawa.

Here I summarize the points of the argument:

1. An individual who committed the 12-6 killing is a murderer, not a suspect. This is a fact.

2. The police has not publically charged any suspect yet. How can we publically label such suspect as murderer?

3. A challenge to a fair selection of jury does not lead to a mistrial rule. If such motion is sustained by the court, this is usually resolved by moving the trial to another location.

4. If the evidence is sufficient, the 12-6 killer will be brought to justice no matter how hard the defendent team tries.

Failing to do so, would you please take back your comment "use your brain". Thank you.