Sage the Lawyer

They probably didn’t have you as a prosecutor there, unfortunately.

I’m a public defender. Was about to talk about how even though I’m as leftist as they come and find this guy reprehensible, that I’d have had no problems arguing what he argued in court… But I missed that it was charged as “attempted.” That’s an excellent point. I agree that he almost certainly attempted to commit voter fraud.

That said, I can still see how the jury could find a not guilty though, even if, were I on it, I would have said guilty. Attempted crimes still have a mens rea (usually, and I’ll note here that I’m not barred in PA so this is all a best guess, consult a local attorney to know anything for sure). So the state would still have to prove his intent beyond a reasonable doubt.

I’m guessing the jury said they couldn’t prove the intent beyond a reasonable doubt. Your argument convinced me, but, I can see how a jury might go the other way, for sure. Especially since juries are always unpredictable. I’ve won cases I should’ve lost and lost cases I should’ve won, you just never know what’s gonna happen in the jury room.

If you’re at a table with 11 people and a Nazi, you’re at a table with twelve Nazis.

Most people aren’t the extremes, sure. But if they refuse to denounce the extremists, they create space for the extremists viewpoints to survive and gain traction and acceptance on a broader scale.

So, no, even though I know most of my family would be against outright killing me, I also know they support and vote for people who are in favor of killing me. So no, I do not feel safe around them. How do I know if any of them hold extremist viewpoints before it’s too late? If they don’t denounce it, they’re every bit as culpable.

You just made an enemy for life!

Meanwhile in Wisconsin I have to pay an extra $100/yr for registration because I drive a hybrid.

Why?

Because, I shit you not, driving a hybrid apparently costs the state too much money, because we have to fuel up less, and so they get less tax.

What the fuck.

Lol. Yes I am! How did you know?? 😜

Not sure how uncommon you’re looking for, but I think I already did this.

I chose Sage.

According to some quick googling (read: not sure how accurate this is), Sage wasn’t in the top 500 names for my birth year, but my given name was top 100.

Though both names I’ve used have been trending towards more common for most of my life. Looks like my original name is now a top 35 most common, but Sage is still outside the top 100 for females and outside top 300 for males.(Really wish there was more data for the popularity of nonbinary names. I think Sage is probably one of the more popular enby names, so maybe it’s not all that uncommon, depending on how you define it.)

Sports at the top level already are dominated by rich kids. Wealth is actually more likely to lead to athletic advantages than being a trans woman.

https://www.cces.ca/sites/default/files/content/docs/pdf/transgenderwomenathletesandelitesport-ascientificreview-e-final.pdf

Hmm, this link might be dead. Search for “Canadian Centre for Ethics in Sport - Transgender Women Athletes and Elite Sport” and it should pop up.

More:

https://news.osu.edu/want-to-play-college-sports-a-wealthy-family-helps/

The Income Gap Is Becoming a Physical-Activity Divide https://www.nytimes.com/2023/03/24/health/sports-physical-education-children.html?smid=nytcore-android-share

Maybe I was thinking of just birds, since the other one in my head is the European Starling, which is awful for pretty much the same reasons as Sparrows.

Thanks for the extra info!

If this is America, and it was a House Sparrow, bastard had it coming. Awful invasive species, and it’s one of, I believe, two animals birds which is always legal to kill here. Fuck sparrows. I’d swipe right.

Edit thanks to extra info from replies.

"Correctional officers from the jail responded to a medical emergency in one of the cell pods.

There, inmates explained that they believed [Jessica] Barry was experiencing a drug overdose.

Within 3 minutes of being notified of the emergency, officers gave Barry a dose of Narcan.

A total of six doses of Narcan, chest compressions, and an AED were given to Barry, but officers were not able to resuscitate her."

Tragic stuff. I know we all like to blame the cops, and usually I’m 1000% on board, but it sounds like they did everything they could here. At most they could maybe be blamed for not catching and stopping the drugs from getting in. Maybe the ongoing investigation will turn something up as to how that happened, but I can’t say I’m surprised. I’ve been that courthouse and jail. It’s not the most well-funded, and addicts tend to find a way. Sad stuff.

It is now, but you used to get a free one each day, iirc. So while this is definitely cringe, there’s a chance, depending on when it happened (if it happened), that it’s slightly less than max cringe.

Edit: I looked closer, this is apparently from 2016, you still got free super likes back then.

Not a fan of Maro’s response here. The complaint was that the competitive environment feels less engaging, and he basically just said “but we’re throwing even more money at it, so you shouldn’t complain.”

It’s not a solution. How is that extra manpower being used to actually promote competitive play? Moreover, does he not see that the focus on casual has side effects on competitive? There needs to be more focus on outreach to competitive players, not just putting more people on the team.

Idk, feels like he missed the mark on this one. It’s not about bad design, it’s about bad promotion and engagement, not about the amount of resources being devoted to it.

I mentioned this further down the thread, but Scrubs is full of micro aggressions.

I mean, pretty much the very first joke in the series is JD asking Turk if he’s allowed to say the N word.

There’s an episode where the theme is whether Turk is black.

As for trans-specific problems, Todd advertises his website with the T slur in it on his T-shirt one episode.

He’s also a prime example of bi-erasure as when he “comes out,” nobody says bi the whole episode, and it’s like the whole cast can’t conceive of someone liking both men and women. Not to mention the bi stereotype that we’re all sexual deviants and overly promiscuous.

Frankly, I could go on for a while. Scrubs was fine for its time. It does not hold up well. Shame because it was my favorite show for a very long time. But I’m glad society has grown.

The Todd advertises his website which includes the T slur on his shirt in one episode.

His character is also, imo, bi-erasure. The episode where he “comes out” as bi, nobody even says the word bi. When asked “what are you,” he just says “I’m the Todd.”

Further, he plays into the stereotype that bi people are extra promiscuous or sexually deviant.

So no, I do not think Todd gets a pass.

I don’t necessarily disagree with you. I don’t think there’s really a number of years to put on it to make it appropriate. But I’m sure the lawyers discussed all the points you raised in negotiating this sentence. These numbers aren’t pulled out of our asses, there are guidelines (almost certainly, again, not barred in NY) which help ensure similarly situated defendants are sentenced similarly.

What I’d like to hear more about, is whether the judge also ordered some kind of anger management counseling. I think that’s what she needs more than a longer sentence.

If we truly want to balance the goals of protecting the public, adequately punishing the defendant, and also rehabilitating her, I don’t think a few more years either way is what makes the biggest difference. I think it more depends on what she does with that time. I’m not sure what the situation is like within New York prisons as far as counseling goes, but if they have good programs, it’s hard for me to imagine, if she takes it seriously, that 8.5 years of good counseling wouldn’t be helpful to her, and to society at large.

I also think she could make all those gains in counseling, again, if she truly takes it seriously, within a couple of years. But then, I could probably be convinced that 2-3 years isn’t long enough for causing someone’s death. I’ve seen people get that for having the wrong amount of weed on them.

But then we get into the larger discussion about the entire prison industrial complex. We need some kind of change with how our prisons operate. Exactly how that looks isn’t the point here. I’m just trying to point out that there’s a bigger picture in play, and hope that people will consider that in the future.

In the end, nothing we say here has any impact on her life or the issued sentence. But it might have a difference in how people perceive and talk about the system as a whole in the future, so I think it’s important to not lose sight of that.

Defense lawyer here, though not in New York so take this all with a grain of salt, I just felt I should put my 2 cents in based on the vibes in this comment thread.

It is weird for a judge to go against a joint recommendation, which seems to have happened here. It takes something extraordinary. The article indicates that the judge felt she didn’t truly feel remorse for her actions, which could do it, but doesn’t always do it. But, to me, just the fact that the judge went against a joint recommendation will always raise an eyebrow. Usually, if the sentence isn’t harsh enough, the prosecutor won’t agree to it, and if it’s too harsh, the defense won’t agree to it. So joint recommendations are almost always followed.

Yes, it’s “only” 6 more months, but that’s really not insignificant.

Now, to all the people screaming about how it’s not enough (and especially to the one person saying she should have her citizenship revoked (???)), I wonder, how many of you are also against the prison industrial complex we have here in America? I challenge you to think beyond your initial emotions. Is this death tragic? Yes, absolutely it is. It was senseless violence for no good reason. So I agree, it deserves a harsh punishment.

But everyone keeps calling it murder. Not every killing is a murder. I also want to challenge people to watch their language. Murder carries with it an intent to kill. A shove does not intend death, regardless of who is being shoved. No, it shouldn’t have happened, yes, it’s tragic, but it was not a murder.

Now, all of you calling for 20+ years, really think about what you’re saying. Do you think this person has no chance of rehabilitation? Those are the people we put away for life. I don’t think that’s the case here. She fucked up. Obviously. She deserves to be punished harshly, and make no mistake, she is. 8.5 years is a LONG time. Think back to where you were 8.5 years ago. Were you the same person? I doubt it. Now, do you think she might better herself in those 8.5 years? I think it’s very likely, though again, the prison industrial complex makes that less guaranteed.

Sentences have many goals. Some of the primary goals are punishment, protection of the public, and rehabilitation of the defendant. Does this sentence punish her? Yes, a lot. Does this sentence give her a chance for rehabilitation? I’m not sure on that one, but that’s because it may, if anything, be too long, and cause her to get too used to life in prison, and increase her likelihood of recidivism. But that’s not her fault, that’s the fault of the prison industry. Does this sentence protect the public? I say yes. She lost her temper once and it’s now going to cost her 9 years of her life (if you include the duration of the case). That’s a hell of an incentive not to repeat.

Alright, I think that’s all I really want to say. But please, everyone, in the future, try to think about how our prison system really works, and how much you support it, when you’re discussing individual crimes, not just when you’re talking about the system as a whole. I think most people on this site lean left, and therefore should support reducing the prison populations, but this comment section has me worried with everyone here frothing at the mouth to give MORE prison time, when the sentenced amount should be enough to satisfy our sentencing goals.

I got one off etsy, it’s just 3d printed. Works fairly well, but the floss can get a little loose towards the end. But it’s easy enough to fix.

Not quite as convenient as the individual picks, but FAR less waste. A trade off I’m happy to make.

The Civil Rights Act was passed in large part because of it. Is your argument that the Civil Rights Act changed nothing? Because that’s silly. Or were you just not thinking, and trying to score internet points? Because that’s also silly. You’re being silly.

“instead of using the singular nongendered pronoun already present in English.”

Lmao. That shoulda given away the /s right there.

But uh, I think the pronoun you’re talking about there is “they.” 😜

Completely fair, and I totally agree! I’m also not a person of color, so I hope my comment didn’t come across as trying to co-opt the movement. Just wanted to, as you said, point out there are a lot of similarities and lessons that could be learned.

I, as a trans person, fully recognize that black people had it worse than trans people do now. While both communities face violence, black people faced violence that was heavily state-sponsored and far more widespread, even with the recent increased rates of violence against trans people. The entire U.S. legal system was rigged against them from the start. It was their blood that earned us the Civil Rights Act, which is the foundation our movement needed. And that’s a debt we will owe forever. And I also recognize that people of color continue to face discrimination. The fight isn’t over, for any of us.

I’m getting wordy. I think we’re both on the same page here. I guess civil rights discussions get me going (but tbh, I’m okay with that). Hope you have a great day!