Ryan Lochte scandal megathread

  • Guest, it's time once again for the massively important and exciting FoH Asshat Tournament!



    Go here and give us your nominations!
    Who's been the biggest Asshat in the last year? Give us your worst ones!
Lendarios

Lendarios

Trump's Staff
<Gold Donor>
19,360
-17,424
parts with "...." I had to remove due to 10k limitations onposting
yerm said:
I'll start looking. In the meantime:

NJ Extortion Lawyer | New Jersey Extortion Attorney

"Extortion can also involve the “abuse of authority of office.” Examples include a government official or a police officer demanding money, services, or property in order to avoid a threat of some consequence."

If I do find something apparently I should refer them to a lawyer because they can sue because you are NOT allowed to do this crap where I live. Go figure.
Click to expand...

That is not a case, also it seems to apply only to governmental officers
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,843
50,760
Lendarios said:
Sentence vacated( the extortion claim). Keep reading.
Click to expand...

Sure, because they improperly instructed the jury. Again, you really don't read these cases do you?

I know you're not going to understand this, but they overturned that case because they didn't instruct the jury that it was a specific intent crime that they charged him with, and they instructed the jury that general intent was fine.

In this case, the guy didn't specifically ask for money (and also didn't brandish a weapon, at least not based on the facts given). So they would have needed to instruct the jury differently and probably argue the case a bit differently.

I know this is all going to go over your head and all you're going to say is CONVICTION REVERSED LAWLERRSKATES but thats why.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Lendarios

Lendarios

Trump's Staff
<Gold Donor>
19,360
-17,424
Been right for the wrong reasons is still been right!!

but here is in less legalize

"In order to be liable, the person must act with criminal intent. The victim of an extortion acts from fear, whether of violence or exposure and there should be a specific intent on the part of the perpetrator to induce such fear in the victim. The elements of extortion are a wrongful use of force or fear, with the specific intent of inducing the victim to consent to the defendant’s obtaining his property, which does not in fact induce such consent and results in the defendant’s obtaining property from the victim[ix]. Courts will find the specific intent by using an objective analysis of the entire surrounding circumstances and facts[x]. "

The court found that a citizens arrest is not a wrongful use of force.

The main point is that context and actions prior to the use of force matters, and the courts agree with me.

I could remember you were making the opposite argument against Tanoomba, that the jury was incorrectly instructed in what consent was.

Don't make me search for it!!
 
TJT

TJT

Mr. Poopybutthole
<Gold Donor>
43,202
110,725
Except that's not even the case dude.

He conviction reversed in this case does not mean he wasn't guilty of the crime just that the court failed at lawyering and thus had to reverse the conviction.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,843
50,760
I mean... thats not what those cases holdings say, but you speak in such generalities and absolutes that it's not worth discussing this with you.

Referring to Lendarios Lendarios
 
Lendarios

Lendarios

Trump's Staff
<Gold Donor>
19,360
-17,424
TJT said:
He conviction reversed in this case does not mean he wasn't guilty of the crime just that the court failed at lawyering and thus had to reverse the conviction.
Click to expand...

I think that if the court fails at convicting you, because of a technicality, or a nonguilty verdict, or an appeal, the outcome is the same. You are not guilty.
 
TJT

TJT

Mr. Poopybutthole
<Gold Donor>
43,202
110,725
Are you referring to him or did I misunderstand your summary there?

EDIT: Except that's retarded because in another case in the same situation. If the court didn't have a technicality with the jury then the conviction wouldn't be reversed.

You couldn't use that in an another case as precedence. That was just a technicality of that particular case. In absolute terms he was totally guilty. In which the legality of such a situation is what you've been arguing. So in the context of your own reasoning you're wrong.
 
Lendarios

Lendarios

Trump's Staff
<Gold Donor>
19,360
-17,424
The point was to find a case where someone was committed a crime held, and money was extorted from them. The best i could find was a guy who impersonated a police officer and got a blowjob, for holding a prostitute under citizens arrest, and then requesting a blowjob.

Granted it is not the exact same, but it is the same idea. It can be argued that is worse, the intent of the guy holding the prostitute hostage was premeditated, while the guards in Ryan's case acted in the heat of the moment. I can't argue that the intent of the guy holding the prostitute hostage was none other than to get a blowjob out of it, or money.
In that event I would find it that heat of the moment, "you pay for this shit yo broke or else" is less harmful than what the guy did to the prostitute.
 
Lendarios

Lendarios

Trump's Staff
<Gold Donor>
19,360
-17,424
TJT said:
Are you referring to him or did I misunderstand your summary there?

EDIT: Except that's retarded because in another case in the same situation. If the court didn't have a technicality with the jury then the conviction wouldn't be reversed.

You couldn't use that in an another case as precedence. That was just a technicality of that particular case. In absolute terms he was totally guilty. In which the legality of such a situation is what you've been arguing. So in the context of your own reasoning you're wrong.
Click to expand...

Are those feelings terms? Because in legal terms he was found not guilty of extorting a bj. ("We conclude the conviction for extortion must be reversed.")

On this case the guy was found guilty of impersonating a police officer. So he went to jail for that, not extorting.
 
TJT

TJT

Mr. Poopybutthole
<Gold Donor>
43,202
110,725
You're still wrong because that guy got off on a technicality that had nothing to do with what was actually committed... That doesn't create precedent at all because the same case where the jury was properly instructed wouldn't have had an overturned conviction.

You aren't even making a point.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user
Lendarios

Lendarios

Trump's Staff
<Gold Donor>
19,360
-17,424
The point is that extortion, requires the wrongful use of force or fear. A citizens arrest, or holding someone who has just committed a crime, is not a wrongful use of force or fear.
 
Last edited:
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,843
50,760
It's just fucking comedy talking to this guy. Conversation with a goddamn ESL 5 year old.
 
  • 2Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 2 users
yerm

yerm

Golden Baronet of the Realm
6,561
16,806
God, I am not excited to go home and start looking for a case tonight. I feel like it's a losing idea since all signs indicate it won't matter what I find.

I mean I link a blurb with lines like "a crime is committed if someone threatens action unless someone else pays them money or compensates them in some other way." but nope.
 
Cad

Cad

scientia potentia est
<Bronze Donator>
25,843
50,760
yerm said:
God, I am not excited to go home and start looking for a case tonight. I feel like it's a losing idea since all signs indicate it won't matter what I find.
Click to expand...

If you can find one in spanish it might aid comprehension
 
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 1 user
yerm

yerm

Golden Baronet of the Realm
6,561
16,806
I actually have top notch docket searching and other automation tools at my fingertips (well, over at enforcement's)... if I knew EXACTLY what I'm looking for. Since I do not live in a third world shithole where this kind of behavior is apparently acceptable, I have no idea what to enter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.