You’ve been framed for murder

[Wormfodder Delivery]

Well, the one writing this luckily lives in a country with a functioning legal system, so eh?

[Infected Mushroom]

No. Taking the stand is rarely advantageous, especially not in a murder trial. Were I charged with something like drugs instead then maybe I'd be more inclined to take the stand and push for jury nullification, but I can't see any circumstance in which the jury is going to think I'm guilty of a murder but acquit me, unless the victim is a child molester or some other kind of scumbag.

I'm very proud of the charisma I've built up over almost 30 years of life, I went from an awkward and creepy teenager to a pretty charming dude all things considered, but you have to be top fucking tier to survive cross and I'm not there.

I agree with this particular assessment.

[Imperial States of Duotona]

I'm taking the stand. If they've framed me, there's a point where they run out of evidence that I haven't proved wrong or out of context, and just go, "Oh, well, we don't have anything left on this dude." . All I need to do is find what makes me more incriminating and find evidence that disproves it or puts it in context.

I mean, I'm not a legal expert, so this is my best shot.

(Unless this is Japan. If it's Japan, I'm not winning, period. They have an absurd Guilty to Not Guilty ratio that's gives an insane advantage to the other side.)

[Kowani]

i've been framed?
at least hang the picture in a museum or something, i am a cultural treasure

[HC Eredivisie]

Last time I went to court.

i've been framed?
at least hang the picture in a museum or something, i am a cultural treasure

National treasure but beware of Nicholas Cage though.

[Unstoppable Empire of Doom]

(Unless this is Japan. If it's Japan, I'm not winning, period. They have an absurd Guilty to Not Guilty ratio that's gives an insane advantage to the other side.)

The Taiwanese province of mainland china also has a 99.96% guilty rate. Executions are extremely common there too. Innocense is no excuse.

[ImperialRussia]

Then tell why how the was the legal owner of the weapon or who owned that kitchen knife before to real evidence of the true murder in record and labels of coding of who own that weapon and place of time and where some may accidentally grab a weapon while proclaiming innocent knowing that murder true intentions was to scape goat you the person who is being framed for the murder. Or accidentally grabbing the weapon of evidence to some Civilian who isn’t really the murder at all look at the track records who bought the gun and look who was the real murder along. Just look at people who can legally register a gun. Look at near by cameras at the scenes use them at your case.

[Infected Mushroom]

I'm taking the stand. If they've framed me, there's a point where they run out of evidence that I haven't proved wrong or out of context, and just go, "Oh, well, we don't have anything left on this dude." . All I need to do is find what makes me more incriminating and find evidence that disproves it or puts it in context.

I mean, I'm not a legal expert, so this is my best shot.

(Unless this is Japan. If it's Japan, I'm not winning, period. They have an absurd Guilty to Not Guilty ratio that's gives an insane advantage to the other side.)

https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/a ... alCode=jls

Conviction rates in Japan exceed 99 percent. Because Japanese judges can be penalized by a personnel office if they rule in ways the office dislikes, perhaps they face biased incentives to convict. Using data on the careers and opinions of 321 Japanese judges, we find that judges who acquit do have worse careers following the acquittal. On closer examination, though, we find that the punished judges are not those who acquit on the ground that the prosecutors charged the wrong person. Rather, they acquit for reasons of statutory or constitutional interpretation, often in politically charged cases. Thus, the apparent punishment seems unrelated to any pro‐conviction bias at the judicial administrative offices. We suggest an alternative explanation: the high conviction rates reflect case selection and low prosecutorial budgets; understaffed prosecutors present judges with only the most obviously guilty defendants.

[Wallenburg]

Your lawyers advise against it

Then I wouldn't do it. If your lawyer tells you to shut the fuck up, shut the fuck up.

[Vikanias]

I’d not take the stand, I’m still in high school so the chances of me getting a harsh sentence is low. And they can go through my record and see nothing is suspicious. The only stuff that could incriminate me is the stuff on NS. And the lawyers are smart in the law, so i’d listen to their advise.

[Thermodolia]

Your lawyers advise against it

Then I wouldn't do it. If your lawyer tells you to shut the fuck up, shut the fuck up.

Though if I’m innocent I’d be better taking the stand. So I’d get a new lawyer and ask their advice

[Infected Mushroom]

Then I wouldn't do it. If your lawyer tells you to shut the fuck up, shut the fuck up.

Though if I’m innocent I’d be better taking the stand. So I’d get a new lawyer and ask their advice

Couldn't innocent people be made to look really really bad and unlikable on cross examination?

I understand there are rules against introducing overly prejudicial evidence but if the charge is murder, there's a lot of stuff that the judge is going to allow if the prosecution can somehow tie it to demonstrating even remotely to a character trait relevant to that of a murderer that's going to seem less than fair to the average non lawyerly person (and frankly, it's going to be very upsetting especially to an innocent person). As far as the judge cares, you're potentially a threat to the public safety and to him and to the prosecutor it's an intellectual game (while to you it's your life).

The prosecutor is going to take charge of the narrative by directing questions for 9-10 days and he's only going to be going over the bad stuff. Aside from some introductory stuff or a few dozen questions just to get you settled or into a trusting space, they are then going to get under your skin and dig.

And I don't know... I'm too argumentative and easily provoked to survive in such an environment long term.

[Wallenburg]

Then I wouldn't do it. If your lawyer tells you to shut the fuck up, shut the fuck up.

Though if I’m innocent I’d be better taking the stand. So I’d get a new lawyer and ask their advice

Being innocent is not a reason to speak. Your words will be used against you. If your counsel advises against talking, you listen or you get convicted.

[Infected Mushroom]

A lot of faith in this process.

[Infected Mushroom]

Your lawyers advise against it

Then I wouldn't do it. If your lawyer tells you to shut the fuck up, shut the fuck up.

Especially when they get paid by the hour (hundreds to thousands of dollars every hour you use or they decide you've used) and if you agreed to do it, it would prolong the trial and they would get even more money both prepping it and doing it in the actual courtroom time

[Bombadil]

(Unless this is Japan. If it's Japan, I'm not winning, period. They have an absurd Guilty to Not Guilty ratio that's gives an insane advantage to the other side.)

The Taiwanese province of mainland china also has a 99.96% guilty rate. Executions are extremely common there too. Innocense is no excuse.

Depends on the administration, if the KMT then they're high, if the DPP then low, only 3 in the last 5 years under the DPP, whereas 32 in the previous KMT administration of 5 years..

[Infected Mushroom]

I am being framed?


I go pay the witch queen to kill whoever is behind it and all their loved ones.

Witch Queen or Mafia Queen?

I don’t think there’s ever been a hypothetical where the Witch Queen took on contracts.

[Risottia]

Please consider the following hypothetical:

You’ve been effectively framed for murder and you’re now on trial.

What, again?
Pfft.

The evidence against you is largely circumstantial

Of course.

but you get the feeling that the judge and the jury don’t like you.

No fucks given. If they judge by circumstantial evidence the appeal is going to overturn the sentence.

Now, if you excuse me, my dungeon awaits.

[Disgraces]

I'd take the stand

[Infected Mushroom]

I'd take the stand

Oh? How come?

[Thermodolia]

Though if I’m innocent I’d be better taking the stand. So I’d get a new lawyer and ask their advice

Being innocent is not a reason to speak. Your words will be used against you. If your counsel advises against talking, you listen or you get convicted.

And if I think my counsel is not doing enough then I’ll seek a second opinion. Which is what I’m saying. Here in the US most lawyers want innocent people to take the stand. So if my lawyer doesn’t want me to take the stand I’d seek new advice from a new lawyer

[Thermodolia]

Though if I’m innocent I’d be better taking the stand. So I’d get a new lawyer and ask their advice

Couldn't innocent people be made to look really really bad and unlikable on cross examination?

It’s possible. You can also make super guilty people completely great and super likeable too.

I understand there are rules against introducing overly prejudicial evidence but if the charge is murder, there's a lot of stuff that the judge is going to allow if the prosecution can somehow tie it to demonstrating even remotely to a character trait relevant to that of a murderer that's going to seem less than fair to the average non lawyerly person (and frankly, it's going to be very upsetting especially to an innocent person).

Character traits are not how cases are built on and will lead to the case being overturned on appeal. You are also forgetting that your own lawyer will be objecting to most of these things and if your lawyers have evidence the judge has determined to see you in jail then that alone is grounds for appeal.

As far as the judge cares, you're potentially a threat to the public safety and to him and to the prosecutor it's an intellectual game (while to you it's your life).

The judge is supposed to be impartial. If the judge already believes that I’m a threat to the world than the trial is already compromised. So that’s grounds for appeal.

The prosecutor is going to take charge of the narrative by directing questions for 9-10 days and he's only going to be going over the bad stuff. Aside from some introductory stuff or a few dozen questions just to get you settled or into a trusting space, they are then going to get under your skin and dig.

The prosecution isn’t going to be the only one asking the questions. You’ll be questioned by your lawyer and you’d still have the possibility of redirect.

And I don't know... I'm too argumentative and easily provoked to survive in such an environment long term.

And yes that is a legitimate concern, however that’s why your legal team will prep you

[Ethel mermania]

I am being framed?


I go pay the witch queen to kill whoever is behind it and all their loved ones.

Witch Queen or Mafia Queen?

I don’t think there’s ever been a hypothetical where the Witch Queen took on contracts.

Times are tough business needs to expand.

[San Lumen]

Take the stand. If I didn’t do it the evidence would come out that I was innocent via my testimony.

[Infected Mushroom]

Take the stand. If I didn’t do it the evidence would come out that I was innocent via my testimony.

There's nothing in your past or present that the prosecution can throw at you?