SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
On Monday, a US federal appeals court sided against a former Philadelphia police officer who has been in jail 17 months because he invoked his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination. He had refused to comply with a court order commanding him to unlock two hard drives the authorities say contain child porn.
The 3-0 decision (PDF) by the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals means that the suspect, Francis Rawls, likely will remain jailed indefinitely or until the order (PDF) finding him in contempt of court is lifted or overturned. However, he still can comply with the order and unlock two FileVault encrypted drives connected to his Apple Mac Pro. Using a warrant, authorities seized those drives from his residence in 2015. While Rawls could get out from under the contempt order by unlocking those drives, doing so might expose him to other legal troubles.
In deciding against Rawls, the court of appeals found that the constitutional rights against being compelled to testify against oneself were not being breached. That's because the appeals court, like the police, agreed that the presence of child porn on his drives was a "foregone conclusion." The Fifth Amendment, at its most basic level, protects suspects from being forced to disclose incriminating evidence. In this instance, however, the authorities said they already know there's child porn on the drives, so Rawls' constitutional rights aren't compromised.
[...] The suspect's attorney, Federal Public Defender Keith Donoghue, was disappointed by the ruling.
"The fact remains that the government has not brought charges," Donoghue said in a telephone interview. "Our client has now been in custody for almost 18 months based on his assertion of his Fifth Amendment right against compelled self-incrimination."
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 24 2017, @11:45AM (4 children)
Jesus can go to hell, marcello_d
In america and all white societies the woman is the ruler (master) of the man and the man is mastered by the woman.
The man must be loyal to the woman ("if you look at a woman, you have committed adultery with her in your heart") ("the man must set down his life for the woman"), the woman need not be loyal to the man ("do not stone the adulterous woman"). This is because while a servant (the man) may have but one master, a master, a ba'////al, may have many slaves.
This is why you were denied entry into the US military. The US and white society exist so enforce the lordship of women over men. They bomb every country where men ruled over women and had child brides.
This is in direct contradiction to the will of the God of Dtrnmy, whom Jesus hated and seems to have called "a murderer from the beginning, the father of lies". The God of Dtrnmy was the Israeli God of War (Lord of hosts: ie: lord of the armies). He set that the MAN was the ba'///al (master) of the female, that if a man raped a female child, the man paied the father money and kept the sweet qt-pie.
(Dt 22, 28-29, hebrew (If you wish to argue, here's a refutation of your arguments: http://pastebin.com/mzFJyxea [pastebin.com] )
Also note: Numbers 31:18, take the female children for yourselves (taph: child. lachem: means to devour in this section)
White men, men who follow Jesus and reject God, men who say Jesus is god, who follow Jesus' teaching are at war with the remnants of the order God created and promoted.
You were rejected because you are not a "white" man. Be joyful. White men are the enemies of all men on earth and of God. Be a celt, a gaul, a Roman, a Jew, a Russian. Do not be a white man (a new invention who needed a new lynchpin to keep together: and that is promoting the mastership of women over men and the eradication of "chomos" (men who like girls, somehow white men think this is "gay" (sure: it would make men very happy, to have a sweetiepie)))
(Score: 2) by marcello_dl on Friday March 24 2017, @03:17PM (3 children)
Your POV is unsustainable without implying the scriptures, which put Jesus as the only god, becoming man in every aspect, have been altered. If they have been altered we are discussing about nothingness or about a different religion.
Yes I know some guys like to think the Bible does not say Jesus is God, but all their objections and theorems I have found inconclusive/trolling. Of course, people are free to believe in whatever set of books.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 24 2017, @09:03PM (2 children)
The Torah puts the God who said that he is who he is as the only God.
It existed before Jesus and the New Testament renunciation of the Law.
Just as the New Testament existed before Muhammed's book.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 25 2017, @12:07PM
The NT is the only set of books in continuity with the Torah, The Talmud is not, the Koran bwaahahahahah.
The NT did not renounce the Law, Mt 7:21, John 14... actually Jesus made it stricter. What you call renunciation is probably the fact that the law never saved anybody BY ITSELF and never took away any original sin. Jesus can.
(Score: 2) by marcello_dl on Monday March 27 2017, @08:37PM
The divine nature of Jesus makes the phrase "God existed before Jesus" utterly meaningless.