• Recently, onaforums has taken to opening a substack. You can subscribe to this substack to get email notifications when the site is down, gets a new domain name, or is otherwise running into trouble. We are not accepting donations at this time, so please skip the part where it asks if you would like to contribute. Subscribe at onaforums.substack.com

  • Reminder: Do not call, text, or mention harrassing someone in real life. Do not encourage it. Do not talk about killing or using violence against anyone, or engaging in any criminal behavior. If it is not an obvious joke even when taken out of context, don't post it. Please report violators. If you want your account deleted, send a private message to @BlackTransLivesMatter

    Do not post IRL pranks here without including the source

    DMCA, complaints, and other inquiries:

    [email protected]

Robinson et al v. City of Milwaukee et al

Suetonius

LAUGH.
Forum Clout
119,113
ok now explain why you posted this:

View attachment 189144
Bad phrasing. And me being retarded. “Finding them innocent” only applies to non-jury trials or certain venues which don’t have juries like civil cases (but even then you’re not found “innocent”, again me being retarded). If I wanted to parlay that into my point about criminal trials though I would say “Well, even if a jury finds someone guilty, the judge can technically reverse it and thus TECHNICALLY find them innocent!”. And the “giving them a light sentence” shit isn’t retarded because that happens all the time. Judges are people and even though they’re supposed to be unbiased…shieeet not always.
 

Harry's Enticer

WOULD
Forum Clout
125,215
Bad phrasing. And me being retarded. “Finding them innocent” only applies to non-jury trials or certain venues which don’t have juries like civil cases (but even then you’re not found “innocent”, again me being retarded). If I wanted to parlay that into my point about criminal trials though I would say “Well, even if a jury finds someone guilty, the judge can technically reverse it and thus TECHNICALLY find them innocent!”. And the “giving them a light sentence” shit isn’t retarded because that happens all the time. Judges are people and even though they’re supposed to be unbiased…shieeet not always.
Ok, thanks
 
Forum Clout
7,658
You people who think the City won’t fight tooth and nail on this and will try to settle are insane (sorry Fez).

City Attorneys live for this kind of shit. When their usual job entails proof reading contracts and other paper pushing nonsense, they love fighting to keep the city from having a precedent set to have to pay out anything.
Are you saying the greatest legal minds of this generation over on Kiwifarms are wrong?
 

Prison Enjoyer

Have no tits to sag, stlaker.
Forum Clout
42,427
670b697a9f775dad044a7034b87d3441.png

 

quasi101

the $83,736.99 fugitive
Forum Clout
82,925
Bad phrasing. And me being retarded. “Finding them innocent” only applies to non-jury trials or certain venues which don’t have juries like civil cases (but even then you’re not found “innocent”, again me being retarded). If I wanted to parlay that into my point about criminal trials though I would say “Well, even if a jury finds someone guilty, the judge can technically reverse it and thus TECHNICALLY find them innocent!”. And the “giving them a light sentence” shit isn’t retarded because that happens all the time. Judges are people and even though they’re supposed to be unbiased…shieeet not always.
Are you a britfag becuase this is wrong jn the US
 
Top