Alec Baldwin 'Rust' prosecutors concede embarrassing early loss

[LetMyPeopleVote]

10. I am still laughing at all of the threads you deleted when you lose the argument

You really have issues with the concept of non-expert testimony being worthless in a court of law or before a fact finder. As I repeatedly pointed out on other threads, under the law and normal argument/forensic debate principles, the opinion of a non-expert is given no weight by fact finders.

I am a member of the bar but I do not practice criminal law and I do not have access to all of the facts in this case. The call on the ex post facto law was basic constitutional law and was clear from day one. The case against Baldwin appears weak to start with and is weaker now. The current case requires a finding of gross negligence and gross negligence is a jury issue that will be based on the admissible evidence. From the partial facts that are available, I think that it is likely that a jury will not find gross negligence in this case. Lawyers get to opine on legal issues, but we generally do not opine on fact issues or try to predict jury verdicts.

It has been fun watching the supposed Russian offensive flop. No one has seen the 1800 promised Russian tanks.

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

Please let us know when your promised 1800 tanks show up.