|like a lovely pointless Chess set.|
first of all, CRIMINAL scum, right... oh, let me temper my tone for the purposes of this missive... these 'innocents until proven guilty' are often-times LYING ON THE HOLY BIBLE. So, what's the point in forcing an Accused to 'swear on it'? I'll caveat this by saying, "If there really was a God, and he really did know everything about you, you'd know whether you were lying under Oath or not."
And isn't it just TIME to drag The Lord or God or Any Holy Book out of the court system? I mean, what is the place of a(n ancient) FAITH DEVICE in a supposed reasonable-proof corporate-environment like that? They'd might as well have the Accused swear on one of those Palaeolithic stone phalluses. In fact, that should be a law.
Cocks in Court.
Do you get this, readers? Lawyers and Judges ALLOW the Accused to Lie on the Holy Bible. Why can I say this with such passion? Ask yourselves this, "Has anyone convicted of a crime ever been FURTHER SUED for having lied under Oath?"
No, this never happens. It's taken as rote that (at one end of the case) THERE'S A LIAR.
Also, think of all the lovely atrocious insane xenophobic shit you can get up to, as an Accused. And you can do this kinda amoral evil shit for years until you fuck up and some nosy cunt shops you to the cops or you make your own mistakes. Otherwise it's an Evil Personal Heaven of torture, maiming, blackmail, general brutality and murder. I mean, what's the worst that'll happen to an Accused if convicted? Three square meals a day? Lethal injection after years in the luxury of the Appeals Machine? No, let the families of the victim(s) deal with these fuckers, once they're found Guilty.
Considering that the UK Government is currently reviewing The Modern Slavery Bill in Parliament, Free Planet blog finds it significantly ironic that...
...the 'free man' is forced to go out and 'work' 40+ hours a week so that he can a) put a roof over his family's head and b) have enough left from paying his rates, mortgage and utilities bills to pay for food.
"THE FREE MAN IS MORE A PRISONER than the convicted criminal."
What does the convicted criminal have to do to facilitate both a) and b)? He has to have committed a crime. Job done, simple as that. No work needed. No responsibility to his family, his locality, his country. Opted out, for free. I say, "Make these convicted criminals EARN THEIR FOOD (we buy for them) and EARN THE ROOF OVER THEIR HEAD (we pay for). Not the way it's done in USA i.e. cheap labour for Corporate Profit, as only the Private Organisation benefits. But make the convicted work, make the anti-societal useful again. Or no food.
But what's the real CRIME here? The fact that it's just a GAME for which you go to Uni and then onto Law School to understand THE RULES OF THE GAME. And it's expenses paid all the way, so-called Justice is just a Game. Play on.