What’s that? All I hear is bleating.
I read the law. The plain language says defendant. Show me the law that overrides the language of the Speedy Trial act.
Until then the plain language (which is clearly important to you) is on my side.
Ah hell it was just too easy
AUTHORITY FOR PROMULGATION OF RULES
TITLE 28, UNITED STATES CODE
§ 2072. Rules of procedure and evidence; power to prescribe
(a) The Supreme Court shall have the power to prescribe general
rules of practice and procedure and rules of evidence for cases in
the United States district courts (including proceedings before
magistrate judges thereof) and courts of appeals.
(b) Such rules shall not abridge, enlarge or modify any substantive
right. All laws in conflict with such rules shall be of no
further force or effect after such rules have taken effect.
(c) Such rules may define when a ruling of a district court is
final for the purposes of appeal under section 1291 of this title.
I love the last rule:
Rule 61. Title
These rules may be known and cited as the Federal Rules of
Criminal Procedure.
There are similar rules for civil, BK and some others.
Established by law from congress, then the rules are submitted to the judiciary committe before the committee adopts them.
So the courts can write rules that override laws.
How interesting. I thought you guys weren’t cool with legislating from the bench?
Representation is the same thing as defendant. I ornmy lawyers appear in court many times before the Client and the client may never. Different for criminal cases but again representation is the same as defendant.
No they write rules to comply with the laws. Then the rules are approved by the lawmakers overseing them.
Little bit different. You know like the EPA, and all the other agencies that write regulations. Difference is, those regs don’t go to the oversite committee to be approved. Extra step for the courts. Remember they are a seperate equal branch of the government.
So they can write “rules” to override laws passed by Congress as long as they are approved by a committee?
What you’re suggesting isn’t a rule to comply with a law. It’s a rule to change a law.
Cratic didn’t say it…The Judge said it in the ruling. - 5 points.
In theory is you think about it, the law spelling out what a “speedy trial” is might actually be unconstitutional. Where the supreme court is a sperate but equal branch of govnerment, one might argue it should be like the Utah Sepreme Court that has set what a speedy trial is.
And we are going full circle, as it’s down to the definition of a word. “defendant”. Your interpretation of the word is the person who is chared with the crime and that person only. Others including myself include representation in the word defendant. As another poster put, lawyers are included in that interpretaty and appear without a client often.
So I’m done going in circles. I’ve posted lots of information to back up my clain, you’ve brovided absolutely NOTHING.
All I wanted you to admit was that even “plain language” is open to interpretation.
I interpret the right to a speedy trial differently that you do. I don’t go just by the plain language.
No.
your interpreting WHO should get a speedy trial. Completely different.
How does it feel to “want”?
No. I’m interpreting when the right to a speedy trial starts. I think the defendant should get a right to a speedy trial.
As soon as they show up to court.
What the hell are you talking about?
And with this we go full circle.
Forget the definition of speedy trial (30 days, 70 days, a year).
Forget the definition of defendent in appearing in court to request the speedy trial.
I ask you once again, to show anyplace in the constitution, speedy try is reserved ONLY for those you know will show up in court.
You couldn’t so then you went off on the first tangent of what is a speedy trial, then off on the tangent of what a defendant is.
lets start this circle aaaaaaaalllllll over again. Because you can’t and won’t find anything other than a guarantee of a speedy trial with no qualifiers on who is eligible for it – other than everyone charged with a criminal offence.
Speedy trail has an amendment and a fed law…
“The Speedy Trial Act is a 44-year old federal law that dictates that a federal criminal case must begin within 70 days from the date of the indictment.”
http://dailycaller.com/2018/05/23/mueller-delay-russia-trial/
It doesn’t say it’s reserved for only those they show up in court. I had to interpret it.
It’s a tax.
No points for judges. I’m The Final Arbiter.
1 Like
Sorry? Your bleating is a little hard to make out. Can you rephrase?
