News
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
view the rest of the comments
He stands accused, not convicted, which may not matter to you but it should
Me defending the lawyer’s ability to make comments on the racial politics of the situation really has nothing to do with Diddy in any way, other than that Diddy is a black man and high profile enough for the lawyer to have been talking about the case on a podcast
“Playing the devil’s advocate” doesnt mean whatever you think it means based on how you just used it
To me, this whole thing has nothing to do with Diddy so much as it is about a judge who is uncomfortable with the fact that there are valid criticisms to be had surrounding race and the courts.
Playing the devils advocate would be saying something like “Can Diddy get a fair trial if the prosecution is 6 white women?”. I think he can, but I also think those prosecutors and especially the judge should be cognizant of how the racial politics could impact the trial. To ensure that he gets a fair trial and is rightfully convicted if guilty (as we all anticipate he is)
Correct. By over 100 people, many of whom were minors when they were allegedly sexually abused.
I agree with your argument in the abstract, but given the nature of the case I don’t think I’d be choosing to carry water here.
Or, have you considered it could be that the judge is familiar with the circumstances of the case, and in this instance finds the defense’s argument unsubstantiated, gross, and totally inappropriate?
Here's the thing tho, that lawyer isn't even part of the defense team. He's simply a spectator in the courtroom who happens to be a lawyer and that's what the judge is holding him accountable for, ie: he should know the rules and keep his mouth shut.
There may very well be an issue of racism. That’s for comb’s actual defense team to bring to the judges attention.
Further, there absolutely is a better way to express that concern. It was an absolutely sexist comment and highly inappropriate. as a lawyer Geragos should know better.
Especially as he is loosely connected to the defense team and could potentially taint the jury pool.