F430murci

Doesn't matter how good a driver is on a track driving on a road is very different..On a track if you make a mistake there are no trees or posts near the track edge, many circuits have run offs at dodgy places.

I would assume the driver was not adhering to the roads speed limits, in which case he was breaking the law, end of story in my opinion..

Right, cause nobody has ever died on a race track.

I don't think transam tried to suggest that.

But what you and mr Ferrari up there don't seem to understand is that when someone tries to drive like a <deleted> on a public road and ends up wiping out your snotty nosed little brat who was minding his own business walking to school, some poor bastarrd has to come along and mop up the mess, then go break the news to the kids family.

Thank goodness this didn't happen this time and the only two morons that got cooked like a bad piece of bacon fat were Paul and his driver.

They had no control over what they hit and it was only good fortune or luck that netted such a good result.

The community where it occurred should sue both estates for the calamity they created, the money should go to promoting safe driving practice amoungst teenagers there.

Seriously, Paul walker was admired by many and his foolish actions (just getting in the car with the loser driving) has endangered many young lives. SHAME on him, shame on them both, pair of douchebags.

Bitter, judgmental and low class. Feel bad for ya. Sad way to go through life.

The community where it happened? It was a desolate industrial park over the weekend that was empty. They weren't zipping around some public neighborhood.

I was hit by a drunk driver who killed my best friend and put me in the hospital for 3 months. I don't harbor any hard feelings and go through life being judgmental like you about drunk or reckless drivers. People make mistakes.

We have all made mistakes. This one was costly and extremely sad.

Paul Walker's charity work and giving to children. communities and places like the Philippines after natural disasters is well documented. Roger's is not. Roger was just as giving of both his time and his wealth to many less fortunate and those in their time of need. He was full of life, always had a big smile on his face and was very gracious to everyone he met.

Wish there were more people like both of them in the world. It would certainly be a better place.

Rodas not Walker was driving a modified Porsche and wrapped it round a tree because of excess speed and maybe other things

For Rodas widow to try to sue the car maker - rightly thrown out of court

Walkers family have shown respect and kept quiet - RIP Walker

The Walker family also has a lawsuit against Porsche.

Somebody should file a suit against the estates of these guys. I wonder how many fools have tried to copy what they see in these crapp movies fast and foolish and died as a result?

Clearly these guys got their 'ambitions' and 'abilities' completely mixed up.

Died too young....too stupid to live long.

What a bitter old . . .

I don't know what happened but there is one thing that comes to mind...

"The crew had decided to abort landing and circle round again. They had begun to gain altitude when the controls of the plane were abruptly pushed away, pushing its nose lower.

That, combined with the angle of the tail fin, sent the plane into a steep dive which the pilots were unable to pull out of, the IAC said."

In laymens' terms, if the plane is nosed up too steeply, it will obviously lose speed. At the extreme, the wings will stall meaning they don't have enough airflow over them to maintain lift.* At the moment of stall the nose will drop as the wings stop flying. Planes are always somewhat nose-heavy to make them more stable. To recover from this stall, the pilots must push the controls forward which pushes the nose down and puts the plane into a dive so that it can regain flying speed. When sufficient airspeed is regained the nose is pulled back up to level or climb. There has to be enough altitude available to do that, and the reaction of the pilot has to be correct.

Knowing all of that and reading the article makes me wonder if it stalled and the pilots couldn't or didn't recover for some reason.

*That is a rough description of what a stall is and good enough for this discussion but not good enough to pass a pilot's exam.

Stall should be readily apparent on CVR and BB.

Oh lawdy, the idiot brigade is out in full force. Never seen such bitter judgmental people, especially considering those being judgmental are completely clueless about that which they speak.

It is a CGT, not a GT3. I purchased a late production number (1025 black/teracota) new in 2005. Flipped it for profit to purchase a one off blue an owner of a dealership in Connecticut had that was a close racing buddy.

I have raced Porsches since the early 80s and started racing karts in grade school during the late 70s. The CGT is a handful and can be extremely twitchy in certain situations. Ben Keaton was my first close friend to have lost his life in his CGT at California Speedway. Porsche accepted some responsibility in a settlement related to that incident that was not Ben's fault.

All CGTs are "second hand" in that production was limited in 2004 and 2005. Used examples are only fetching around $800k. The dude asking $2mm is a bit of a wierdo that has a one off paint to sample car that has virtually never been driven.

RE: Roger Rodas

I knew Roger well from racing and considered him a friend. Only met Paul a few times and Roger was racing one of his Mustangs that last year if I remember correctly.

Roger was a very accomplished racer, a super talented driver and an all around great guy that did a lot of charity work. There is no reason to be so judgmental, especially about two very good individuals that contributed so much to society and those less fortunate.

RE: wrecked CGT

The red CGT that was crashed was not significantly modded as someone above suggested. The only mod I am aware of was an exhaust and I know the guys pretty well that did the last service on that car before it was purchased and wrecked.

The CGT has about 600hp, which really is not that much by today's' standards. Many cars, including luxury sedans commonly have similar ho and much more torque as the CGT was not forced induction.

There are no nannies or electronic safety nets on the CGT. The car is twitchy and especially prone to throttle oversteer. Roger was extremely capable and something happened beyond his control to lose it in that manner. There was indications at the scene that steering fluid may have leaked or failed, the tires were old and I think the reflectors in the road may have impacted traction or unsettled the car. Limits are easy to feel feel for someone with Roger's experience.

This was a sad situation and grieving family members have their way of dealing with things. Roger left a gorgeous and sweet wife and two young children behind. Paul's daughter still has a claim against Porsche and perhaps the fuel cel construction and location is viable. Paul was still alive when the car caught fire. Many Ferraris and exotic cars have split at bulkheads due to even greater speeds and have not erupted in fire.

"I have nothing but contempt for any religion"

But all religions say something to the effect of: "Don't kill, don't steal" - and here's the BIGGIE - "love your neighbours as you love yourself."

I agree that these great concepts seem ludicrous in light of the world - past - present and future

We just don't listen to good advice is all..

Signed,

Supremely Obdurate

The vast majority of people I know that have a solid faith in a higher power are well adjusted, happy, good people that live unselfishly positive lives and are a positive influence on others and the world around them.

The vast majority of those that I know that either do not believe or have faith in a higher power or reject the notion of a higher power are maladjusted, bitter, lonely people that ooze negativity and think only of themselves.

I wish I had a stronger faith as I currently live my life somewhere in limbo between the above classifications.

The Muslim faith, I don't understand as I am not surrounded by those that live by those principles. I, however, do know that the way of faith around me and in my environment is a positive and I strive to have more positive in my life.

In the end, the world is full of bad people who seek to do harm to others. This is more of a reflection of their life, the way they feel about themselves and their culture and environment than religion.

Two faced piece of . . . Loves it when his boys are rioting, looting and razing (uhm, I mean protesting), but gets offended at Trump when his boys show up at a Trump Rally and start a scene??? Dude is a joke. Sad part is all of the nitwits out there that fall for his rhetoric.

Wow, his boys? Can you say racist much?

Oh give me a break. Pathetic people try to play race cards whenever they can because they are . . . Pathetic and got nothing else.

Two faced piece of . . . Loves it when his boys are rioting, looting and razing (uhm, I mean protesting), but gets offended at Trump when his boys show up at a Trump Rally and start a scene??? Dude is a joke. Sad part is all of the nitwits out there that fall for his rhetoric.

Obama has absolutely no integrity and takes absolutely no responsibility. Perhaps it not anyone's reaction to him, but him, the decisions he has made and the actions he has taken that led the country to be so disgusted that Trump became an attractive option.

Obama is a master manipulator of those prone to follow him that are not sufficiently intelligent to read between the lines and see the big picture. Obama supporters just focusing the trees he throws their oath without even realizing a forest is even there.

Junior doctors are acting like spoilt brats.

Doctors should put patients first, not their own pockets.

What a ridiculous point of view. People invest a whole lot of time, money and effort to be or doctors and deserve to be compensated for that investment. If they are not being compensated appropriately, they have just as much right as anyone else to complain. What is sickening is the fast food worker type complaining about pay when they could not even muster the effort, responsibility or brain power to graduate high school.

The medical profession is valuable and we need the creame of the crop being attracted to this field. All of this entitlement let's give free health care to the loser faction and broke immigrants bs is depleting the system and negatively impacting the wrong people. The system is broken and needs to be fixed. This is basically the only means and the last ditch effort to fix a broken system or the system will either cease to exist or your medical devices will be provided by a bunch of fast food worker types looking to make their $15.00 an hour.

All you anti Trumpers are like Canute. No matter how much you rant and rave about the Donald's supposed downside he just keeps on gaining delegates and leading, leading, leading the pack. When are you going to understand that Trump supporters don't care about the BS that you write about him, about his business acumen, about his ex wives, about his appreciation for his daughter, about his desire to stop illegal immigration and revive business in the US, about his hair and other bits. They even use his drinking a diet soda to try and monster him. NONE OF IT MATTERS. As long as he threatens the corrupt establishment politicians, he will win votes, and the more the Romney's and the Bush's attack him the more support he will get.

Here's a thought- run a non corrupt establishment politician against him and he will probably lose support. Unfortunately, there are no such politicians available from the GOP establishment - all of them bought and sold. Bernie probably qualifies on the Dems side, but the corrupt super delegate scam will probably keep him out.

When are you going to understand that Trump supporters don't care about the BS that you write about him

Number one, Trump's critics and other opponents don't speak BS.

Number two, we 100% know Trump's fellow radical wildmen don't care what Trump's critics and other opponents say against him. It is not Trump supporters we speak to. Speaking to Trump supporters and advocates accomplishes nothing.

It is the electorate we speak to, the nation in general and the world more broadly. They need to know Trump and his people are a distinct minority of a minority and that Trump and his advocates are crackpots who will get nowhere in the general election in November.

The candidacy of Donald Trump is in effect an airing out of fundamental and radical differences in American society and civilisation. I individually welcome it so the minority element of American soceity can be exposed as the crackpots that they are, always have been.

The radical widlmen of the society are being wholly repudiated by the broad and moderate centrist political and cultural middle of the American electorate, as will become obivous on voting day November 8th. This is the only 'when' about it. And we alread know the answer as indicated.

Actually, normal hard working, honest Anericans with something called INTEGRITY are finally getting sick and tired of the loser, lazy, non-working element that lacks all INTEGRITY with their hand out mentality constantly taking and do little or nothing to contribute to society.

I actually think Hillary and Bill, whom I loved, get it and probably thinks it sux also, but their narsacism and underlying need for power and fame means more to them than doing what they deep down inside know is right and best for the American people. They will basically pander or pay lip service to the pathetic, loser element to get votes regardless as to their true internal beliefs. I actually think, or at least would hope, that Hillary won't be that bad because she doesn't really buy into the Obama bs and will act and do right if she is elected President. She will say whatever she thinks she needs to say to get losers to vote for her, but hopefully she will turn her back somewhat on them if she elected.

No one, except some like Ibama had an internal agenda, can be that stupid to think much of what Obama has done is a good thing. I, therefore, hold out some hope that Hillary might be a decent President once she can drop the charade and do what is right.

Enrique Pena Nieto Is a corrupt scum bag. Mexico is one of the most messed up places on earth and we need to keep that rift raft out of the states. Mexico people are so desensitized to extreme violence, torture and gore, they cannot reasonably integrate in the US on a large scale.

" Im going to open up our libel laws so that when the New York Times writes a hit piece which is a total disgrace or when the Washington Post, which is there for other reasons writes a hit piece we can sue then and win money instead of having no chance of winning because they are totally protected "

The libel laws in the US are fine. If you are damaged, and can prove it, you can collect. It happens often. There is no need to change them. Sounds a bit like our DL if you read how he describes how "unfair" the media are to him. Sure, there are far more negative stories on him than positive - but thats the nature of the beast. Happiness doesn't sell like fear and negativity.

And you base this on what? Years of practicing in this area? There are certain immunities and defense available to the press that shield them from having to actually do any work to verity the veracity of the source or information reported.

Do the laws need to changed as it relates to the press? I don't know and don't really care, but the press should be held more accountable for false stories when they fail to check the credibility of secondary sources. There are too many dumb people incapable of reading between the lines, looking for true meanings or taking certain things in context, much of like what we see in here day and day out.

So perhaps laws should be changed to take into account the dumb butts of the world that get worked up over certain things that are either not true or are incapable of reading with a critical eye and seeing that certain bits and pieces of information or statements are being taken out of context. Sadly, our laws and society norms too often have to be tailored to address the dumbest, weakest and most naive.

It is your only system, as if you have a choice. You're stuck with it. A judgement should never be handed down on the basis of a personal political ideology. A decision should never be considered in the light of a personal bent Conservative or Liberal. That is a corrupted judicial system. IF the public feel a decision is wrong and does not reflect community standards then new Legislation is enacted that the Justices must then apply or possibly strike down if it conflicts on a matter of legal argument but NEVER on a personal political ideology.

Absolutely bizarre that anyone could role over and conclude, oh the system is corrupt but hey it's the best system in the World. In your dreams it is. Any justice that even gave an impression he / she was swayed by a political ideology would simply be removed from the bench by both Houses of Parliament. It simply would not be tolerated.

My personal view is Dow are a pack of thieving bastards that would sell granny up the river if they thought they could make a buck but they have a right to walk into the highest court in the land and present their case and have that case measured against the law not on the political ideology of a Justice. It's outrageous!

See, you are ruled by emotions and personal prejudices governed by ignorance of that you judge and hate. You make incorrect statements based inaccurate assumption driven by apparent personal biases and struggles. Lol, if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to walk around with such deep hatred and resentment about people and things of which you are very ill informed.

BTW, the Dow case and Tyson Food case pending before the Supreme Court had nothing to do with Dow or Tyson Foods. It has everything to do with very difficult area of law that have wide ranging impact on thousands of cases. Those issues still need resolution, but if it makes you feel satisfied to believe the big evil system is just trying to help Dow, Tyson Foods or any partying particular . . . more power to you!

I have worked for and been around a lot of judges. They are not corruot, they are not in the take and they make difficult decisions doing the best they can. Of course they do what the believe in and are consistent in their beliefs. That does not make them corrupt, but if it makes you happy to walk around cussing them as evil and corruot, God bless you!

I certainly hold those views but I have no time for hatreds nor am I a Supreme Court Justice so my view would not impact on Dow Chemicals. The fact that I hold those views yet still demand that Dow has an absolute right to run their case and be treated without bias and free from the personal political ideologies of Justices in the Supreme Court demonstrates that I actually hold myself to a higher standard than the US Supreme Court Justices.

You have made your position clear 'well of course it is a corrupted process, but hey, it is the best system around'. For a start it is not the best system around and as a participant in the system your integrity and courage really comes into question. Your attitude seems to answer why the system is the way it is. The fact that you support and excuse a corrupted system I am marking you 'Could do better'. Harsh but fair I think.

My view would be that the number one prerequisite for a Supreme Court Justice is their ability to deal with far reaching complex legal matters and arrive at a legally sound judgement free from any personal political ideology. You seem to accept that the latter is acceptable.

When did you actually 'sell out' your values and ethics within the legal system? What motivated you to excuse and defend a corrupt legal system? Career? Money?

Your initial comment certainly sounds like comment from a well adjusted, rationale individual without a deep seeded resentment:

"Oh please Scolia was a pig ignorant homophobic Right Wing nutter totally corrupted by the Wealthy Elite and Corporate Establishment"

Rules of law are man made. They are "opinions." You wrongly equate the concepts of opinion or interpretation with corruption and bias. Your comments and word choice reflects an ideology shaped by a personal feeling of persecution and inadequacy. Perhaps you perceive certain legal rulings, opinions and truisms as perpetuating those feelings, but that does not make those rulings or options corrupt or bias.

My values? I try to focus on the larger picture and don't think everything is about me or directed at me. I am certainly sorry that you go through life thinking anyway who is happy, functions well in society and is overall grateful for our legal system is corrupt or a sell out for money. There you go ago again. Judging someone you don't know or really understand.

Oh please Scolia was a pig ignorant homophobic Right Wing nutter totally corrupted by the Wealthy Elite and Corporate Establishment. Dow understands perfectly well that with a evenly split politically motivated SC a 4/4 decision result then the lower court judgement stands.

A SC that is influenced by political ideology Left or Right is inherently corrupted. The decision of a SC Justice should be based on applying the rule of law NOT a personal political ideology. America is in desperate need of Law Court reform.

Interesting, but humorous comments throughout this thread. Obviously, a of misdirected or misplaced anger and very little knowledge regarding the topic.

The Supreme Court generally hears issues of first impression and cases or cases involving a split among the Circuits. Accordingly, statements about applying the law is misguided as there is not a set rule of law to apply in either instance.

I have been following the Tyson Food and Dow cases for some time, particularly the Tyson Food case. I am currently defending 3 class actions in California, 2 in New York, 1 in Pennsylvania and 1 in Tennessee. I also represent plaintiffs in class actions so I like to think I am an equal opportunist a-hole. My personal preference is to have pro-plaintiff rulings as I make money whether I am defending and prosecuting class actions.

Both cases presented very interesting issues impacting certification of class actions. Tyson Foods in particular presented serious questions needing resulting including whether use of statistical sampling can be used to ignore differences in class members and whether class treatment may be appropriate where not all members of the class have sustained damages.

The basic premise of Rule 23 is to preserve class actions for cases involving common, typical claims of all similarly situated putative class members. Tyson Foods deviated a bit from this standard perhaps because of record issues in Tyson Foods that made class sampling necessary. I can see the pros and cons of both views, but we desperately need resolution of these issues one way or the other.

Scalia's decision in Walmart v. Dukes on somewhat similar issues was actually a very well written and well reasoned opinion. The case actually left wiggle room for both the plaintiff and defense bar depending on the facts of the case.

There is generally no right or wrong answers to amy of these questions. Some individuals take a real stringent, hardline strict interpretation of Rules such as Rule 23 (Scalia and the conservative approach) while other may view Rule 23 as needing to remain pliable as a remedial rule. Is one view right and the other view wrong. Typically not.

Mere disagreement with one or the other view makes neither view wrong. The Supremes hear and resolve exceedingly difficult issues. Are some decisions driven by religious and philosophical beliefs. Perhaps so. We are all human. Do I get frustrated with rulings. You betcha. One side will likely never be happy and many times, both sides end up not completely happy.

The US legal system is not perfect. Nothing human is, but it is dang good and I am generally very proud of it. I wrote for a state appellate court judge and a state Supreme Court Justice. The Supreme Court job was a very difficult job, but very rewarding. I believe in our system and, without a doubt, our system is the best there is.

It is your only system, as if you have a choice. You're stuck with it. A judgement should never be handed down on the basis of a personal political ideology. A decision should never be considered in the light of a personal bent Conservative or Liberal. That is a corrupted judicial system. IF the public feel a decision is wrong and does not reflect community standards then new Legislation is enacted that the Justices must then apply or possibly strike down if it conflicts on a matter of legal argument but NEVER on a personal political ideology.

Absolutely bizarre that anyone could role over and conclude, oh the system is corrupt but hey it's the best system in the World. In your dreams it is. Any justice that even gave an impression he / she was swayed by a political ideology would simply be removed from the bench by both Houses of Parliament. It simply would not be tolerated.

My personal view is Dow are a pack of thieving bastards that would sell granny up the river if they thought they could make a buck but they have a right to walk into the highest court in the land and present their case and have that case measured against the law not on the political ideology of a Justice. It's outrageous!

See, you are ruled by emotions and personal prejudices governed by ignorance of that you judge and hate. You make incorrect statements based inaccurate assumption driven by apparent personal biases and struggles. Lol, if it makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside to walk around with such deep hatred and resentment about people and things of which you are very ill informed.

BTW, the Dow case and Tyson Food case pending before the Supreme Court had nothing to do with Dow or Tyson Foods. It has everything to do with very difficult area of law that have wide ranging impact on thousands of cases. Those issues still need resolution, but if it makes you feel satisfied to believe the big evil system is just trying to help Dow, Tyson Foods or any partying particular . . . more power to you!

I have worked for and been around a lot of judges. They are not corruot, they are not in the take and they make difficult decisions doing the best they can. Of course they do what the believe in and are consistent in their beliefs. That does not make them corrupt, but if it makes you happy to walk around cussing them as evil and corruot, God bless you!

Where is the death penalty US court system is racist brigade? Oops, this low life was white, but alas we will get the long distance complainers wrapped up in something that has no impact on them or their daily life.

I find it interesting that some posters would think that it's corruption when something is going through the Court system.

A judgement was awarded by a lower court (that doesn't sound like corruption to me). The Company appealed the judgement and it has now reached the level of the SC. The Company is now reassessing it's position because of the change in the Court's composition. Scalia was a constitutional purist and less likely to make an interpretive ruling. He is much more like fundamentalist Christians and Muslims who believe their books are to be adhered to as written.

The SC decides what cases it will or will not hear and there needs to be a constitutional issue involved. I am not sure what the constitutional issue is, but the SC is not going to hear a case in which the defendant appeals because they don't think it's fair and they don't want to pay the amount.

Life isn't fair and companies have money and influence. Apparently Dow has decided that they don't have enough money or influence to get out of this situation. They will live with the lower court's ruling.

It's hardly corruption.

Oh please Scolia was a pig ignorant homophobic Right Wing nutter totally corrupted by the Wealthy Elite and Corporate Establishment. Dow understands perfectly well that with a evenly split politically motivated SC a 4/4 decision result then the lower court judgement stands.

A SC that is influenced by political ideology Left or Right is inherently corrupted. The decision of a SC Justice should be based on applying the rule of law NOT a personal political ideology. America is in desperate need of Law Court reform.

Interesting, but humorous comments throughout this thread. Obviously, a of misdirected or misplaced anger and very little knowledge regarding the topic.

The Supreme Court generally hears issues of first impression and cases or cases involving a split among the Circuits. Accordingly, statements about applying the law is misguided as there is not a set rule of law to apply in either instance.

I have been following the Tyson Food and Dow cases for some time, particularly the Tyson Food case. I am currently defending 3 class actions in California, 2 in New York, 1 in Pennsylvania and 1 in Tennessee. I also represent plaintiffs in class actions so I like to think I am an equal opportunist a-hole. My personal preference is to have pro-plaintiff rulings as I make money whether I am defending and prosecuting class actions.

Both cases presented very interesting issues impacting certification of class actions. Tyson Foods in particular presented serious questions needing resulting including whether use of statistical sampling can be used to ignore differences in class members and whether class treatment may be appropriate where not all members of the class have sustained damages.

The basic premise of Rule 23 is to preserve class actions for cases involving common, typical claims of all similarly situated putative class members. Tyson Foods deviated a bit from this standard perhaps because of record issues in Tyson Foods that made class sampling necessary. I can see the pros and cons of both views, but we desperately need resolution of these issues one way or the other.

Scalia's decision in Walmart v. Dukes on somewhat similar issues was actually a very well written and well reasoned opinion. The case actually left wiggle room for both the plaintiff and defense bar depending on the facts of the case.

There is generally no right or wrong answers to amy of these questions. Some individuals take a real stringent, hardline strict interpretation of Rules such as Rule 23 (Scalia and the conservative approach) while other may view Rule 23 as needing to remain pliable as a remedial rule. Is one view right and the other view wrong. Typically not.

Mere disagreement with one or the other view makes neither view wrong. The Supremes hear and resolve exceedingly difficult issues. Are some decisions driven by religious and philosophical beliefs. Perhaps so. We are all human. Do I get frustrated with rulings. You betcha. One side will likely never be happy and many times, both sides end up not completely happy.

The US legal system is not perfect. Nothing human is, but it is dang good and I am generally very proud of it. I wrote for a state appellate court judge and a state Supreme Court Justice. The Supreme Court job was a very difficult job, but very rewarding. I believe in our system and, without a doubt, our system is the best there is.

And I have a rich friend, former BMW owner, that bought exactly that model Volvo last year saying that he NEVER will buy a JAPANESE or AMERICAN car...only GERMAN!

Paid close to 3 million THB for a CHINESE!

People paid a lot more for an INDIAN (Jaguar & Land Rover)!

I like the new Jags and Range Rovers have always been cool. Land Rovers are awful though. Do they make the F-Tyoes in India? Wasn't aware.

Will someone please give this hint to Obama? - If you nominate someone, he at least should have graduated from law school.

Thank you.

Here's a hint for you: one need not have graduated from law school to serve on the Supreme Court. Stanley Forman Reed and Robert H. Jackson (justices in the 1950s) are evidence of this.

You're welcome.

Cheers!

One not only needs to have attended jaw school, one needs to have had considerably experience in the bench. I candidly don't know the rules back in the 59s, but I do know that some trial court bench positions could be filled by non-lawyers in scattered jurisdictions throughout the country.

No have a trial judge trained in law and having considerable considerable experience is a disaster waiting to happen. Not having. Supreme Court justice at either the state or federal level is beyond a disaster waiting to happen and saves no good or constructive purpose.

I clerked for a State Supreme Court judge in the 90s and that was an extremely difficult job. I clerked for an intermediate court of appeals judge prior to my Supreme Court clerkship. The appellate court level was a cake walk easy job despite a much heavier volume of cases and opinions to write. I also had staff attorney resources such as staff attorneys dedicated to areas such as death penalty cases that had read and could discuss every death penalty case written in our state and at the Fedrral Curvuit and Supreme Court level.

I cannot even begin to fathom how someone with no formal legal education and considerable experience as a judge could begin to handle such a job. Blows me away that someone thinks otherwise.

While I respect Scalia and understand and respect his views on the constitution, I would love to see Ovama get an appointment because I do prefer a liberal court. There are many issues including women's rights and tort law issues wherein I prefer a liberal view.

Kind of sux as I am awaiting the Court's decision in Tysin Foods as that appeal drastically impacts 7 class actions I am currently defending. We need a decision so we can properly evaluate the case, advise our client and instruct our experts how to analyze the class data.

But, his death and his family's loss is much more important than timely release of some silly decision.

At the end of the day, many close to him loved and respected him even if they did not share the same beliefs or views as to how the constitution should be interpreted. I also think the constitution should be interpreted as written and consistent with the beliefs of the drafters at the time written. Otherwise, we open the door to have people two centuries later trying to change it to conform to their own set of values and beliefs. This creates inconsistency and uncertainty as to the law. If you want to change interpretation of the constitution, do it by amendment.

Why should Obama go? Scalia was a a bigot and did everything he could to back big business. Worked to eliminate the EPA was against gay rights etc etc.

You go to a funeral to pay your last respects.

I doubt Obama has any respect for this poor excuse for a man so why should he go?

America is better off with this guy dead!!!

Lol, another judgmental, bitter person. Like his decision or not, he was actually a justice that applied the constitution and law as he read it to be intended at time it was created. That is not bigotry.

Your comments are actually disturbing. I fell bad for you to walk around with such bitterness and resentment. Scalia was actually very well respected and adored by those around him even if they had differing opinions on how the constitution was written or should be interpreted two centuries later. So ask yourself, how many lives have you touched in a positive way and who would show up to your funeral?

Don't hate the sinner. Hate the sin. His sin was bigotry.

One is not a bigot simply because they apply the constitution as they see it written. I respect judges more that rule against innate personal beliefs to apply the law as written. You are way too judgmental and perhaps more so than those you are quick to label a bigot.

Source of OP original from islamophobic Breitbart. And was later 'confirmed' by extreme right news outlet Kroner Zeitung. Previously owned by an WW2 ex-Kriegsmariner and after his death his newspaper became very popular, but criticised for support to Kurt Waldheim, Jorg Haider and Barbara Rosenkranz.

Moreover, photoshopped pictures were published in the beginning of the Syrian civil war.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Dichand

All other news outlets repeated the same texts almost word by word.

No austrian official made a press conference. Which I would look forward to read to make any conclusions.

At least I did my homework...

You did your homework?

This article cites to Kronen Zeitung.

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/vienna-iraqi-migrant-raped-boy-10-local-swimming-pool-1542379

...and OF COURSE, no one has ever heard of any European or Christian, raping little boys...

Oh...wait!

Oh that makes it alright then,

The fact he was a Muslim migrant who showed zero remorse is just an irrelevance to you.

Perhaps the Austrian authorities should provide these male migrants with free vouchers for sex workers along with all the other freebies?

See, the decadent West at fault for not providing sexual relief.

Your Muslim apologies are becoming a total joke. Castrate the b/stard with a blunt rusty blade and deport him back to his missus.

Okay, dude...here for you and all your "likers": no, that does not make it okay!

At all!

The fact that he was a migrant with no remorse does not matter!

The fact that he was a rapist matters!

But of course it matters to you, that he was Muslim!

Because it fits your agenda!

Free vouchers for sex- workers?

The decadent west?

Projection much?

I am not apologizing for anyone!

How about your general attacks on everything and everyone Muslim?

That is just perverted!

Here is a 10 year old boy scarred for life and his family devastated all because of letting this deviant, loser Muslim migrant into their country. Citizens that belong in their home countries need to be protected from this filth. Nasty immigrants such as this rapist come from a culture that condones abbussive and deviant behavior toward children and women. There is no effective way to screen and it is only a matter of time for some of these nasty little deviant f'ers start showing there true colors.

So yes, there are already deviants in the host countries, but there is no reason to let more in.

Is this anyway for a quest to treat its host by taking a young child, creating havoc, depleting resources and assaulting women. WTH is that all about. You would think they would act grateful and respectful, at least in the beginning.

Post #56 states (the computer will not allow me to include so many quoted posts):

"A study from 40 years ago no less.

Are you saying that the USA has not moved forward on race issues since then?"

Reply:

I understand that you do realize that I had not asked a rhetorical question, correct?

No doubt, one would hope that the USA has moved on. However, we have recently seen videos of unarmed African-Americans shot and killed in the streets by law enforcement officers. I know that forty years may seem like a long time for some things. However, bigotry and prejudices can last for generations. The Civil Rights Amendments are about 150 years old.

It seems to me that compared to before the 1965 Civil Rights Act and the Voting Rights Act, things are not as bad for the African-American community. Still, I am not so sure if America has moved on enough.

By the way, you seem interested so I'll share the following which cites more recent studies consistent with the Baldus study which includes links: http://www.deathpenaltyinfo.org/race-and-death-penalty

Thanks for your contribution to the discussion!

That site has a huge agenda and statistics can be sifted through in certain fashions to support agendas.

Tge stats they cite actually support what I said regarding the ratio of whites to blacks executed in the last 40 years. I also acknowledged that the death penalty is sought much less when blacks are killed, regardless of the race of the perpetrator. This is not by virtue of racism in the system as some of you with no experience in the system try to infuse. Prosecutors are very reluctant to seek death penalties in all cases and will only do so when they are 99.9999% sure they can get the conviction. Concerns about juror perception (society, not system bias) and the circumstances of the crime are key here.

Look for studies by more objective sources and try to understand that bare statistics have a multitude of factors often not explained by mere raw numbers.

African American, he was ...

And if he'd been white...? ( hmm, nice coffee)

More likely that he'd still be alive if he was white.

That's another reason I'm against the death penalty for less than spectacularly heinous crimes.

The U.S. "justice" system tends to punish minorities more harshly.

It isn't an explicit policy, per se, it just works out that way.

It also of course punishes the poor in general more harshly, of any race, for obvious reasons. They can't afford good lawyers.

Exactly why one shouldn't judge an entire system based upon ignorant assumptions fed by projections of one' sown internal struggles.

More whites have been executed than blacks over the last 49 years at a nearly 2 to 1 clip. The potential racial bias has little to do with punishing blacks more harshly. Prosecutors, however, do appear less inclined to seek the death penalty for black on black murders,.

I worked on a state Supreme Court reviewing death penalty cases. They are subjected to unbelievably high scrutiny focusing on evidence to meet the enhancement factors. Race had zero to do with these reviews. In fact, I can only recall white defendants in the death penalty cases we reviewed.

Felony murder can be enhancement that makes a crime death legible.. I believe that felony murders are particularly heinous, senseless killings that need to be deterred.

The killing of innocent store clerks during commission of a robbery of a few bucks to eliminate the clerk as a witness to me is much worse than a premeditated murder of someone because of a personal dispute between the two. Think about it. Your child or liege done was killed while working in a store for minimum wage so they could not later ID the robber that stole $59 or $100 bucks. That is about as depraived as it gets.