UVA Class of 2012

(housing, friendships, future exams, all things 2012)
User avatar
CE2JD
Posts: 929
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:33 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby CE2JD » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:45 am

mallard wrote:
RTF wrote:
mallard wrote:So you're saying the presumption should be guilt rather than innocence?


Again, no.

Using the word "bump" in this circumstance is more than likely misleading.


Why?


Epstein initially pled guilty to the charges as filed in an affidavit by a Secret Service agent who used the word "karate chop" in his affidavit. I'd say this is a good reason to believe he likely did more than bump into the alleged victim.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby mallard » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:46 am

RTF wrote:Because striking someone in the head and bumping into someone are distinguishable.

Striking someone in the head is considered assault and the other is not.


No offense, but is there something wrong with you? The facts of the case are in dispute and you take one side based on the idea that there is a difference between them?

How about this. A guy is on trial for murder. You're prosecuting him. He argues that the victim actually committed suicide. You suggest that, since killing someone and not killing someone are distinguishable, he must have done it.

If he initially pled guilty, that's one thing; if the facts are actually in dispute, that's something different entirely.

User avatar
philosophy
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:15 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby philosophy » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:48 am

Log into UVA SIS. Click on "View Financial Aid" and select this year. Click the "loan counseling link" and select your loan(s). The link won't work, but will take you to the right website.

To complete your entrance interview: http://mappingyourfuture.org/oslc/
Select the appropriate loans and institution (UVA), and then read and answer questions.

I don't guarantee that this is the right way, but it seems to work.


in the section where we choose our institution, are we supposed to choose 'UVA,' as there is no 'UVA Law' option? this seems odd, considering there is a 'UVA Medicine' option.

RTF
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 11:58 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby RTF » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 am

mallard wrote:
RTF wrote:Because striking someone in the head and bumping into someone are distinguishable.

Striking someone in the head is considered assault and the other is not.


No offense, but is there something wrong with you? The facts of the case are in dispute and you take one side based on the idea that there is a difference between them?

How about this. A guy is on trial for murder. You're prosecuting him. He argues that the victim actually committed suicide. You suggest that, since killing someone and not killing someone are distinguishable, he must have done it.

If he initially pled guilty, that's one thing; if the facts are actually in dispute, that's something different entirely.



What are you talking about?

All I have said is that using the word "bump" considering the circumstances is a bit misleading.

User avatar
CE2JD
Posts: 929
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:33 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby CE2JD » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:51 am

mallard wrote:
RTF wrote:Because striking someone in the head and bumping into someone are distinguishable.

Striking someone in the head is considered assault and the other is not.


No offense, but is there something wrong with you? The facts of the case are in dispute and you take one side based on the idea that there is a difference between them?

How about this. A guy is on trial for murder. You're prosecuting him. He argues that the victim actually committed suicide. You suggest that, since killing someone and not killing someone are distinguishable, he must have done it.

If he initially pled guilty, that's one thing; if the facts are actually in dispute, that's something different entirely.


So why do you think Epstein would plead guilty to something he didn't do if the burden of proof is on the plaintiff? It's completely reasonable to take a guilty plea as a likely (not definite) sign that the defendant is guilty.
Last edited by CE2JD on Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

showNprove
Posts: 968
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 2:52 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby showNprove » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:52 am

.
Last edited by showNprove on Sat Nov 21, 2015 12:41 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby mallard » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:53 am

RTF wrote:What are you talking about?

All I have said is that using the word "bump" considering the circumstances is a bit misleading.


You don't get to say "considering the circumstances" if the circumstances are under dispute. If they actually aren't and the stories of the accuser and the accused match, fine. But what we're talking about here is the suggestion that the accusation didn't match what actually happened (in a post from the previous page).

User avatar
CE2JD
Posts: 929
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:33 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby CE2JD » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:54 am

mallard wrote:
RTF wrote:What are you talking about?

All I have said is that using the word "bump" considering the circumstances is a bit misleading.


You don't get to say "considering the circumstances" if the circumstances are under dispute. If they actually aren't and the stories of the accuser and the accused match, fine. But what we're talking about here is the suggestion that the accusation didn't match what actually happened (in a post from the previous page).


Your mistake is in ignoring the guilty plea.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby mallard » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:55 am

CE2JD wrote:Your mistake is in ignoring the guilty plea.


Could easily have been part of a bargain. The quote from the previous page suggests that he actually disputes the facts.

User avatar
iceberger
Posts: 289
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 12:24 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby iceberger » Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:55 am

CE2JD wrote:
mallard wrote:
RTF wrote:Because striking someone in the head and bumping into someone are distinguishable.

Striking someone in the head is considered assault and the other is not.


No offense, but is there something wrong with you? The facts of the case are in dispute and you take one side based on the idea that there is a difference between them?

How about this. A guy is on trial for murder. You're prosecuting him. He argues that the victim actually committed suicide. You suggest that, since killing someone and not killing someone are distinguishable, he must have done it.

If he initially pled guilty, that's one thing; if the facts are actually in dispute, that's something different entirely.


So why do you think Epstein would plead guilty to something he didn't do if the burden of proof is on the plaintiff? It's completely reasonable to take a guilty plea as a likely (not definite) sign that the defendant is guilty.


not to jump into either side of this argument, but fwiw i think i read somewhere or heard a description that he entered an alford plea

User avatar
CE2JD
Posts: 929
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:33 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby CE2JD » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:00 pm

mallard wrote:
CE2JD wrote:Your mistake is in ignoring the guilty plea.


Could easily have been part of a bargain. The quote from the previous page suggests that he actually disputes the facts.


A alford plea is a type of guilty plea that is interpreted by the court to mean an admittance of having committed the offense in question. If the plea is good enough for such an assumption of guilt to be made in a court of law, it's certainly good enough for someone else to use as an indication of how likely a person was to have committed said offense.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby mallard » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:02 pm

Except that the premise of this argument (again, from the page prior) was that he was privately disputing the facts.

User avatar
philosophy
Posts: 31
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2008 3:15 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby philosophy » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:04 pm

showNprove wrote:
philosophy wrote:
Log into UVA SIS. Click on "View Financial Aid" and select this year. Click the "loan counseling link" and select your loan(s). The link won't work, but will take you to the right website.

To complete your entrance interview: http://mappingyourfuture.org/oslc/
Select the appropriate loans and institution (UVA), and then read and answer questions.

I don't guarantee that this is the right way, but it seems to work.


in the section where we choose our institution, are we supposed to choose 'UVA,' as there is no 'UVA Law' option? this seems odd, considering there is a 'UVA Medicine' option.

I thought that too, but there is no UVA Med option for the GradPLUS. I guess the med school has a separate office for handling Stafford loans.


i take it that you chose the 'UVA' option and completed the counseling without a hitch?

User avatar
CE2JD
Posts: 929
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:33 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby CE2JD » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:05 pm

mallard wrote:Except that the premise of this argument (again, from the page prior) was that he was privately disputing the facts.


So you take the claims of the defendant made privately to his friends while not under oath over the claim of guilt he made under oath in a court of law? Interesting.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby mallard » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:08 pm

CE2JD wrote:
mallard wrote:Except that the premise of this argument (again, from the page prior) was that he was privately disputing the facts.


So you take the claims of the defendant made privately to his friends while not under oath over the claim of guilt he made under oath in a court of law? Interesting.


The discussion that you entered was one in which the competing claims ("karate chop" and "bump") were being compared against each other and another poster was suggesting on the basis that these can be distinguished that the former was more likely, and that if it hadn't happened, "the authorities wouldn't have gotten involved." Please show me a way in which that does not lead to a presumption of guilt for everyone accused of a crime.

User avatar
CE2JD
Posts: 929
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:33 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby CE2JD » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:14 pm

mallard wrote:
CE2JD wrote:
mallard wrote:Except that the premise of this argument (again, from the page prior) was that he was privately disputing the facts.


So you take the claims of the defendant made privately to his friends while not under oath over the claim of guilt he made under oath in a court of law? Interesting.


The discussion that you entered was one in which the competing claims ("karate chop" and "bump") were being compared against each other and another poster was suggesting on the basis that these can be distinguished that the former was more likely, and that if it hadn't happened, "the authorities wouldn't have gotten involved." Please show me a way in which that does not lead to a presumption of guilt for everyone accused of a crime.


I assume RTF made his comment in light of Epstein's guilty plea, in which case I believe he's totally justified in assuming guilt.

User avatar
Kohinoor
Posts: 2756
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby Kohinoor » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:20 pm

RTF wrote:
booyakasha45 wrote:
jasofbase2001 wrote:FWIW, I got the story of Marcus. I'm not defending him, just giving what I understand to be his side of the story. He did not disclose this on his application because it is a misdemeanor. He claims to have been plastered when it happened and bumped into her hard (not a karate chop), then called her the N-word, has to do community service, is on probation, and is still attending AA as a result.

I report, you decide.


No matter how drunk I were, I'd never call someone that. I don't have any sympathy for him.


I think using the word "bumped" is a little misleading. I have bumped into people on the Subway before, frankly I have had people bump into me and get angry about it. Never have I ever considered "bumping" into someone assault and never does "bumping" into someone ever warrant being called a racial slur.

My point is, he had to do a little more than just "bump" into this girl.

A disinterested third party called it an open-handed slap.

showNprove
Posts: 968
Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2008 2:52 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby showNprove » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:23 pm

.
Last edited by showNprove on Sat Nov 21, 2015 12:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
Kohinoor
Posts: 2756
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2008 5:51 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby Kohinoor » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:23 pm

mallard wrote:
RTF wrote:
mallard wrote:So you're saying the presumption should be guilt rather than innocence?


Again, no.

Using the word "bump" in this circumstance is more than likely misleading.


Why?

Because given the testimony of a suspect who admitted to being shit-faced versus the victim and a disinterested federal officer, we usually err on the side of the latter.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby mallard » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:25 pm

Kohinoor wrote:Because given the testimony of a suspect who admitted to being shit-faced versus the victim and a disinterested federal officer, we usually err on the side of the latter.


I like to err on the side of presuming innocence.

User avatar
CE2JD
Posts: 929
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 8:33 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby CE2JD » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:26 pm

mallard wrote:
Kohinoor wrote:Because given the testimony of a suspect who admitted to being shit-faced versus the victim and a disinterested federal officer, we usually err on the side of the latter.


I like to err on the side of presuming innocence.


Apparently, even when a guilty plea is entered.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby mallard » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:27 pm

CE2JD wrote:
mallard wrote:
Kohinoor wrote:Because given the testimony of a suspect who admitted to being shit-faced versus the victim and a disinterested federal officer, we usually err on the side of the latter.


I like to err on the side of presuming innocence.


Apparently, even when a guilty plea is entered.


Fair enough.

RTF
Posts: 105
Joined: Fri May 02, 2008 11:58 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby RTF » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:27 pm

Sorry, work was calling.

I think the others basically answered for me, thanks guys.

Just out of curiousity, under what circumstances would you then ever find someone in Epstein's circumstances guilty?

User avatar
Cavalier
Posts: 1994
Joined: Mon Apr 13, 2009 6:13 pm

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby Cavalier » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:28 pm

Well, looks like Marcus Epstein finally made his Facebook profile private.

User avatar
mallard
Posts: 1092
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 5:45 am

Re: UVA Class of 2012

Postby mallard » Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:28 pm

RTF wrote:Sorry, work was calling.

I think the others basically answered for me, thanks guys.

Just out of curiousity, under what circumstances would you then ever find someone in Epstein's circumstances guilty?


Well, if the facts are under dispute, I would consider him guilty if a court resolved the issue of fact against him.




Return to “TLS Class of 2012 Forum”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest