Very interesting. My question is what jurisdiction does the US have over non-citizens/residents? I'm thinking to Kim Dotcom (rather than Noriega) - his extradition to the States while a citizen of NZ was decided by our courts, and they might have gainsaid it because the US has no jurisdiction here.
Fascinting comparative analysis. The observation that the Maduro indictment reads as much like a political document as a legal one is spot-on, especially that quote about "cocaine-fueled corruption." The shift from NZ's depositions to written statements cutting six weeks off the process makes sense from efficiency standpoint, but I wonder if something's lost in skipping oral testimony before committtal.
I was hoping it might lead to a conclusion supporting a "peoples' panel", because I (and others) are frustrated by our woke Judges. Almost every day, there are more unbelievable decisions, like the offender getting a 60% discount despite his extremely aggressive/outrageous offence....
Should I rely on Google's AI for the explanation, or is this a typo?
"However, the grand jury did sometimes save an innocent person from the ordeal of a trial, though it almost invariably acted on the suggestion of the Judger a Ma"
Very interesting. My question is what jurisdiction does the US have over non-citizens/residents? I'm thinking to Kim Dotcom (rather than Noriega) - his extradition to the States while a citizen of NZ was decided by our courts, and they might have gainsaid it because the US has no jurisdiction here.
Dotcom is alleged to have breached US law and extradition was sought. Maduro wasn’t extradited.
Very interesting.
Fascinting comparative analysis. The observation that the Maduro indictment reads as much like a political document as a legal one is spot-on, especially that quote about "cocaine-fueled corruption." The shift from NZ's depositions to written statements cutting six weeks off the process makes sense from efficiency standpoint, but I wonder if something's lost in skipping oral testimony before committtal.
Yes, very interesting thank you.
I was hoping it might lead to a conclusion supporting a "peoples' panel", because I (and others) are frustrated by our woke Judges. Almost every day, there are more unbelievable decisions, like the offender getting a 60% discount despite his extremely aggressive/outrageous offence....
Should I rely on Google's AI for the explanation, or is this a typo?
"However, the grand jury did sometimes save an innocent person from the ordeal of a trial, though it almost invariably acted on the suggestion of the Judger a Ma"
Prosecutor - bad proofing - now corrected
Perhaps Maduro will face "trumped up" charges?