 |
| |
|
|
Zylka
|
|
My parents have decided to drop recently mentioned charges against me, and upon today telling the police (who have been eagerly pressuring them into charging for the past week) - they responded that "The charges have already gone through", and that there is no way out and my court date stands.
I call bullsh*t, personally - of course a minor bit of paperwork like this can be legally addressed before the court date, correct? I wouldn't be so quick to think that, had the officers I was dealing with that night shown competent understanding of the law by answering my questions, rather than saying "I don't know really, now stop bugging me with questions or we'll find something big to charge you on"
Please tell me they're lying... and if so, what do I do to grab these corrupt quota filling morons by the balls?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
I'm not the one who assaulted an officer, that was buddy who got away because he had a high priced lawyer. Funny that one might see this kind of thing as the making of severe distaste for the state. Oh well, I'm harmless for now
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
I get a "final say" type thing after being convicted, correct? Is there a time limit to my ranting?
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
Well I'd let the ruling come before, obviously
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
No insulting or red in the face banter; I just want to voice my discontent in a rather well spoken, yet lengthy period of mock debate. I imagine it would piss them off just as well, but if I can keep them in that room and feeling guilt/worry beneath desperate rage for 54 hours or so, I'll do so.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Cruddy
|
|
Well Zylka, although it has no bearing on your personal case, I can see one good side to the Canadian way of doing things.
Here in the UK a lot of anti-social small crimes get dropped, because the defendants (or their thug accomplices) go round to the witnesses and get heavy with them.
That's no point in doing that with the Canadian system - so although it's failed in your case, it may have succeeded in a lot of other cases.
I really, really wouldn't bother saying anything in court other than what is ncessary. It will only have a negative impact. It might make you feel better for 3 seconds - and you'll probably regret it for the rest of your life.
Your call though.
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
No - I've cooled down, and am content having the case thrown out for the officers not playing by the rules
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
AGAIN... the case is likely going to be thrown out, and if not - that is exactly what I'll "play". It's not like I'm that bad overall anyway, I generally stick to the law and keep my illegalities small and personal
|
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
Or my admission of guilt to the officers through my statement? Keep wondering, moron
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
|
|
Zylka
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Tingkai
Another poor little Zylka thread.
Before he was blaming his parents, now its the evil cops. 
Not only that, he plans on doing a rant in court about how he's just being persecuted by these cops who don't play by the rules. 
That'll be good. I was a court reporter for over a year and people who go on a rant are always good for a laugh. They usually end up incriminating themselves without realising it. And they're always good for demonstrating the myth of the criminal mastermind.
|
The case is being dropped. Add another to the list who seem to go by this line I repeat being invisible
quote:
So far Zylka has told us:
1) He took his parent's van without permission (read stole it), when he knew he's not insured to drive it (meaning his parents specifically told him not to drive it).
2) He took the van so he could do a drug deal.
|
Yep. Boo hoo, eating babies next - right?
quote:
3) He used a screwdriver to start the van because the ignition had been jimmied when it was previously stolen.
|
OH NO! The law abider would have crossed the f*cking wires? What's your point on this one???
quote:
4) His drug deal gets interrupted by campus security.
5) The buyer takes off with Zylka in the car, but instead of running away, Zylka returns to the van with illegal drugs in his pocket. A classic smart move.
|
Legal drugs. Read much?
quote:
6) Campus security has no proof that Zylka stole the van or that he was the driver, but Zylka actually gets in the van and tries to start it with a screwdriver while they're watching. (That's the funniest bit of all).
7) He then tries to run away, just as the cops arrive to nab him.
|
I don't give a f*ck what they see me doing as long as it's legal and a possible promotion of my getting away safely. You wouldn't last a minute in the real world, cupcake.
Then I try to "run away" - which was legal but in the end avoided upon my own decision? Again - do you know how to read properly, or is that a crime against the state in China too?
quote:
I can just see him trying to explain this one in court.
He'll get lots of sympathy from the judge when he starts ranting about how the cops.
I'll give you five to one that if Zylka goes on a rant, he'll end up to confessing that he was doing a drug deal.
|
THE CASE IS BEING THROWN OUT, REMEMBER? :loll0LOL! :LOL!
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:28.
Apolyton Time is 00:28. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
13-06-2003 08:55
Running your mouth may make you feel good momentarily, but pissing off judges is a no-win situation. I don't know if they can issue summary contempt judgments there, but in traffic court here in the US, I've seen idiots run their mouths off and earn themselves jail time for not shutting up when told, or just being particularly insulting.
|