reevesr1 Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 Too classic! http://www.biggeekdaddy.com/humorpages/Mis...wnmowerDUI.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bigbadbrent Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 cops really don't like it when you want to pee Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dryfly Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 Substitute a SkiDoo or quad .. and could be in the Great White North. As a person of age who is bladder challenged, I think the cop was out of line cuffing the poor bugger when he had to pee. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Inconnu Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 That was.....yeesh I don't know! I think I would have let him finish THEN maced him, less yucky that way perhaps! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted December 10, 2007 Author Share Posted December 10, 2007 I'm still laughing....I can't get "I know my rights" and "my wife is gonna kick yer ass" out of my head. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rocknbugs Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 LMAO, I would have maced him and then smacked him. I believe that the worst time to pull your dick out in public and take a piss is when a cop has pulled you over and is asking you what you are doing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
snakeman Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 "Is it illegal to cut grass!?" Hahahaha Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SanJuanWorm Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 How about getting behind a huge cement truck being that drunk on the streets of Calgary. I'd say our guy is 5,000,000 times more stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weedy1 Posted December 10, 2007 Share Posted December 10, 2007 How about getting behind a huge cement truck being that drunk on the streets of Calgary. I'd say our guy is 5,000,000 times more stupid. I'm surprised this topic hasn't come up on here yet. That guy (if in fact guilty) and his COMPANY should have the book thrown at them. A frickin cement truck? Can't get much more stupid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladystrange Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 i feel sorry for the family. i cant believe the truck driver refused to blow. it's too bad 5 other people (plus family) had to pay for 1 guys stupidity. at least he (if found guilty) will probably lose his license for many years. if he doesnt go to jail, he wont have much of a life Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 My wife pulled up on that accident coming back from the movies with my daughter. I can't even begin to imagine what those families must be going through. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonefisher Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 That was such a tragedy...... I sure hope he doesn't get some BS reduced charge..... vehicular manslaughter 5 counts....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weedy1 Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 * 5 counts of second degree murder, enough is enough. Time to start handing out real sentences for real crimes. * If this guy was an employee of a business - 2 years in the slammer for the business owner for failing to provide for the safety of an employee. $50 says this guy was an alcoholic and the owner was aware of it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonefisher Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I just said 5 counts veh man because I am sure they won't even try to stick him with 5 counts of sec degree murder....... they should but I bet they don't........ But yeah they should hit both the guy and the company as hard as legally possible..... specially if he was a known alcoholic.,... I have a feeling I know what he will get convicted of though not sure the actual name but basically impaired/reckless driving causing death/ bodily harm..... But if I remember back I think such a charge would allow the judge a pretty wide window of sentencing....... PS on a fairly unrelated note I think its a joke that at this point in time Pickton can apply for parole in 10 years....... (Unless i misread the paper this morning)((anyways thats a whole nother thread)) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladystrange Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 has pickton been sentanced already? he was only found guilty end of the week? sentancing shouldnt be for another couple of months. i have to go read some online stuff... brb Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladystrange Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 ah, ok. on a totally different topic. LF. since pickton was found guilty of 6 counts of 2nd degree murder the automatic sentence is life, but can apply for parole in 10 years. that doesnt mean he will be allowed out. he may still be found to be a dangerous offender and may sentance to an indetermanent amount of time. but from what i have read, the application has to be made prior to sentancing. now at sentancing and depending on how this works... if the person has been convicted of a previous murder then the second murder and so on, shall not have parol for 25 years if guilty of 2nd degree murder. but i'm not sure how it works, if the previous murder has to be part of a different trial or not. of course olsen has been applying every time he can and has been denied. pickton still has to go through the sentancing process and can be given either consecutive life sentances or concurrant. Canada has a habit of doing concurrent. i prefer the US system, like dalmer... something like 23 consecutive life sentances which he would have spent something like 381 in jail. lol. why canada doesnt do that is beyond me. interesting that he wasnt found guilty on first degree - from Criminal code (5) Irrespective of whether a murder is planned and deliberate on the part of any person, murder is first degree murder in respect of a person when the death is caused by that person while committing or attempting to commit an offence under one of the following sections: (a) section 76 (hijacking an aircraft); ( section 271 (sexual assault); © section 272 (sexual assault with a weapon, threats to a third party or causing bodily harm); (d) section 273 (aggravated sexual assault); (e) section 279 (kidnapping and forcible confinement); or (f) section 279.1 (hostage taking). Punishment for murder 235. (1) Every one who commits first degree murder or second degree murder is guilty of an indictable offence and shall be sentenced to imprisonment for life. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonefisher Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 "Their horror was replaced by weeping relief when Pickton was convicted on the lesser charge. It still carries a life sentence, although with a minimum of 10 years before he can apply for parole rather than the automatic 25 years that comes with a first-degree murder conviction." Thats the passage that I was refering to. I do understand though thats just when he can start applying not that he will get it..... none the less I see no need for a parole board to ever be set up for this prick. I also read another passage that seemed to indicate that that was only a guideline and the sentencing may make it more years before he can apply. I think they should save a whole lot of taxpayer money and feed him to his own pigs and bury the bones in the basement of the prison.....but of course after they try him for the next 20 women...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
reevesr1 Posted December 11, 2007 Author Share Posted December 11, 2007 Can someone explain to me how this could be 2nd degree murder. Isn't the only difference between 1st and 2nd premeditated? I guess how I could see how the first murder could be not premeditated, but the second, third, fourth, etc. Is the law different here? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonefisher Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I could not explain how it could be 2nd instead of 1st...... Seems to me there is no way he shoulda gotten off the 1st degree murder charge........ maybe you can kill 1 person in a spur of the moment non premeditated way but not 6, not 26, not 50...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladystrange Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 the question is intent and what was his mind set. assuming each girl went to his place to offer services at separate times. the crown would have to prove that he had the intention to kill each one prior to getting them back to his house. ie: while picking her up at the corner and taking her back, perhaps his intent was just to have sex, he wanted to do something she didnt and in the heat of the moment, he killed her. that would be 2nd degree... just because he killed one we cant infer that he planned to kill the next one. also since he had not been convicted yet of the first murder, how can you use the first murder to prove the 2nd murder Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weedy1 Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think they could specifically pin the murders on Pickton, only that he was there and had something to do with. Not to be graphic, but the guy ran a pig farm with a slaughter house if you get my drift. I would imagine the evidence was quite overwhelming for the jury. Thus probably the reason for 2nd. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladystrange Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 he should have been found gulity of 1st degree, not by premediation but under section c or d, but then you would have to prove that there was a sexual assault at the time of death and since many of the women had been long dead and decomposed, it would be very difficult to prove beyond a reasonable doubt. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ladystrange Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think they could specifically pin the murders on Pickton, only that he was there and had something to do with. Not to be graphic, but the guy ran a pig farm with a slaughter house if you get my drift. I would imagine the evidence was quite overwhelming for the jury. Thus probably the reason for 2nd. if that were the case, there would have been enough reasonable doubt to aquit (sp?) unless charged with conspiracy or acessory but then we are missing the shooter on the grassy knoll just because he owned the property and a slaughter house doesnt mean he did it, there would have had to have been enough phsycial evidence to directly link him to the murders. i dont think circumstancial evidence would have convicted him he was found guilty of the 6 murders he was charged with. the only matter was whether it was 1st or 2nd degree, for which the jury could not find enough evidence to convict of 1st degree - either by premeditation (which you would need some one else to say - he told me on this date and time on this tape recorder that he was going to plan to ....) or by involvement of c or d, see above response. pardon me people, i'm having a bad spelling night. i must be tired. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weedy1 Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 LS I wasn't replying to your post #20, we just happened to post at the same time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lonefisher Posted December 11, 2007 Share Posted December 11, 2007 I see the point being made but I think (and yes my opinion means nothing in the eyes of law) that once you kill 1 person in a fashion any murder committed subsequently in the same or similar fashion must in some way be premeditated as otherwise if you did not plan or want to commit another murder you would not do things to put yourself repeatedly in the same position to do so........ I dunno..... I think that the simple logistics of this case means that the case has to be pursued on a basis other then simply forensic evidence...... But the lifestyle of a person who appears likely to of had little close relationship with people 1 would deem as "reliable witness's" means you have to accept the witness's you have and give their testimony reasonable weight...... The little forensic evidence found should be given incredible weight, and circumstantial evidence all has to be considered (the womens belongings found, his movement, history, odd personal behavior ect) I think the lifestyle this animal lived put him under the radar of most upstanding citizens, and gave him one of the best means of destroying forensic evidence (the best being your own personal incinerator). I think the evidence against him is staggering when it is all considered...... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.