“get out of my country.”

[clubgop]

I'd prefer to hear from one of our many lawyer posters, rather than the peanut gallery.

Not entrapment. Not the same ballpark, not the same league, not even the same sport.

Entrapment involves the state using some scheme to convince a defendant to commit a crime that he would have not otherwise been interested in committing. It's an absolute defense to prosecution, and it's not "idiotic."

Heard of the Google? Check it out, looks like STA has it dialed in.

There, now that you have been called an idiot by a lawyer, you feel any better?
You are running out of punch bowls to shit in and your wife is running out of cheeks to get dick slapped.
The "man of science" is wrong about everything. Mr. a court summons= entrapment but a gun registry isn't a stupid policy because I don't even know the basics of the 5th Amendment and Haynes v. US. How can I not straw man a man whose thoughts are made of straw?

[SuburbanFarmer]

I'd prefer to hear from one of our many lawyer posters, rather than the peanut gallery.

Not entrapment. Not the same ballpark, not the same league, not even the same sport.

Entrapment involves the state using some scheme to convince a defendant to commit a crime that he would have not otherwise been interested in committing. It's an absolute defense to prosecution, and it's not "idiotic."

Heard of the Google? Check it out, looks like STA has it dialed in.

There, now that you have been called an idiot by a lawyer, you feel any better?
You are running out of punch bowls to shit in and your wife is running out of cheeks to get dick slapped.
The "man of science" is wrong about everything. Mr. a court summons= entrapment but a gun registry isn't a stupid policy because I don't even know the basics of the 5th Amendment and Haynes v. US. How can I not straw man a man whose thoughts are made of straw?

I recall just the other day, when StA was wondering aloud why I am so "insulting", and StCapps was informing us that the Righties here aren't 'mean' at all... it's all in our heads....



Anyway, the fact that your feeble mind recognized the word "idiotic" in a 30-word "wall of text" is a pretty grand accomplishment for you. I applaud your efforts, despite completely missing the context of even that simple token of recognition.
I really have no idea what you think you saw in there that made me look so silly, but I know you need something to do on those long, lonely ME evenings, after jizzing in your foxhole buddies, and a longing kiss of that gun barrel. Perhaps tomorrow will bring you the sweet, sweet oblivion that you crave, and end that burning self-hatred in your heart. How's the view now, kid?

[apeman]

challenge him to a duel

[clubgop]

I'd prefer to hear from one of our many lawyer posters, rather than the peanut gallery.

Not entrapment. Not the same ballpark, not the same league, not even the same sport.

Entrapment involves the state using some scheme to convince a defendant to commit a crime that he would have not otherwise been interested in committing. It's an absolute defense to prosecution, and it's not "idiotic."

Heard of the Google? Check it out, looks like STA has it dialed in.

There, now that you have been called an idiot by a lawyer, you feel any better?
You are running out of punch bowls to shit in and your wife is running out of cheeks to get dick slapped.
The "man of science" is wrong about everything. Mr. a court summons= entrapment but a gun registry isn't a stupid policy because I don't even know the basics of the 5th Amendment and Haynes v. US. How can I not straw man a man whose thoughts are made of straw?

I recall just the other day, when StA was wondering aloud why I am so "insulting", and StCapps was informing us that the Righties here aren't 'mean' at all... it's all in our heads....



Anyway, the fact that your feeble mind recognized the word "idiotic" in a 30-word "wall of text" is a pretty grand accomplishment for you. I applaud your efforts, despite completely missing the context of even that simple token of recognition.
I really have no idea what you think you saw in there that made me look so silly, but I know you need something to do on those long, lonely ME evenings, after jizzing in your foxhole buddies, and a longing kiss of that gun barrel. Perhaps tomorrow will bring you the sweet, sweet oblivion that you crave, and end that burning self-hatred in your heart. How's the view now, kid?

What view? The view from Maine? Maine? You think I live in Maine, you think entrapment is a court summons, you think DoE is some sort of secular Hai'a. You make things up, all I have to do is just read back to you what you wrote. Keep it up, just keep being wrong. Dirty dick can't even be a broken clock at least they are right twice a day.

[SuburbanFarmer]

You are achieving unheard of levels of dipwaddery. God speed, young man.

[clubgop]

You are achieving unheard of levels of dipwaddery. God speed, young man.

Your witty retorts are like at TC level at least he has Asperger's as an excuse, what's yours? Having to listen to you two has to be some sort of crime. Wait, it's double jeopardy. At least thats what the lawyers at Dirty Dick and Trebuchet Toddler Tosser told me.

[de officiis]

It's been awhile, but I believe there are restrictions in civil proceedings with regard to the service of process on someone found within the jurisdiction of the tribunal solely because they were summoned into the jurisdiction to give testimony in a separate legal proceeding. As one might imagine, a basic due process consideration underlies the rule. Of course, this has nothing to do with criminal procedure or entrapment.

[SuburbanFarmer]

It's been awhile, but I believe there are restrictions in civil proceedings with regard to the service of process on someone found within the jurisdiction of the tribunal solely because they were summoned into the jurisdiction to give testimony in a separate legal proceeding. As one might imagine, a basic due process consideration underlies the rule. Of course, this has nothing to do with criminal procedure or entrapment.

So that would apply to someone that immigrated illegally, committed some infraction, then left the area, but returned to attend s summons, and was arrested correct?

[de officiis]

It's been awhile, but I believe there are restrictions in civil proceedings with regard to the service of process on someone found within the jurisdiction of the tribunal solely because they were summoned into the jurisdiction to give testimony in a separate legal proceeding. As one might imagine, a basic due process consideration underlies the rule. Of course, this has nothing to do with criminal procedure or entrapment.

So that would apply to someone that immigrated illegally, committed some infraction, then left the area, but returned to attend s summons, and was arrested correct?

Like I said, "this has nothing to do with criminal procedure."

[SuburbanFarmer]

It's been awhile, but I believe there are restrictions in civil proceedings with regard to the service of process on someone found within the jurisdiction of the tribunal solely because they were summoned into the jurisdiction to give testimony in a separate legal proceeding. As one might imagine, a basic due process consideration underlies the rule. Of course, this has nothing to do with criminal procedure or entrapment.

So that would apply to someone that immigrated illegally, committed some infraction, then left the area, but returned to attend s summons, and was arrested correct?

Like I said, "this has nothing to do with criminal procedure."

so then, by 'civil proceedings', you mean lawsuits?