Justices Rule Action Isn't Necessary to Prove Conspiracy

NY Times ^ | January 12, 2005 | LINDA GREENHOUSE

[neverdem]

This seems to me like more flouting of precedent for the wars on terror and drugs, anything for the power of the state. More of the line that if you didn't do anything wrong, then you don't have anything to worry about, except perjured testimony.

[kcvl]

Good. Now can we move on and convict the Clintons and their cronies?

[neverdem]

No problem as long as prior rules of evidence are observed. I believe he was called Slick Willie. I also believe this decision will prop up uncorroborated accusations for politically ambitious prosecutors who want or need convictions.

[EGPWS]

Now can we move on and convict the Clintons and their cronies?

Me thinks Vince Foster toted the same attitude.

Live long and prosper kcvl.

[kcvl]

LOL!

[An.American.Expatriate]

Strangely, this is actually a "good" decision.

O'Conner sites the fact that the legislature, if it had been so inclined, could have included the wording necessary to make an overt act a requirement of a conspiracy charge in this type of case. They failed to do this.

In other words, the USSC did NOT legislate from the bench in this case (must have been hard for them to avoid!).

IMHO - Congress should rectify this asap.

[Jim Robinson]

I was thinking the same thing.

[samtheman]

So let me get this straight. No money was laundered. No steps were taken to actually launder money. But government telepaths detected a money-laundering-intention in the minds of the accused, and that was enough to convict them for conspiracy.

Was there a minority report?

[MindyW]

From the article above: The unanimous decision resolved, in the government's favor...

[PGalt]

Interesting. Thanks for the post. VRWC bump!

[sergeantdave]

This, I assume, is another thought crime. Does it also apply to judges and politicians?

[GeronL]

wait a sec, what if it were online role-playing, would it still be a conspiracy?? Whats the sentence for Conspiracy to Kill a Role-Playing Character??

[Lazamataz]

So let me get this straight. No money was laundered. No steps were taken to actually launder money. But government telepaths detected a money-laundering-intention in the minds of the accused, and that was enough to convict them for conspiracy.

Never think.

The government will throw you away for that.

America continues apace in it's devolution.

[Lazamataz]

wait a sec, what if it were online role-playing, would it still be a conspiracy??

Yes.

Whats the sentence for Conspiracy to Kill a Role-Playing Character??

Usually, death.

[GeronL]

Seems a bit harsh, child-molesters, rapists, jay walkers I can see being put to death, but conspiracy?? Three guys in a garage who are drunk make jokes about killing someone and they could be lifers? =o)

Anyway, maybe for D&D players I can let it (getting the death penalty) slide... I might be upset if they allow convictions for people who had zero itent to actually harm a person.

Hey, I haven't seen you post lately, sticking to the daytime these days?

[GeronL]

itent=intent

[Lazamataz]

Seems a bit harsh, child-molesters, rapists, jay walkers I can see being put to death, but conspiracy?? Three guys in a garage who are drunk make jokes about killing someone and they could be lifers? =o) ... I might be upset if they allow convictions for people who had zero itent to actually harm a person.

This is the New America. No crime need be committed in order for a conviction, and VERY severe punishment.

[GeronL]

Gives new meaning to the phrase: Don't even think about it.

[MississippiMan]

Exactly. It's good that the court didn't legislate, but the legislature needs to fix it STAT because this nonsense could be a hideous tool in the hands of prosecutors who are chapped over a pesky lack of evidence.

MM

[samtheman]

Unanimous = Correct ???