whatever happened to dressing appropriately for court

[centex]

22 hours ago, Allkindabroke said:

Just picking up where I left off.

 

I don't believe the word murder appears in my post so I have no idea to what you're responding. I did mention a dead son.  There is plenty of evidence that the victim is very much dead and was also someone's son.      

Murder IS relevant to the article to which the photo is attached that formed the basis for this thread.  And it is ALSO relevant to the actions of the now-deceased referenced by someone else in this thread and that led to the actions resulting in the misguided prosecution. 

 

AND...the bottom line is that the family did NOT dress appropriately and SHOULD have been cautioned by the Court to never appear in their courtroom dressed like that again (and yes, judges DO have that authority and DO issue such directives in Harris County). 

[Allkindabroke]

2 hours ago, centex said:

Murder IS relevant to the article to which the photo is attached that formed the basis for this thread.  And it is ALSO relevant to the actions of the now-deceased referenced by someone else in this thread and that led to the actions resulting in the misguided prosecution. 

 

AND...the bottom line is that the family did NOT dress appropriately and SHOULD have been cautioned by the Court to never appear in their courtroom dressed like that again (and yes, judges DO have that authority and DO issue such directives in Harris County). 

 

The title of this thread and the majority of posts do not focus on murder nor have my responses.  The focus has been on the fashion choices of people who lost a relative and how that plays out in the court of public opinion.   I contend that the grieving family who are not in fact on trial for anything including the alleged faux pas of wearing denim to court should garner sympathy on the basis of the whole GRIEVING A DEAD SON THING.   There is no reason this should be controversial besides issues with the grieving family or the messenger delivering the stance.

 

As for your second point, I do not find it at all surprising that the judge did not use his or her authority to caution a grieving family sitting in a room with the person responsible for the death of their loved one about their attire.     

[centex]

1 hour ago, Allkindabroke said:

 

The title of this thread and the majority of posts do not focus on murder nor have my responses.  The focus has been on the fashion choices of people who lost a relative and how that plays out in the court of public opinion.   I contend that the grieving family who are not in fact on trial for anything including the alleged faux pas of wearing denim to court should garner sympathy on the basis of the whole GRIEVING A DEAD SON THING.   There is no reason this should be controversial besides issues with the grieving family or the messenger delivering the stance.

 

As for your second point, I do not find it at all surprising that the judge did not use his or her authority to caution a grieving family sitting in a room with the person responsible for the death of their loved one about their attire.     

Did you ever read the article from which the topic was drawn?  It was linked right there in the post...

 

And as to the judge...you clearly don't know some of our judges here.  Courtroom decorum is courtroom decorum.  Period.  You don't show up dressed like trash-can rejects, especially when the jeans were clearly of a variety they paid for to look that trashy.  You want respect from a jury, then you show up in a manner that conveys a modicum of respect for the process.  The civil attorney ambulance chaser they hired should ALSO have told them that...

[Konrad2012]

2 hours ago, Allkindabroke said:

 

The title of this thread and the majority of posts do not focus on murder nor have my responses.  The focus has been on the fashion choices of people who lost a relative and how that plays out in the court of public opinion.   I contend that the grieving family who are not in fact on trial for anything including the alleged faux pas of wearing denim to court should garner sympathy on the basis of the whole GRIEVING A DEAD SON THING.   There is no reason this should be controversial besides issues with the grieving family or the messenger delivering the stance.

 

As for your second point, I do not find it at all surprising that the judge did not use his or her authority to caution a grieving family sitting in a room with the person responsible for the death of their loved one about their attire.     

The family raised the piece of trash that beat and choked his girlfriend a month prior, threatened to shoot a diner earlier in his last minutes on earth, exposed himself to minors and then committed an assault that led to his death.

 

The mother and father should actually be on trial for his death. 

[Allkindabroke]

31 minutes ago, centex said:

Did you ever read the article from which the topic was drawn?  It was linked right there in the post...

 

And as to the judge...you clearly don't know some of our judges here.  Courtroom decorum is courtroom decorum.  Period.  You don't show up dressed like trash-can rejects, especially when the jeans were clearly of a variety they paid for to look that trashy.  You want respect from a jury, then you show up in a manner that conveys a modicum of respect for the process.  The civil attorney ambulance chaser they hired should ALSO have told them that...

Well, I had to click the link "right there in the post" to see what the grieving family was wearing......       

 

Courtroom decorum is within the power of the judge to dictate.  Obviously, he did or she did not have a problem with the grieving family wearing denim or else it would have been a focal point in the posted article. 

[Allkindabroke]

8 minutes ago, Konrad2012 said:

The family raised the piece of trash that beat and choked his girlfriend a month prior, threatened to shoot a diner earlier in his last minutes on earth, exposed himself to minors and then committed an assault that led to his death.

 

The mother and father should actually be on trial for his death. 

I trust your expertise on the topic of trash.

[Konrad2012]

2 hours ago, Allkindabroke said:

I trust your expertise on the topic of trash.

Some people don't deserve the benefit of the doubt.  Although I preferred to deal with them with an M16A4 as opposed to a rear naked choke. 

 

Others like you are blind to the realities of the the US and the World.  Viewing predators as victims.