That’s two or more people conspiring to violate rights. People still routinely have their Constitutional rights violated and it’s not criminal. I’m literally litigating a § 1983 federal lawsuit right now. It’s rarely criminal. Just stop spreading misinformation.
a 1983 is a deprivation of rights and amounts to a finding of legal implication. it’s a far more serious section compared to 241 because it implies both intent and execution.
241 implies conspiracy to commit to a violation of rights which would fit the current argument better than 1983 since there’s a lack of motive and evidence against the DOJ for violating his sixth. it could be used as discovery to identify evidence between communications to lead to 1983.
a crime is a crime, regardless of who/what committed it. the government is no exception, however it’s not like you can slap cuffs on the entire DOJ. those individuals involved would need to be charged for anything to stick. no different than if an employer killed an employee through neglect. those responsible would be charged, but the company would get off mostly unscathed.
It is difficult to prove willful violation of rights (required for a criminal case) which is why it doesn’t happen often, even while people’s rights are violated routinely.
Both in this particular case, I’m doing it pro se.
I can’t legally represent anyone, so I represent myself when the need arises and provide assistance to others who cannot afford help, usually prisoners. I’m focusing on 8th amendment violations such as excessive force claims and poor prison conditions. It’s a useful form of activism, even if a suit is not ultimately successful. It costs them either way.
Pretty sure they didn’t commit a crime. And it’s not uncommon for these things to happen in high profile cases. A “fair trial” is very difficult.
it’s literally a violation of his sixth amendment rights as an American citizen.
it’s a crime to violate the rights given to citizens through the constitution.
just to say again.
a crime was committed.
where is the difficulty exemption?
You’re under the mistaken belief that it’s criminal to violate Constitutional rights.
18 U.S. Code § 241 - Conspiracy against rights
don’t be a dumbass and educate yourself.
That’s two or more people conspiring to violate rights. People still routinely have their Constitutional rights violated and it’s not criminal. I’m literally litigating a § 1983 federal lawsuit right now. It’s rarely criminal. Just stop spreading misinformation.
a 1983 is a deprivation of rights and amounts to a finding of legal implication. it’s a far more serious section compared to 241 because it implies both intent and execution.
241 implies conspiracy to commit to a violation of rights which would fit the current argument better than 1983 since there’s a lack of motive and evidence against the DOJ for violating his sixth. it could be used as discovery to identify evidence between communications to lead to 1983.
a crime is a crime, regardless of who/what committed it. the government is no exception, however it’s not like you can slap cuffs on the entire DOJ. those individuals involved would need to be charged for anything to stick. no different than if an employer killed an employee through neglect. those responsible would be charged, but the company would get off mostly unscathed.
It is difficult to prove willful violation of rights (required for a criminal case) which is why it doesn’t happen often, even while people’s rights are violated routinely.
so you said you’re working a case right now. are you a lawyer or the client?
Both in this particular case, I’m doing it pro se. I can’t legally represent anyone, so I represent myself when the need arises and provide assistance to others who cannot afford help, usually prisoners. I’m focusing on 8th amendment violations such as excessive force claims and poor prison conditions. It’s a useful form of activism, even if a suit is not ultimately successful. It costs them either way.