She was never guilty. Accusing her and dragging her through the courts — further victimization — is a method of intimidation to other protesters.
It’s the same tactic being used against Dotard’s political opponents as he “indicts” them.
this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2025
436 points (99.8% liked)
politics
26105 readers
3216 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
This is exactly it. It costs a lot of money to hire attorneys and time, effort, and aggravation to fight charges. As a consequence, this weaponization of the justice system serves to chill the exercise of constitutional rights.
Yep. Many will feel compelled to take a plea because they don't have the money to hire an attorney, and court-appointed attorneys are so over-loaded with cases they encourage the plea-route too.
It's funny how they'll prosecute people who didn't do it, because I'll vote not guilty even if they did do it.
Prosecutors argued that though there was no contact, a jerk movement that Reid made with her knee near Bates’ groin during that struggle constitutes simple assault
On the one hand, many folks don’t realize Assault is the threat; Battery is the execution of the threat.
But over here in reality, this is like saying, “I feel threatened by women existing and that is assault”.
Hey man she had a phone. That's assault with a deadly weapon.
Many folks don't realize because the common usage doesn't work that way, and to muddy the waters further the laws are written in many jurisdictions such that "assault" is used as a legal term of art which requires some manner of physical contact between the perpetrator and victim. DC specifically treats assault and threats of bodily harm separately, (source) but the penalties are the same and in fact refer to the same paragraph anyhow, so the net difference in this case is kind of moot.
In some jurisdictions there is no such thing as "battery," and assault is the attack while threatening is the threat. This may or may not have something to do with dumbing down the wording at some point for the layman. I'm not a lawyer despite the occasional insinuation to the contrary, so I'm not qualified to speak on that possibility.
I wonder if there was near this level of concern for Tina Peters - seems she was trying to kick the officer when she was being arrested.
Meanwhile, dumpty trumpty was trying to lean on Colorado to have that POS released. And she tried to steal a fucking election.
Ever notice how in court that pigs are always described as giant cowards? They're constantly terrified of how a woman flails as she's thrown to the ground or get PTSD when protesters shine bright flashlights at them.
I'm convinced that final exams at the police academy is a mock courtroom where the recruit has to testify "your honor, I was scared for my life". Bonus points if you cry.
Yup. Whenever you see a cop yell "Stop Resisting!" on a body camera video at someone who is clearly NOT resisting, it's because they are putting on a show for the camera. And there are jurors dumb enough to fall for it.
- Soap Box
- Ballot Box
- Jury Box <-- We Are Here
- Ammo Box
There a reason why the Constitution explicitly spells out the right to a trial by a jury of the accused's peers, both in the document itself and the sixth amendment. It acts as an effective check on the government, because it helps to ensure the government can't just jail people because it wants to.
Just wait until they start moving the cases to Alabama because they can't get a fair trial in DC.
You mean like how they ship people arrested in Vermont, to Louisiana for immigration court, even though there is one in Vermont?
Cripes you can smell the whiskey coming off that photo.
That ain't right.
Way to go Jeanine Pirro, working to prove herself for the Nazis, and being a Nazi, before becoming the next Nazi victim.
How fucking stupid are these idiots?
Kick him ~~harder~~ for real next time. If I'm on the jury it'll still be a not guilty verdict.
There is literally nothing they can do to ICE for which I will find them guilty.
They used to say "you can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich" but these sleazeballs can't even do that. It's not just this case or this jurisdiction, too.
I think the phrase is "any good prosecutor can get a grand jury to indict a ham sandwich."
That's probably still as true as it ever was. And leaves open the possibility that Pirro is just a bombastic idiot; not a good prosecutor.
Please put me on any jury where Trump regime goons assault someone and then charges them with assault. Please.
Bodycams. They make a huge difference. It's keeping the bastards honest and showing what people said, how they said it, what they were waving about, and when.
The problem with ICE is that it exists.