Am lawyer.

We have basically three murders:

An intentional killing with Malice aforethought or premeditation as you put it.

An intentional killing in the Heat of passion lacking the premeditation.

An unintentional killing, manslaughter.

In Tennessee the middle on is called intentional manslaughter and that’s the one at play.

There are certainly cases where the jury has concluded at some point between bullet one and bukket six you formed the premeditation required.

But that’s fundamentally a flawed argument. It’s more expensive becuase death penalty cases have more rights. Specifically in the US what is called “actual innocence” is not grounds for an appeal to a life sentence but is for a death penalty.

Ideally we would extend that everyone, not save a few bucks and justify continued incarceration of innocent people by noting “hey it’s not a death sentence.”

Imagine the scenario of an innocent person who can’t appeal becuase the trail was fair but would have been freed if they had been sentenced to death, but becuase of the judge or jury’s mercy, they are imprisoned for life.

That has happened here.

Not think a great argument for abolishing the death penalty since it fundamentally is just saying “it is way too expensive to let any prisoners appeal based on being innocent. We could save so much money if didn’t let anyone do that.”

I told her we were going to get married, and all she could talk about was frogs.
She said there’s these hills where it’s hot and rains all the time, and in the rainforests there are these very tall trees and right in the top branches of the trees there are these like great big flowers called . . . bromeliads, I think, and water gets into the flowers and makes little pools and there’s a type of frog that lays eggs in the pools and tadpoles hatch and grow into new frogs and these little frogs live their whole lives in the flowers right at the top of the trees and don’t even know about the ground, and once you know the world is full of things like that, your life is never the same.

In 2016 they had a coordinated and clear effort to undermine the election and get Hilary in the primary over Bernie. Trump won.

In 2024 they all agreed to not challenge Biden despite serious concerns the ones in the know must have had.

Thats twice now they rolled out the red carpet for trump and in both cases it was to make damn sure their preferred candidate won the primary voters be damned.

It really should be brought up each election because it seems like they really want to keep doing it.

I only heard about it when she put out a full nudity and penetration reinacment video. The reactions to that were certainly interesting.

“A murder should only have one victim. When Ratchett kills Daisy Armstrong, a dozen lives are broken, deformed, ended, THEY DEMAND JUSTICE! Of all these wounded souls, we must finally answer — who among them is a killer? Who takes up the knife? The answer is… no single one of you could have done it. Nor any pair. It could have only be done… by all of you."*

That’s fundamentally missing the problem- sales of wine are down 1/5. They have a supply chain that isn’t moving. If you offer cheaper wine you likely won’t move enough more to make up the shortfall and the costs of production/storage ect.

You’ve heard of jumbo olives though right?

deleted by creator

Nah cuz ballots are cast secretly. So there’s no way to know who wrote it. Some 100% safe and fine. No worries friend. Just relax. Everything is fine. Shh.

I distinctly remember hearing:

There were rooftop cheers from a Muslim community in New Jersey.

There was cheering in Gaza.

That rooftop thing was a continual news cycle item for weeks. I recall it being debunked but none of the details.

I remember when he stepped on a lego and it hurt so bad he jumped up and down and hopped on one foot right into an intimate massage parlor and his credit card fell out of his pocket and he paid to exploit sex traffic victims.

Good times. What a nanny set of circumstances.

I’m kind of with you in that pink’s positions off but I can’t quite put my finger in why it’s off brand. It definitely feels off brand but I honestly can’t articulate it.

I’m worried it would be used by the people in power to surprese discourse.

“Uh guys, have you noticed that everyone in power has connections to Epstein?”

knock knock oy mate you got a loisense for those opinions?”

I mean, a slave is a sapient being and a bee is an insect and may not even be sentient.

I guess arguing “the bugs just love working” and “the blacks just love working” strikes me as fundamentally different.

I don’t think there is a dietary restriction that doesn’t draw a complete arbitrary line at some point.

Fish isn’t meat is just the pope compromising with fishermen. Not eating an oyster but eating corn is a fairly arbitrary line as well.

Far, far away.

If I understand you correctly you want the door to unlock when you’re at home and approach the door?

That doesn’t strike me as a good thing.

I didn’t jerk off a crab.