Where oh where has common sense gone...

[lil charlie]

Cap,

I agree and disagree with you at the same time. We should protect the honor of our soldiers just as much as they protect us by putting their life on the line. At the same time I don’t see how we can prosecute someone for a lie. He told a group of people that he served and was awarded metals. That means he has no morals or values and should be caned from his job as he has no right to represent “the people†anymore. I do not see this any worse off (as the law should see it) as me telling my boss I got a degree from some Ivy League school when I did not. Is it illegal to pretend to be a police officer, doctor, or lawyer? Not if you are only telling a bunch of people that you are. It becomes illegal once to try to perform said services that it becomes illegal and then it becomes fraud which is different that lies. He should not be prosecuted for that lie unless he tried to perform the services of “said†Marine and since he didn’t have the courage to step on the battle field or on a base in uniform I have to say he should not be prosecuted. Now, as Skydivr said… We should be prosecuting him for fraud based upon the monetary value of the services and goods that we can PROVE he ONLY got from venders/people based upon his claim of phony service.

If we start this slippery slope of some lies are illegal and some are not who gets to say which professions qualify and which don’t? Where will it stop? Just because you and I have strong moral values doesn’t mean everyone does. It is against some people’s religion to back/support the military. Does a judge have the right to say your values matter more than the next guy? I fully agree that our service man and woman deserve the up most respect but not everyone feels that way. We need to make laws that are not discriminatory against anyone, even the jerks who think it’s okay to lie about it. Fire him from office and get him on the fraud. Karma will take care of the rest.

You also made a statement about people used to have more respect and not cross lines that people are doing now. That people do it no on purpose and claim freedoms. I disagree with you again on this one. Not that they aren’t doing it, because they are, but that fact that what you imply is that they can’t claim freedom. That is what makes our country great, we are free and they are within their rights to cross most (not all) of the lines. I say most because I’m not talking about the ones who are breaking laws while doing it. Crossing these lines is what got the civil rights action in place and women’s rights to vote. We must test the waters in order to create and expand. I get that the lines you are talking about are not the same lines as I just mentioned but I was trying to make a point. You are referring to these punk kids who have no respect for their elders and like to push buttons just because they can. It pisses me off too but it’s part of what I fell is the downward spiral of the morals and values of this country. That’s parents not doing a good enough job raising their kids. The constitution should not be punished by making parts of the 1st amendment restricted. Free speech is just that….free.

Bottom line is I think the guy is a bottom of the barrel, yellow bellied, scrupulous liar! But it is his right to lie if he wants, even about something that we fell is a line that should not be crossed. Prosecution for a lie should only come from prudery.

 

[dadofthree]

The law has been very narrowly drawn for one specific claim. Sotomayor understands. She doesn't give a damn about these brave men. We've lost all common sense. The first amendment gets thrown at everything.

 

[mrsBusawhipped]

Fake Soldier Pleads Guilty to Impersonation

If the judges use past cases, then maybe they will use this one. Wrong is wrong.

 

[captain]

He told a group of people that he served and was awarded metals. That means he has no morals or values and should be caned from his job as he has no right to represent “the people” anymore.

Why did he lie? He could have chosen to say I was a mass murderer in Georgia, I slept with goats when I was a kid, he could have said he worked for the IRS... He chose a US Marine of 25 years because of the respect that comes along with it..... He misrepresented himself for a reason, because he wanted something from people.. He knew that people would trust a Marine of 25 years...

 

[05 Busa LE]

Thanks for the response, I knew you were an attorney, hence the reason for the "Is that Correct" comment..

What is unfortunate to me is that it seems that we have become backwards in our thinking. Instead of a judge listening to the merit of a case and basing his decision on "The Laws" we see attorneys using precedent of other cases that have no comparison to justify what their clients have done... So instead of looking at each case by itself as to right or wrong we see cases where people judges and attorneys are pointing to another case to say "See it's okay for what I did because of this other case"... More along the lines of what can I get away with based off somones elses situation as opposed to each case being valued by itself....

I try not to speak about what I do, but you posed a really insightful question, and one that lawyers often face.

You're right in your analysis. If the language of the statute is clear on its face, then there is really no reason to look any further ... that is, unless it implicates other laws. In this case, it implicates the First Amendment. That's one of the reasons why this case has gone to the Supreme Court.

Many times, the legislature isn't very clear when they write laws, or they don't think of every factual situation where the law may be invoked. So, it's left to the courts to interpret the law, and the lawyers to advocate their client's position. That's where people complain that the courts are "making" law, and lawyers are distorting the meaning of the law. Sometimes, you'll see that the legislature will change the law if the interpretation was wrong, but most times, they have moved on to other things, leaving it to the courts to decide.

If your factual situation is similar to another's situation, then the law should equally apply to both of you. That's why courts and lawyers analogize and distinguish facts of each case. Also, if a situation has never arisen, and the statute is unclear or it implicates another law, then it may become a test case. Or, in some cases, the law is just wrong, so lawyers have to make the case that the law should be changed. In those cases, sometimes the courts are waiting for the perfect test case.