![]() |
|
|||
|
Re: WrongO
Quote:
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/crim/faq.htm Specifically: Q. What are the differences between a civil and a criminal civil rights violation? A. A criminal violation requires the use or threat of force. Other distinctions between criminal and civil cases brought by the Government are: CRIMINAL CIVIL Who is charged: Accused person Usually an organization Standard of proof: Beyond a reasonable doubt Preponderance of evidence Fact finder: Jury Judge Victim: Identified individuals Individuals and/or representatives of a group or class Remedy sought: Prison, fine, restitution, community service Correct policies and practices, relief for individuals Govt's right to appeal: Very limited Yes Criminal cases are investigated and prosecuted differently from civil cases. More and stronger evidence is needed to obtain a criminal conviction than to win a civil suit. Should the defendant be acquitted, the Government has no right of appeal. A federal criminal conviction also requires a unanimous decision by 12 jurors (or by a judge only if the defendant chooses not to have a jury). Civil cases are usually heard by a judge, but occasionally a jury will decide the case. Both criminal and civil cases can be resolved without a trial where both sides agree and with the concurrence of the judge; this is done by a plea agreement in a criminal case and by a consent decree in a civil suit. In criminal cases, judges must use the Federal Sentencing Guidelines in determining the defendant's punishment, whereas judges in civil suits may or may not adopt remedies as recommended by the Government when it wins. Q. If there is no violence or threat of violence, whom should I contact? A. If no violence is involved, complaints should be submitted in writing to the Civil Rights Division, where it will be forwarded to the appropriate Section for review. The Division's mailing address is: Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice 950 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, D.C. 20530 Of course, I'm not a lawyer but I am bright enough to know that the federal government holds a bit more power than the NFHS or even the NFHS legal dept. As for do-rags, any idiot can claim a do-rag is a religious article, and any idiot can introduce it into an argument concerning the legitimate wearing of religious articles. Only an idiot would not see it for what it is: a red herring, a tactic to muddy the waters in an otherwise simple question, so I will not entertain any more questions related to do-rags. If you choose to prevent kids from participating in an organized sport due to their religious beliefs and the legitimate expression of those beliefs then more power to you. If I'm the father of such a kid then I'm going to the DOJ and I'm going to have a lot of questions.
__________________
9-11-01 http://www.fallenheroesfund.org/fallenheroes/index.php http://www.carydufour.com/marinemoms...llowribbon.jpg |
| Bookmarks |
|
|