@fangirlbillie / fangirlbillie.tumblr.com
Have I mentioned the Cohen Family Monarch Birthing Center? Well, it’s a thing. My wife and my son and myself are helping boost monarch populations one chrysalis at a time! And it’s always magical! 🤙🖤🤙 @mandymusgrave4real https://www.instagram.com/p/CKCUtC6B5jo/?igshid=1wf3trmsgov7s
So yesterday @super-sootica proposed that we use this picture to draw castiel:
and I did this:
I hope you’ll like it, have a nice day ;)
Love this
Honestly if you’re female and you’re called for jury duty and during the elimination process you’re asked if you’ve ever had any adverse experience with a man (harrassment or rape or any other male violence) just fuckin lie and say no. Then vote that fucker guilty
Women survivors are barred from serving on a jury but rapists are not even questioned. There can be no doubt that this is a major reason rapists walk free. Men have never played fair. It is time for women to start beating them at their own game. Our lives depend on it.
As someone who wants to be a prosecutor one day… I agree.
It’s wrong not for any bullshit rape apologist shit, btw, it’s wrong BECAUSE THIS SHIT WILL LITERALLY FUCK YOU OVER AND FUCK OVER ANY RAPE VICTIMS TOO. Here’s why:
(bear in mind this advice is gonna be MD specific since that’s where I practice)
1) FIRST THINGS FIRST. Don’t fucking lie. Don’t you dare fucking lie when you’re being questioned at jury duty. Why? OK well first: you’re swearing to tell the truth under penalty of perjury. What that means is yes, you will face criminal charges. Criminal charges which, btw, will keep you off of any juries in the future.
Here’s the thing, people (the law enforcement authorities and the defense counsel) WILL be able to find this out especially if you have ever filed a formal police report and/or spoken publicly about it. Yes, even on facebook. This ALSO means that if the fact that you lied about this is found out mid-trial it’s grounds for a mistrial with prejudice, if not a straight dismissal. Which means that hey, look, EVERYTHING HAS TO START ALL OVER AGAIN, THIS TIME WITH NEW JURORS.
2) The second thing is this: in many states, you don’t just get dismissed after answering affirmatively. The voir dire process in MD works like this:
A) prosecutors and the defense come up with a list of questions to ask potential jurors. These are typically a combination of blanket questions you would ask at any trial (ex: have you ever been convicted of a crime in this jurisdiction) and specific questions tailored to the hearing in particular (like the question above). Both attorneys get the chance to view each other’s questions and object to any particular questions that the other team may have.
B) So we’re at jury selection. Both attorneys argue preliminary whether or not questions get to be asked or not, submit the questions to the judge, and decide how to do the striking. (all at once submitted on paper, or alternating).
C) The questions are now done. The attorneys then go through their strikes. Like I said, they have a limited number of the peremptory ones. And there are other limits too. You can’t strike jurors on the basis of a “protected class” (i.e.: race, gender, religion etc.) and anything that SHOWS that an attorney is doing so a can be objected to by the other attorney. There doesn’t have to be a “pattern” but that helps (i.e. striking three women in a row). Every time a juror gets called and somebody requests a strike, the other attorney can either object or not. So it’s up to each attorney to protect the jurors they want (and btw other than the questions, in MD, the info you get as an attorney is the juror’s name, age, job, and where they live, and their spouse’s job). If there’s a disagreement then the judge will hear arguments either way. If it’s a protected class argument, the attorney who has been striking has to come up with a different reason to justify and that’s got to be something UNRELATED to the protected class (ex: if you struck two Black guys in a row you can’t say “oh well I didn’t want THESE Black guys I wanted the other ones” because that’s still BASED ON RACE).
————
3) SO HERE’S WHY IT’S SO FUCKED UP TO EVEN SUGGEST THIS SHIT AS A WAY TO “SOLVE THE PROBLEM”
A) as I said above, you don’t want to fucking lie.
B) also BEING A CONVICTED FELON, BTW, AND OTHER TYPES OF CONVICTIONS, DISQUALIFIES YOU FROM BEING ON THE JURY. So…convicted rapists? yeah, they can’t actually serve. THIS IS LITERALLY A QUESTION ON THE JURY DUTY FORM AND IS A QUESTION ASKED AT EVERY STAGE OF SELECTION.
C) ALSO, in a couple of the posts I’ve seen they’ve mentioned this question was only asked for women. I’m not sure really if I, as an attorney, would have phrased a question in a gendered way like this SINCE IT’S BASICALLY BEGGING FOR A CHALLENGE AS A PROTECTED CLASS OBJECTION. So fine, if it’s asked gender neutral? That’s OK, but as I said, you won’t get dismissed instantaneously (at least not in MD) as it’s not one of those automatic questions the court asks (i.e.: are you a citizen etc.). And so (again, in Md, Idk about other states) If you say “yes I can be impartial” then fine. Sit your ass down and wait for an attorney to strike you.
D) so if you DO have an attorney striking you, I would ABSOLUTELY object to any attorney who systematically struck ALL THE WOMEN from a jury panel. Because fuck that that’s a protected class that fucking SO DEMONSTRATIVE of a violation of the law. IT’S GENDER BASED. Whoever the prosecutor was who allowed a defense attorney to get away with that shit just wasn’t doing their fucking job.
E) And in terms of this post? about nobody caring? Fuck that if I was a prosecutor I would absolutely ask if any person (”PERSON” DAMN IT NOT JUST MEN BECAUSE THE WIVES/SISTERS/MOTHERS etc. OF MEN WHO ARE ACCUSED OF RAPE ARE ALSO FUCKING BIASED) had ever been accused of rape or sexual assault or knew somebody who did etc. That’s just good lawyering. It’s sloppy not to do so.
F) And as a defense attorney, NGL, I would want to know the answer too, in order to make sure to challenge those strikes.
——-
I get it. I fucking get it. And some of these things will depend on how fucked up your judge is and how good the other side is. But this shit about “OH HEY JUST LIE” FUCK ME NO. DO NOT FUCKING DO THIS.
I’m so fucking furious that people are spreading this like it’s a good damn idea and something that will work. Honestly this is so fucking stupid and dangerous to me that I’m suspicious–is this for real? Or is this somebody trying to false information troll people?
FOR THE LOVE OF GOD DO NOT DO THIS. Answer your questions truthfully and let the lawyers do their damn job. Yes, it sucks, but at the end of the day, people in this country are INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY. And your job, as a juror, is to ASSESS ONLY THE FACTS AND ARGUMENTS PRESENTED TO YOU, AND TO SEE IF THE STATE WAS ABLE TO PROVE THAT THIS PARTICULAR SUSPECT DID IT. AND THEY DID IT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT.
THe fact is, not all rape cases go to trial. And the ones that do, DISPROPORTIONATELY charge men of color (in particular, Black and Latino men). You cannot believe in equality, fight against racism, protect the constitution AND ALSo try to do this shit. It’s fucked up and completely inconsistent and yet another way to fuck with the justice system. doing this will probably allow more alleged rapists to go free than it will allow for equality in jury selection.
HEY GUYS
The new Venom movie has a scene with intense flashing lights (the lab entry scene) and I received no warnings and had to leave (just for that scene) as I am epileptic!!! PLEASE share this since I’ve seen NO warnings being shared and this is very important and can prevent people from having seizures etc during the film.
Malcolm Turnbull’s son is urging people to donate to the Labor candidate in the Wentworth by-election. No, that’s not a joke. He wants you to donate to Labor Candidate Tim Murray
To put it simply: “It’s impossible to vote for the LNP in good conscience. My father fought the stupid and the stupid won.“ - Alex Turnbull.
The Coalition is beholden to the financial interests of the coal industry and now that his dad is no longer PM, Alex has decided to start being vocal about it.
"Times like this you have to decide what your first loyalty is: party or county? I’m going with country. We need donations reform, federal ICAC and sane energy policy NOW.” Said Turnbull on twitter.
The race is close. Malcolm Turnbull held a good personal vote, not just party loyalty, and so Labor is now neck and neck in the polls and could hold Wentworth for the first time… ever.
Tim Murray is a local businessman.
The Wentworth by-election is on October 6th and could determine the fate of the Scott Morrison government as the Coalition currently only has a 1 seat majority. If Labor wins it they’ll either need to form a minority government or go to a general election sooner than they planned, spelling disaster for Scott Morrison.
9 million people fucking love dogs
Here we come 10.
BREAK THE POST
I’ve finally found it again
the elusive 10 million note post
they say no two people reblog it with the same original text
“Never did like that much,” is a baller and superb way to express your irritation with the way the patriarchy refuses to acknowledge how badass you are.
Word.
Before World War I, she shot a cigarette out of the mouth of the Kaiser of Germany at his request.
After the war started she sent him a letter asking for another chance, as she was afraid her aim might’ve been a little off.
Annie Fucking Oakley everyone
when you support outlawing Indigenous people’s hunting practices you are LITERALLY promoting their starvation. Indigenous communities in the Arctic have to suffer from food deserts and 174963846% increase in food costs that no white vegan will ever have to face. So please. let them eat lmao.
Yes!!! This is so important to me as a topic in my field!!! Maintaining, supporting, and especially restoring indigenous peoples’ right to hunting is a topic of the utmost importance.
People want to cry “even the populations of concern??” but the fact is they were almost never of concern until colonizers started overhunting. The decline of the polar bear in North America (and in most of its range) is a perfect example of how in very little time, white colonizers decimated a healthy population of animals that indigenous people had been responsibly surviving on for hundreds and often thousands of years.
It doesn’t just stop at us white people letting indigenous people hunt for subsistence though. It’s extremely important that we ask for and use indigenous knowledge and ideas when we create hunting laws and treaties. We need to hand over the power.
Again, the international agreement on polar bears is a good example of indigenous hunting traditions and knowledge being used to actually make informed decisions on hunting regulations.
I’m not trying to lecture or inform OP, but to make sure white people reading this understand how important it is that moving forward, indigenous communities are included in hunting regulations and treaties, because it is not their fault their survival has been threatened by colonial overhunting, and often they have vital knowledge about species range, migration, populations, and behaviors that non-native biologists haven’t figured out yet.
Here is a read on why the largely held white idea on “saving the animals” (especially seals that advocacy groups love to claim indigenous people club constantly, all the time) is a racist, misinformed, tunnel-vision view of a much larger picture made of way bigger problems:
I say it a lot, but it deserves repeating:
Always always always: wildlife conservation efforts without the consideration and voices of indigenous people is a conservation effort without a soul.
for those who aren’t aware, the australian government has abandoned the manus island offshore detention facility where it’s been indefinitely holding over 600 refugees. they have no food, water or electricity and are at risk of malaria. you can donate here to the RISE refugee welfare organisation, and here for the asylum seeker resource centre #bringthemhere
As of 11/5/2017, this was one of the most recent news stories:
“The United Nations human rights office called on Australia on Friday to restore food, water and health services to about 600 interned refugees and asylum seekers in Papua New Guinea, which Canberra cut off three days ago.
The detainees in the Manus Island Centre have defied attempts by the governments of both Australia and PNG to close the camp, saying they fear violent reprisals from the local community if they are moved to other “transit centres.” […]
For four years, Australia has paid Papua New Guinea, its nearest neighbour, and Nauru to house asylum seekers who attempt to reach the Australian coast by boat. They include Rohingya Muslims from Myanmar, Afghans, Iranians, Sri Lankans and other nationalities, and are almost entirely men.
The impending closure of the camp is part of an Australian government plan to push refugees and asylum seekers to either return to their home country, settle in PNG or move elsewhere, thereby disbanding part of Australia’s controversial and expensive offshore detention program. […]
New Zealand’s Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern on Friday repeated her country’s offer to take up to 150 refugees.
New Zealand citizens are typically allowed to work and live in Australia, a pathway that Australia fears could be used by the refugees to move to Australia.”
things you don’t point out about people:
don’t do it
don’t
I think I’m going to start doing these again
