This man has obviously been able to get away with a lot in his life that you or I would have been hammered for. High political standing allowed him to bend rules that eventually broke. The fact that he continually bent rules in his favor seemed to have been greeted with Good Old Boy acceptance, like the poor behavior we have come to expect and tolerate from professional athletes. As long as he brought home the bacon to his state and greased a lot of palms everybody looked the other way. It should be no surprise to anybody that he behaves like a sulking two year old when after all this time society decides to actually enforce the rules. Janklow is not a good man, but the people who passively condoned his behavior all these years should be doing some soul searching as well. We as a society get what we demand, when we demand little from our people, we get little people.
Well said. One can only hope that the trial is truly fair and metes out proper justice. I'm no lawyer, but his past driving record clearly indicated he was an accident waiting to happen. Will it be "covered up" to conceal what has turned out to be a deadly lapse in previous enforcement?
You may notice that the "Judge" will not allow any evidence of Jackloff's previous driving record into court. Allowing past incidents into court is called "prejudicing the jury". That's another clever trick invented by lawyers to help a criminal get off. The jury will only look at this as a single incident and never learn that this guy is a dangerous repeat offender. The article doesn't mention if the lawyer.. er I mean "Judge" is an old pal of Jackloff. That's quite likely in a low population State like South Dakota.
Being a dangerous criminal Jackloff is eminently qualified to be a Congresscritter.
You didn't think that Jackloff was going to have to pay for his crimes did you? Those rules don't apply to the Republicrat Elite. Only to the taxserfs. Probation will be the absolute worst this guy will face.
[*]Threaten a Sturgis boycott if Janklow is given a slap on the wrist.
[*]Have the AMA file a wrongful death suit on behalf of the victim. This was done in WA state when a Police Chief killed his wife. Latter it was learned that the city of Tacoma was warned about his defective psycholigical profile way before the killing
[*]Write letters to the SD papers and politicians to let know we are watching. The AMA did this before he was charged and it was effective
Hope someone has been listening! Like I said above, time to get the Boycott Sturgis ball rolling! Unfortunatly if MO starts it, they will get sued, so it has to be a grass routes movement (I am a member of the BMW RA, can tell you volumes about how a sleazy government can cause a law abiding group who complains a ton of troubl in court)
Seruzusy, it's the threat of the boycott that is effective. The influx of people into Sturgis means the state of SD get lots of tax revenue. Fines during Sturgis go to fund the schools. By threatening a boycott, it puts real pressure (lost tax revenue) on the state politicians to make sure that Jackloff is treated like an average citzen no better no worse.
The man was killed riding a Harley. I would think that the brotherhood would be united in honoring this guys memory (a Vietnam vet I believe) by boycotting Sturgis to ensure justice is done.
The shyt gets thicker all the time. I've raced dirtbikes, but never cars, and have never driven a cadillac with the northstar engine. Would someone, anyone, explain this to me:
"I was going south, going to Brandon, and I was coming down the road, and as I came up to this place, there was a car on the left-hand side of the road that came right across towards me. I was slowing up for that stop sign and I just raced around it. I gunned around him ..." Janklow said.
"No, I wasn't speeding.
I mean, I wasn't going fast.
I just wasn't driving fast.
I don't even know. Probably 65. There wasn't any reason to be in a hurry. A lot of times I drive fast by myself. When I tried to - when I tried to miss them, I gunned it."
So, this is his story? I was coming to a stop, like any lawful citizen, when a phantom (he's really got a problem with these phantom vehicles) vehicle "came at him". This caused him to run a stop sign at 70 mph. Looks like this tragic situation came down to either Janklow's life or Scott's. He just did what he had to do to survive. Wow.
Generally, past incidents will be admitted if they are similar and establish a pattern of repeated behaviour. The judge in this case stated that he didn't see how the speeding tickets or prior accidents were similar.
The incidents were at least similar in that he was speeding and he got in an accident.
I would like to see the arguments made, but in my opinion this was a difficult one for the prosecution to lose...
I can't believe this piece of sh!t is going to get away with this. I just can't. Everyone needs to consider if THEY had been the one killed by this turd. How would your family feel to know your killer was getting away with a slap on the wrists? We need to stick together just like the good ol' boys are doing in SD right now. There must be a better way to spread word of this atrocity to the motorcycle community than MO. More Harley people need to be involved. Can anyone help?
Good point on the HD people. The AMA should do all it can, we should all rally behind the AMA, but, we all know that Harley riders are a very tight knit group. There has to be Mofo's out there who are also very active in thier local HOG organizations. Do they have chat rooms? I really think the Harley clan should be up in arms about this.
Past driving record: the court would wait and see whether information about Janklow's driving record comes up in rebuttal. At that time, Steele reserved the right to let the state enter the driving records as evidence.
(Does this mean that it's admissible only if the defense starts bragging about his driving record, and the prosecutor, in rebuttal, wants to show what a leadfoot he is? Am I interperting this wrong? Any lawyers out there that can help me out? )
Speeches where he bragged about speeding: Not admissible
Still trying to figure out how, when someone is crossing over into your lane, that "goosing it" helps you avoid an accident. Anyone?
What a crock that his past accident records are not admissible. Not only was speeding a factor in this, but if anyone on the jury is stupid enough to believe this "phantom" vehicle bullsh!t, the fact that he's had many accidents that also had phantoms should be relevant.
I wish I could see the Motions in Limine, because there seems to be some suspicious advocacy afoot. It could be that the South Dakota rules of evidence differ substantially from the federal, but I doubt it. I think the Sturgis boycott idea is brilliant.
1 - 20 of 39 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.