251
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] librechad@lemm.ee 1 points 2 years ago

I understand your perspective. My intention wasn't to argue that the justice system is infallible. Indeed, history has shown that both wrongful convictions and acquittals can happen. What I meant to highlight was that, given the evidence presented during the trial and the way the law is structured in Wisconsin, the jury arrived at that particular verdict. It's crucial to differentiate between presenting a legal outcome and endorsing the inherent perfection of the system.

[-] Zuzak@hexbear.net 49 points 2 years ago

Oh, I just realized I'm arguing with an AI.

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 35 points 2 years ago

Try to form your own thoughts for once, it would do you some good

[-] UnicodeHamSic@hexbear.net 25 points 2 years ago

Is it your honest opinion that the jurors sat down with grpah paper, checked to make sure they understood the laws and then did thr math to arrive at the final conclusion?

[-] Egon@hexbear.net 6 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Weak ass, you don't understand shit but the taste of boot leather. You think you're above it by using a chatbot to form your thoughts for you, but all it does is make you more of a cog in the machine. You are incapable of independent thought.

[-] TreadOnMe@hexbear.net 5 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Also, chatbots are horrible at 'the law'. They still don't know how to judge and rank legal citations properly and likely never will.

this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2023
251 points (99.6% liked)

chapotraphouse

13920 readers
835 users here now

Banned? DM Wmill to appeal.

No anti-nautilism posts. See: Eco-fascism Primer

Slop posts go in c/slop. Don't post low-hanging fruit here.

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS