Supreme Court just said the 6th admendment doesn't matter anymore

>The State charged Jones with sexual assault, three counts of child abuse, and the murder of Rachel Gray, age 4.

>In April 1994, Rachel's mother and her three children were living with Jones. On the afternoon of May 1, 1994, while she was asleep, Jones took Rachel out of the house in his van, and was later seen hitting her with his hand and elbow.

>When the mother awoke, she discovered that Rachel's head was cut and she was bleeding. Jones said that Rachel cut her head when some neighbor children pushed her down. Rachel continued to bleed and throw up during the night, but Jones would not let Angela take her to the hospital. By the time Rachel was taken to the hospital, she was dead as the result of a ruptured intestine.

>The jurors found Jones guilty of all five counts. In addition to the sentence of death for the murder, the trial court sentenced Jones to concurrent sentences totaling 35 years for the first three counts, and a consecutive sentence of life with no parole eligibility for 35 years for the fourth count.

>>n 1995, Barry Jones was convicted of murdering Rachel Gray, his girlfriend’s 4-year-old daughter, and sentenced to die. Since then, the case against him has shattered.

Gray died of a laceration of her small intestine, an extremely painful injury that slowly floods the victim with poisonous fluids. The prosecution’s theory was that Jones must have inflicted this injury on Gray during a four-hour period when he was taking care of her on May 1, 1994. Gray died about 12 hours later.

But this theory does not make sense medically. Gray’s injury would have killed her slowly, and should not have proved fatal in only 12 hours. In a comprehensive article reviewing the evidence against Jones, the Intercept’s Liliana Segura quotes three physicians who say that the prosecution’s theory is wrong.

One, who Segura describes as a “renowned pediatric forensic pathologist,” said that Gray’s injury “could not possibly have been inflicted on the day prior to her death.”

There are also several other potential suspects. Gray’s mother Angela, for starters, was eventually convicted of child abuse and sentenced to eight years in prison. There’s evidence that Gray’s brother sexually preyed on young girls. And, on top of all of that, Gray reportedly said shortly before her death that a boy had hit her in the stomach with a metal bar.

Says the guy on a computer designed by a Christian in a Christian nation eating food planted by a Christian with agricultural science developed by a Christian with electricity from a plant designed and made by a Christian, fuck off you ungrateful heathen. Go to the darkest heart of Africa if you prefer.

reminder that the original 13th amendment would have prevented kikes from infiltrating our law, and every "amendment" past 13 is made to a set of corporate bylaws with a similar name to our original founding document.
>The Constitution of the United States (((corporations))), 1871
is not
>The Constitution For These United States of America, (1787)
this is the only explanation for how so many unconstitutional legalities have been entered into the federal legal books.

The injury suffered by the victim would have taken days to kill her. The prosecution presented a case that the accused had injured her 12 hours before her death. The defence lawyers didn't follow up on that, and the detailed was missed in the appeal too even though every doctor who was asked about it afterwards said it's unlikely that the injury was done only 12 hours prior. Basically he will get killed because public defendants are incompetent and the jury was not presented with an effective counter argument.

Having said that the whole family has a history of abuse so even though he may not have technically caused her death it's a well known fact everyone in the household was involved in abusing the kids there.

Everything you wrote was you twisting words to try and make them sound evil. You are evil, tranny. Fuck you.

Still believe in a made up man in the sky? Which denomination do you even follow?

Christianity was ruined after the First Council of Nicae and taken over by conspiring men.

This is what happens when you protest out side their houses

Attached: JewishHateCrimes.jpg (720x524, 180.16K)

They are literally Justice Thomas' words. And you're still using ad hominem? How juvenile of you.

>lists random bs and pretends some jewish bs is somehow involved or good

imagine how much life would be better if christcucks like you didn't exist. all those christians willing to send their own kids to fight and die for israel, truly its gods will

I'm a Christian. My denomination predates the "council" by three hundred years.

>Thomas, writing for the Court’s Republican majority, offers a different view of why trials exist. He deems federal habeas proceedings problematic because they “override[] the States’ core power to enforce criminal law.” When a federal court deems someone’s conviction constitutionally inadequate, Thomas complains, it “overrides the State’s sovereign power to enforce ‘societal norms through criminal law,’” and “disturbs the State’s significant interest in repose for concluded litigation.”

I don't get it though. How is the process supposed to work otherwise?
If the constitutional protections are not being granted by the state, how should that be resolved?

Hey rabbi

Imagine how much better life would be without food you ungrateful bitch. Where do you think Quaker Oats came from? Fill your belly with our fruit and gripe some more.

It's even better.

>Thomas cited cases holding that defendants are generally held responsible for their attorneys’ errors, and noted that while that general rule does not apply when counsel is constitutionally ineffective, the Sixth Amendment does not guarantee a right to counsel at the post-conviction stage – therefore, at this stage, the defendants were “at fault.” Of course, this is why the Martinez court held that, as a matter of equity, ineffective assistance of post-conviction counsel could excuse the failure to raise a claim, but Thomas concluded that case has no bearing when a congressional statute – in this case, AEDPA – precludes such judge-made equitable rules. As Thomas put it, “Congress foreclosed respondents’ proposed expansion of Martinez when it passed AEDPA.”

Apparently Thomas says if your defense is shit, it's your fault for not getting a better lawyer.

So you don't follow any denominations and are a typical American Christian who doesn't adhere to any Christian values in a spiritual sense and only in the political sense.

Another Political Christian on Any Forums? You guys are really trying to take over Any Forums. It's pathetic.

>Apparently Thomas says if your defense is shit, it's your fault for not getting a better lawyer.
That's obviously true and I agree with him there.
The defense is the defense. You get your shot and then you get judged. That's the process.
There's nothing unconstitutional about that.

I'm just wondering in general how constitutional issues are supposed to be resolved except for the federal courts to intervene

>getting called a jew for the 1001th time
kek you tards crack me up

Attached: 1652530996185.png (1019x779, 962.06K)

OP getting raped.

Attached: 1637292403156.png (900x2000, 425.19K)

Trusting government appointed lawyers? WTF?

I guess we have to go into debt to pay for a good lawyer just to stay out of jail if you're ever on the wrong side of the law.

Based on this decision, they're only supposed to be resolved if they were directly brought up in the original court hearings.
Anything that points out that a lawyer made a mistake or the court made a mistake isn't his problem, and puts a significant strain on government resources to investigate, so he doesn't want to hear about it.

Also
>Trusting state appointed lawyers
You're arguing for debtors prisons.