Cyprus-Forum.com

[Kikapu]

But what is interesting and Ill be looking at closely is what happens to the Russian S300 Cyprus bought and are in Greece. Or whether Lockheed will have concerns with Turkish S400s on the Turkish coast.

Turkey's gamble appears to have backfired though.

All of Turkey's foreign policy gambles have backfired. She is left without friends and a battered economy.

What is interesting is why the US didnt sell them the patriot system. Instead, some NATO allies decided to station them on loan and under their control. I think they understood that Turkey was duplicitous. Whatever they sell her, runs to risk of getting turned on them in the future.

One s400 system is not really enough to provide air defense for a country the size of Turkey.

Admittedly, I am not that knowledgeable on such things but I would imagine that the s300 is not as capable as the s400 to be much of a concern..

Turkey wanted technology transfer and joint production on the Patriot, which is the reason why it was not so sold toTurkey. Yes, turn over tech info perfected over the last 70 years to Turkey for free and allow them to produce it too.

Supposedly Russia agreed to those terms with the S-400. I doubt Russia has. Perhaps on “how to change the oil” on the missiles every 6 months is as far as Russia would go. Besides, Russia sold Turkey the inferior version of the S-400 as they don’t trust Turkey either so not let NATO access to their advanced S-400’s.

Right, makes sense now.

Turkey wanted to buy one then the US was supposed to let her make as many as she wants.

There is always some unrealistic expectation when dealing with he Turks.

Turkey ask for the same conditions from the Chinese few years back and China told her to take a hike.

[Paphitis]

Yep, most US analysts are saying the verdict is going to be overturned.

And that is based on case law according to this expert.

And they are predicting after the reversal will come the STORM.

[Kikapu]

Yep, most US analysts are saying the verdict is going to be overturned.

And that is based on case law according to this expert.

And they are predicting after the reversal will come the STORM.

Yes, every unknown Tom, Dick and Mary lawyers want their 15 minutes of fame by predicting Chauvin’s conviction to be overturned because of KKK intimidation on the Jurors in the 30’s.

[Paphitis]

Yep, most US analysts are saying the verdict is going to be overturned.

And that is based on case law according to this expert.

And they are predicting after the reversal will come the STORM.

Yes, every unknown Tom, Dick and Mary lawyers want their 15 minutes of fame by predicting Chauvin’s conviction to be overturned because of KKK intimidation on the Jurors in the 30’s.

I was one of the first who predicted Cardinal Pells conviction will be overturned. Again one of the first to do the same in this case.

Unfortunately for the average Tom, dick and Harry, law is very complex. And all you need is a technicality and then you have a mistrial.

This case will be tested in the High Supreme Court. Lawyers are coming out in their drives predicting it will be overturned.

And yet again, it takes Sky Bews to really inform the public.

What’s criminal is the vigilantism show trials which violate a defendants presumption of innocence.

Don’t say I didn’t warn you.

Firstly, for murder, the prosecutors must prove intent. Did they do this? No!

[Kikapu]

Yep, most US analysts are saying the verdict is going to be overturned.

And that is based on case law according to this expert.

And they are predicting after the reversal will come the STORM.

Yes, every unknown Tom, Dick and Mary lawyers want their 15 minutes of fame by predicting Chauvin’s conviction to be overturned because of KKK intimidation on the Jurors in the 30’s.

I was one of the first who predicted Cardinal Pells conviction will be overturned. Again one of the first to do the same in this case.

Unfortunately for the average Tom, dick and Harry, law is very complex. And all you need is a technicality and then you have a mistrial.

This case will be tested in the High Supreme Court. Lawyers are coming out in their drives predicting it will be overturned.

And yet again, it takes Sky Bews to really inform the public.

What’s criminal is the vigilantism show trials which violate a defendants presumption of innocence.

As I remember, you did not believe any of these 4 officers would be convicted in the first place.

Overturning any conviction needs to have legal merits which the defendant was denied in the courtroom, either by false evidence or incompetent defense lawyer who fucked it up for his client. One had to be living under a rock not to have seen that video. This does not taint the jurors if they have seen it. Evidence in the courtroom is what counts and I believe jurors in general will give the defendant the benefit of the doubt that he/she is innocent until proven guilty by the state. The judge had instructed the jurors before deliberations to look at the facts and if they had ANY doubt, that they must find the defendant NOT GUILTY. Any one juror could have held out as long as he/she wanted so not to have an unanimous guilty decision which would have turned into a mistrial. There never was going to be a INNOCENT verdict.

[Paphitis]

Yep, most US analysts are saying the verdict is going to be overturned.

And that is based on case law according to this expert.

And they are predicting after the reversal will come the STORM.

Yes, every unknown Tom, Dick and Mary lawyers want their 15 minutes of fame by predicting Chauvin’s conviction to be overturned because of KKK intimidation on the Jurors in the 30’s.

I was one of the first who predicted Cardinal Pells conviction will be overturned. Again one of the first to do the same in this case.

Unfortunately for the average Tom, dick and Harry, law is very complex. And all you need is a technicality and then you have a mistrial.

This case will be tested in the High Supreme Court. Lawyers are coming out in their drives predicting it will be overturned.

And yet again, it takes Sky Bews to really inform the public.

What’s criminal is the vigilantism show trials which violate a defendants presumption of innocence.

As I remember, you did not believe any of these 4 officers would be convicted in the first place.

Overturning any conviction needs to have legal merits which the defendant was denied in the courtroom, either by false evidence or incompetent defense lawyer who fucked it up for his client. One had to be living under a rock not to have seen that video. This does not taint the jurors if they have seen it. Evidence in the courtroom is what counts and I believe jurors in general will give the defendant the benefit of the doubt that he/she is innocent until proven guilty by the state. The judge had instructed the jurors before deliberations to look at the facts and if they had ANY doubt, that they must find the defendant NOT GUILTY. Any one juror could have held out as long as he/she wanted so not to have an unanimous guilty decision which would have turned into a mistrial. There never was going to be a INNOCENT verdict.

Not all 4 cases are the same. Each one has to be heard on their own merits first of all.

If Chauvin’s conviction is overturned, doesn’t mean the others will be. Some of the cases were gunshot killings. Different kettle of fish probably. No I don’t believe all the officers have a legitimate defence. Anything from mistrial, to reasonable doubt and case law. Or a combination of all 3. So the conviction will come under heavy scrutiny and my belief is that it is likely the Chauvin convictions will be overturned.

I do however think that Chauvin possibly has a case to overturn this. In any case, it’s going to take about a year to get before the High Courts.

The bursary about America is the legal system is down the line,

[Kikapu]

Yep, most US analysts are saying the verdict is going to be overturned.

And that is based on case law according to this expert.

And they are predicting after the reversal will come the STORM.

Yes, every unknown Tom, Dick and Mary lawyers want their 15 minutes of fame by predicting Chauvin’s conviction to be overturned because of KKK intimidation on the Jurors in the 30’s.

I was one of the first who predicted Cardinal Pells conviction will be overturned. Again one of the first to do the same in this case.

Unfortunately for the average Tom, dick and Harry, law is very complex. And all you need is a technicality and then you have a mistrial.

This case will be tested in the High Supreme Court. Lawyers are coming out in their drives predicting it will be overturned.

And yet again, it takes Sky Bews to really inform the public.

What’s criminal is the vigilantism show trials which violate a defendants presumption of innocence.

As I remember, you did not believe any of these 4 officers would be convicted in the first place.

Overturning any conviction needs to have legal merits which the defendant was denied in the courtroom, either by false evidence or incompetent defense lawyer who fucked it up for his client. One had to be living under a rock not to have seen that video. This does not taint the jurors if they have seen it. Evidence in the courtroom is what counts and I believe jurors in general will give the defendant the benefit of the doubt that he/she is innocent until proven guilty by the state. The judge had instructed the jurors before deliberations to look at the facts and if they had ANY doubt, that they must find the defendant NOT GUILTY. Any one juror could have held out as long as he/she wanted so not to have an unanimous guilty decision which would have turned into a mistrial. There never was going to be a INNOCENT verdict.

Not all 4 cases are the same. Each one has to be heard on their own merits first of all.

If Chauvin’s conviction is overturned, doesn’t mean the others will be. Some of the cases were gunshot killings. Different kettle of fish probably. No I don’t believe all the officers have a legitimate defence. Anything from mistrial, to reasonable doubt and case law. Or a combination of all 3. So the conviction will come under heavy scrutiny and my belief is that it is likely the Chauvin convictions will be overturned.

I do however think that Chauvin possibly has a case to overturn this. In any case, it’s going to take about a year to get before the High Courts.

The bursary about America is the legal system is down the line,

If Chauvin’s conviction is overturned, for what reason the other 3 officers would be convicted on?

[Paphitis]

Yep, most US analysts are saying the verdict is going to be overturned.

And that is based on case law according to this expert.

And they are predicting after the reversal will come the STORM.

Yes, every unknown Tom, Dick and Mary lawyers want their 15 minutes of fame by predicting Chauvin’s conviction to be overturned because of KKK intimidation on the Jurors in the 30’s.

I was one of the first who predicted Cardinal Pells conviction will be overturned. Again one of the first to do the same in this case.

Unfortunately for the average Tom, dick and Harry, law is very complex. And all you need is a technicality and then you have a mistrial.

This case will be tested in the High Supreme Court. Lawyers are coming out in their drives predicting it will be overturned.

And yet again, it takes Sky Bews to really inform the public.

What’s criminal is the vigilantism show trials which violate a defendants presumption of innocence.

As I remember, you did not believe any of these 4 officers would be convicted in the first place.

Overturning any conviction needs to have legal merits which the defendant was denied in the courtroom, either by false evidence or incompetent defense lawyer who fucked it up for his client. One had to be living under a rock not to have seen that video. This does not taint the jurors if they have seen it. Evidence in the courtroom is what counts and I believe jurors in general will give the defendant the benefit of the doubt that he/she is innocent until proven guilty by the state. The judge had instructed the jurors before deliberations to look at the facts and if they had ANY doubt, that they must find the defendant NOT GUILTY. Any one juror could have held out as long as he/she wanted so not to have an unanimous guilty decision which would have turned into a mistrial. There never was going to be a INNOCENT verdict.

Not all 4 cases are the same. Each one has to be heard on their own merits first of all.

If Chauvin’s conviction is overturned, doesn’t mean the others will be. Some of the cases were gunshot killings. Different kettle of fish probably. No I don’t believe all the officers have a legitimate defence. Anything from mistrial, to reasonable doubt and case law. Or a combination of all 3. So the conviction will come under heavy scrutiny and my belief is that it is likely the Chauvin convictions will be overturned.

I do however think that Chauvin possibly has a case to overturn this. In any case, it’s going to take about a year to get before the High Courts.

The bursary about America is the legal system is down the line,

If Chauvin’s conviction is overturned, for what reason the other 3 officers would be convicted on?

I don’t know as I haven’t looked into them. From memory, one guy was shot in the back after trying to flee from a traffic stop.

On face value, and I don’t know the full story, it’s probable unlikely this officer will get off. It seems to be it was I necessary to shoot him. Therefore, there is a case for murder there on face value with not knowing all the facts.

I don’t believe the Chauvin case is that clear cut.

I would imagine that all 4 cases are unique in their own ways to various degrees only the legal fraternity is qualified enough to distinguish.

[Kikapu]

Ok, you are mixing officers from different incidents and not just the 4 officers from Floyd's incident, which is why we are talking diffent language.

[Paphitis]

Ok, you are mixing officers from different incidents and not just the 4 officers from Floyd's incident, which is why we are talking diffent language.

Chauvin has a strong opportunity to overturn.

The other officers should not be be charged with murder or even manslaughter.

I was talking about other incidents, and depending on the incident, those officers might not be so lucky.