It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Ky. man claims caffeine insanity in wife's death

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:05 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.



Originally posted by TrueBrit
Surely if one is innocent until they are proven , in a court of law, to be guilty, then they must retain the innocent status in the event that they are proven to be not guilty? Otherwise, why not shoot a suspect on sight every damned time?


They're no MORE innocent after a criminal trial's verdict of Not Guilty than they were before the criminal trial started. The jury can't DECLARE someone innocent. There's no burden of proof on a defendant in a criminal trial. The options are - guilty or not guilty. Innocence is something else and isn't PROVEN in a criminal trial. You can't leave a courtroom as a defendant in a criminal trial with a not guilty verdict and say, "The court proved me innocent", or even "The court proved me not guilty", for that matter. They didn't, don't, and won't.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.



edit on 9/20/2010 by yeahright because: clarity




posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:09 AM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


Oh I understand that a court cannot prove one to be innocent, but since US law states that a person is innocent until or unless proven guilty, they must surely be legaly regarded as innocent after a trial which fails to convict them, otherwise the whole premise of innocent until proven guilty is totaly out of the window. Do you see what I am saying? You cant blow two trumpets at once !



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


Fair enough, but how do you "harm society?" I don't agree that a crime is ever committed against the state. A "crime" has a "victim" otherwise it is not a crime in my opinion. I think we have far too many victimless crimes on the books, too much docket space, too many prisoners for crimes that did not have a clear victim. A person has a right to face their accuser. Does a prosecutor represent the whole of society? Who is the victim of drug possession? Yourself? Who is the victim of selling bootleg cd's? The actual artist or record studio? Do you think they are going to show up in court to face you for your $100 street corner project? If they do not show up, then there is no victim, so there is no crime. Why waste court docket space, prosecutor manpower, and jailhouse space when there is no victim to face in court?

And, like it or not, rich guys do manipulate the system already. They do pay hefty fines or legal fees or community improvement donations to avoid jail time. Why should it be ok for the rich guys but not the average guys?

Maybe you are right, and we need to first define "crime" and "victim" more substantially, and fix the criminal justice system appropriately, and then the issue of civil vs. criminal might go away all on its own.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by getreadyalready
reply to post by unityemissions
 



He didn't just have a cup of joe, he was taking over 400mg of caffeine a day, which is equvelant to about 9 or 10 sodas a day. I would explode from that!


I mentioned before that I experimented with Testosterone. At that same point in time bodybuilders like me were taking an "ECA" stack. It was 400mg Caffeine, 50mg Ephedrine, 200mg Aspirin. We took it every day in addition to Testosterone and my normal caffeinated drinks. Plus a lot of endorphin and adrenalin making workouts. Plus a lifestyle around a lot of similar guys and girls and parties. Add to that a typical 20 year old's vigor and fearlessness, and you have the worst possible homicidal combination, yet somehow 99.9% of us were able to keep normal jobs, have normal relationships, and refrain from any major crimes? How can that be with all of those evil chemicals surging through systems?


I seriously doubt that 999/1000 people who take all of that aren't committing major crimes. I also doubt that you have enough personal experience with tens of thousands of body builders to make such a comment with any real backing.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   
The following is my opinion as a member participating in this discussion.


Reply to TrueBrit
See, this is where it went sideways before. Of course, in a criminal court you're legally considered innocent of a crime until you're proved guilty of a crime. That has nothing to do with a civil trial, or in fact, with what may or may not have happened in reality.

Guilty - Not Guilty these are legal designations in criminal court, along with presumption of innocence. The context for all that is one thing inside a criminal court proceeding and something else altogether outside the criminal court. Conflate the two at your peril.


As an ATS Staff Member, I will not moderate in threads such as this where I have participated as a member.






edit on 9/20/2010 by yeahright because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by yeahright
 


Ah I understand.
Jargon... needs banning from the modern world. Law needs refining down to , did he do it or not. Facts or no one leaves the building.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:23 AM
link   
reply to post by unityemissions
 


I never said 10s of 1000s?

I know maybe a dozen guys that were trying all the stuff I was trying. Plus, I know how it personally made me feel and act. There is a significant change, no denying that. But the responsibility is still your own. It won't put thoughts into your head, but it may give you the confidence to act on thoughts you already had. Therefore if you give someone with homicidal tendencies a bunch of some chemical that will ease up their reservations, then they may commit the act that was only a fantasy before the chemical. Alcohol, a ridiculous amount of caffeine, Testosterone, or sugar, whatever it is that pushes them over the edge, is still not the primary cause. It didn't give them the idea or the psychosis, it only gave them the ambition to go through with it.

The ultimate blame still falls on the individual.



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
Lets clear up a few things with snippets from the story..

Prosecutors, meanwhile, said their own expert may testify there was no evidence Smith had consumed diet pills or energy drinks as he claimed before his wife died.

Prosecutor Michelle Snodgrass said Smith tested negative for amphetamine-type substances shortly after the killing.

Tested Negative... there went his claim to taking 400 milligrams of caffeine a day.....so he wasn't buzzed or flying high.... hum...


After sleeping intermittently, Smith had nap with one child he picked up from school at midday at a school near their home in Dayton, Ky

So he wasn't sleep deprived either...

As for the other case cited...

Moorer said Noble awoke in pajamas and slippers in near-freezing weather, went to a Starbucks and downed two large coffees before driving eight miles to Pullman where the pedestrians were hit.

Medical tests in the Noble case resulted in a diagnosis of a rare form of bipolar disorder — triggered by heavy consumption of caffeine, Moorer said.


Everyone read that last part right
bipolar disorder —Triggered by heavy consumption of caffeine
Does Woody also have a bipolar disorder????
if so there not saying, only that he did it because he had too much coffee!

Piss poor excuse if you ask me....



posted on Sep, 20 2010 @ 12:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by unityemissions
Caffeine is the same type of drug as speed and coc aine.

Not quite. They work on different receptors in the brain. Caffeine works on adenosine (a chemical that builds up in the brain throughout the day resulting in sleepiness at night and is metabolized during sleep). Speed and coc aine I believe both work on dopamine, which is used in the brain for all kinds of things and expains why these drugs eff you up a lot more.

Actually speed and coc aine are in two different categories as well. Speed is an amphetamine; coke is in a class by itself I believe.

Not that you can't OD on caffeine causing all sorts of problems. But ODing on caffeine and ODing on speed or coc aine are two totally different animals (although I should mention that of these I am familiar firsthand only with caffeine overdose).



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join