Friday, March 24, 2017

I guess I'm ~that~ girl now.

Some guy managed to wreck his Mercedes right in front of me on the freeway. He went to pass me in the carpool lane and must have hit some water and before I knew it he was cross three lanes trying to crawl under a semi. From the side.

The first thing the cop said to me was - how fast were you doing? Because of course he wanted to get that guy for speeding. And maybe he was, who am ~I~ to judge speed. I kept telling the cop I didn't think he was going that fast. Because ya know - I'm trying to do that guy a solid. He's already totaled his Mercedes. The last thing he needs is an excessive speed charge.

I wasn't technically lying because I didn't really know how fast I was going and told the cop that. But even if he had been, I realized in that moment I might lie in the future. As long as no one dies. So yeah. That is who I am now, I guess.

In other news - Silicon Valley still doesn't have anything to entertain me. Which means I can't entertain you. I am fully shocked at how many articles I read about IOT, yet I see none of this crap at shows. I'm starting to think this stuff doesn't exist. At least with vaporware they build some kind of thing to fool you into thinking it exists.

8 comments:

Post Alley Crackpot said...

Think of me as the would-be witness or juror from Hell, at least from the point of view of the State.

I'm dumber than Sergeant Schultz when it comes to other people's accidents and misfortunes.
I know nothing, I see nothing! That guy who smacked into a barrier wall at speed and who was launched through the wind screen was really only doing 30 miles per hour and had his seat belt on when I saw him, honest!

Oh, you want me on a jury as well, do you? Let's consider the fact that legal codes are so large that even lawyers have to specialise in a certain type of law practice, and then tell me how I'm supposed to know what's "right" according to the laws as codified in one of several thousand separate jurisdictions ...

What about the judge's instructions to a jury for the application of the law? How is this anything but asking a bunch of people to rubber stamp the desires of the State?

In fact, the only good argument I've heard for a jury is for "jury nullification", which involves sending people home who have been railroaded through "the process".

Unless I'm supposed to be there to provide a sort of sanctioned "conscience" for the police and prosecutorial overshoot of the State, I might as well be anywhere else but in a court room.

Mistrial? What mistrial? It wasn't my idea that I would be on a jury! I just looked at the unconvincing, circumstantial evidence and unlike the other craven fools of the "Milgram's Thirty-Seven" on the jury, I decided I could in fact be that arsehole who mucks it up for the prosecution!

"But the retrial will cost the taxpayers money?"

Should have thought about that when you tried to stick me on a jury then!

I bet they won't be inviting me back for seconds, let alone thirds. :-)

So when The Rozzers want me to try to admit guilt to speeding myself just so they can get some other guy, I'm going the other way ...

"No, he looked like he was driving completely safely, and as far as I can tell he had his seat belt on and he was properly signalling lane changes ... so I have no idea how his car got completely wrecked and how he came to be stuck inside the Asda sign near the roundabout!"

As for all of the people who would say that I'm not doing my civic duty, I disagree entirely, and in fact I believe that by mucking up the works for overzealous police constables and prosecutors, I am doing my civic duty. That my goals for civic duty and someone else's don't align is their bloody problem, not mine.

(... and I also make a truly horrible uncle since I always buy the kids the sweets that I can't enjoy myself anymore, mostly so I can wind them up as spin toys that will unwind in the presence of their far-too-trusting parents ... and so, yes, you may have another Double Decker bar, they're sensational, aren't they ...) :-)

she said: said...

I guess my biggest issue right now since I've had a few encounters is that the don't have to be on rage all the time. I think people are complete assholes to them. So I'd decided that when I finally got stopped that I would not be an asshole in any way. I'd be very professional and take my punishment because I probably deserve it. But they seem to always have it ramped up to 11. Even if you are totally cool with them. Not everything is a bank robbing level response.

Even with the above accident. I'm a bystander just trying to make sure the semi driver didn't get blamed. But the cop is like - I'm going to open your door. I was like - allriiiiiight. Then he said something to the effect that he was doing it in case I decided to run. Mind you - I'm not even involved in this accident. I told him I wasn't going to run. But he said he'd been doing this a long time and I'd be surprised at what he's seen. Which I honestly wouldn't be. But anyway. It's just small dickish things like that.

Some day if you are super bored you should read my 4 part story of how trying to serve jury duty changed my mind about the whole system. And I'm pretty pro cop. Here. Here. Here. And here.

Post Alley Crackpot said...

Also, is this dialled up to eleven enough for you? :-)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R03Dtu1r6nk

she said: said...

Your getting there.

Anonymous said...

At the risk of starting another conspiracy in the comment section of Snarkolepsy's blog, I think that your thoughts on jury nulification are cute, but naive. Ask anyone who believes in jury nulification the last time that they were on a jury and its either never or before they believed in jury nulification. Between the predictive algorithms and mining social media, they make sure that the radicals don't get a chance to sit on one. The best way to get taken off of the jury pool list is to simply express pro nulification opinions and you'll never be asked to serve again. DF

she said: said...

I'm pretty sure I didn't have any thoughts about jury nullification. So few thoughts in fact that I had to browse through google to see how I felt about it and to see if I could find anyone who had ever used that successfully. And after going through a little felony traffic issue recently - I'm pretty sure that is an old wives tale. Honestly - the cops really have their shit nailed down these days.

The case I was trying to get out of was for two guys that were bascially career criminals. Murder cases. Since I had someone in my family who was killed through a domestic violence homocide - I'm unforgiving when it comes to murder.

Jury nullification seems to only make a huge difference when you are letting people off of the crimes they are committing. For Murder - that isn't happening with me. I would have been unreasonably harsh most likely.

Post Alley Crackpot said...

"Between the predictive algorithms and mining social media, they make sure that the radicals don't get a chance to sit on one ..."

YES GUVNA WE'RE GUNNA FIND YOU M8 AND SIZE YOU UP RITE PROPPA!

... opinions all provided, the future pre-decided, detached and subdivided in the mass-production zone ...

No thanks, I'm just good.

she said: said...

Woooooow. That sent me down a huge rabbit hole. Pulling out ol timey Rush videos huh? I saw them back in the day but I couldn't remember who I saw them with since I wasn't really a fan. So - a googling away I went. Has Rush really been touring since 1974? Yipes. They must be in their rockers now. I saw them in the 90's. And I'm guessing I was really there to see Primus. You know them from South Park. Here. I was big into them in the day.

I don't think the court uses algorithms at all. Government systems are so antiquated. They are usually 20 years behind the real world.