Supreme Court acquits Webb, et al

[masakiton]

---

i think there is something wrong with this statement.

i think you mean kung nituman ba sa balaod ang trial court ug CA dili ang FACTS nituman sa balaod...

unsaon pagtuman sa FACTS sa balaod? hehehehe... ask lang ko....

ops sorry mam hehehe
edit mode......
FACTS/testimony/evidence/documents/proof ang basihan kung ang taw ni violate ba or wala sa balaod

[RMK711]

i think there is something wrong with this statement.

i think you mean kung nituman ba sa balaod ang trial court ug CA dili ang FACTS nituman sa balaod...

unsaon pagtuman sa FACTS sa balaod? hehehehe... ask lang ko....

Don't feed the troll

[unsay_ngalan_nimo]

for sure mag artista na c Hubert Webb...daghan man gud cya fans.....hehehehehe

masgwapo man si jason webb kesa ni hubert webb oi.. kung si jason webb pa to kay muana gyud ko na innocent gyud.. lol

[Wham!]

masgwapo man si jason webb kesa ni hubert webb oi.. kung si jason webb pa to kay muana gyud ko na innocent gyud.. lol

I bet hubert webb will run for senate ... and maybe even win.

[k.A.i]

masgwapo man si jason webb kesa ni hubert webb oi.. kung si jason webb pa to kay muana gyud ko na innocent gyud.. lol

hala, nabayot na hahaha...


@topic
ani nalang, ang SC naay nakit-an nga problema sa lower courts maong na-acquit sila.
sakto ba ko?

[RMK711]

I bet hubert webb will run for senate ... and maybe even win.

Senate ra? How about President? Hahaha...

[masakiton]

If the Vizconde case was decided by a jury, sure ko, si Hubert ma.guilty. Given na ang filipinos mu.side jud sa victim. Pro victim ra ba ang pinoy in general.

atleast ang gi buhat sa SC kai ilaha gi tan aw ang proof/evidence/fact/testimonies/documents kung naa ba na break nga law ang taw
dili pud baya to basta2x ang US immigration document nga wala ra gi dawat sa previous court

[Wham!]

Yea I'm glad someone understands the principle I brought up. It's just that most people here are ignorant of the law, so they just follow whatever the Supreme Court says. There are those who say the Constitution is what the Supreme Court says it is. Actually, that's not entirely accurate. They are given the power to interpret, but their interpretation powers are limited by their legitimacy. If they keep breaking their own rules and keep crossing boundaries, calling black white or confusing heaven and hell, then they lose legitimacy in the eyes of the people, and worse, they lose their dignity in the eyes of their peers internationally.

emotional man gud kaayo uban tawo diri mao ning dili nila makita nga ang supreme court mismo adunay abuse of power gibuhat sa pag overturn nila sa findings of facts sa lower courts nga supposedly dili mana sila pwede manghilabot ana gani. ang question is kinsa pa kahay madaganan sa ordinary tawo kung ang supreme court mismo nag exercise ug abuse of power?

Normally, in other jurisdictions, high court judges are very mindful about how their decisions are perceived, because they don't want to bring disrepute, shame and embarrassment to their country's system of justice. Of course, this does not apply here, hence the many recent scandals. As you pointed out, the plagiarism case has raised eyebrows everywhere, even the American author involved is incredulous at the court's definition of plagiarism. It would make college deans everywhere laugh hysterically...

ok ra man gud sa 7 justices nga i-label sila sa entire legal profession as the idiot seven as what is actually happening now.. grabe lang jud kaayo ka embarassing sa lower court judges uy.. imagine nanghilabot ang pito ka tawo nga wa man gani alamang sa kaso kumpara sa ila nga grabe nila ug tutok intawun ato.

pero baga man jud ug nawong ang uban supreme court jusdges wa man gani sila naulaw nga halos gi condemn na sila sa whole world atong plagiarism scandal

[Wham!]

atleast ang gi buhat sa SC kai ilaha gi tan aw ang proof/evidence/fact/testimonies/documents kung naa ba na break nga law ang taw
dili pud baya to basta2x ang US immigration document nga wala ra gi dawat sa previous court

it is not the place of the supreme court intawon nga mo "tan aw ang proof/evidence/fact/testimonies/documents kung naa ba na break nga law ang taw" .. that is solely the role of the lower courts. that is why nay abuse of power gibuhat sa supreme court justices sa "pag tan-aw nila kung naka break ba ug law or wala". if you are still wondering what is the role of the supreme court, back read na lang sa thread. pero murag wala naman kay pag-asa kay murag lisod jud nimo masabtan tawun.

[RMK711]

it is not the place of the supreme court intawon nga mo "tan aw ang proof/evidence/fact/testimonies/documents kung naa ba na break nga law ang taw" .. that is solely the role of the lower courts. that is why nay abuse of power gibuhat sa supreme court justices sa "pag tan-aw nila kung naka break ba ug law or wala". if you are still wondering what is the role of the supreme court, back read na lang sa thread. pero murag wala naman kay pag-asa kay murag lisod jud nimo masabtan tawun.

Haha don't feed the troll kay grabe na ang thread pollution diri