Tag Archives: evidence

THE IMPEACHMENT PARADOX OF THE UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION!!!

How do you impeach a president for high crimes and misdemeanors if there is no legal precedent or an established judicial procedure? In the Constitution the Congress has the right to oversight of the Executive Branch. Does that mean that the whole Congressional body including the minority representatives of the House of Representatives have a right to participate in drawing up articles of impeachment with subpoena power to gather evidence which may just be a fishing expedition or does the judicial committee of the House of Representatives have a right to draw up articles of impeachment and subpoena power to gather evidence which may not only be a fishing expedition but may also constitute a harassment of the executive branch if it goes on for an indefinite period of time?

Not having procedural rules and no legal precedents it seems that impeaching a president is purely a political combative process without a judicial foundation. The media is at the forefront of the political battle with the aim of getting a public consensus on the politically motivated impeachment process. The rule of law does not realistically exist with an accused party without seemingly the ability to defend itself against unspecified articles of impeachment.

A morass of unproved allegations and assorted BS is what the media is presenting with no factual evidence. How many unproven allegations can you make before you become the laughing stock of the public for harassment of the executive branch? No audio or visual evidence of a crime and no testimony under oath by
“reputable” officials in public. Is impeachment even possible in private without full transparency where redactions are made in the interest of national security?

So we have a paradox or an unanswerable question. How do you impeach a president without legal procedure precedents and no audio or visual evidence of a crime or misdemeanor? If the evidence is sworn oaths by “reputable” government officials then how do you eliminate possible political bias, vengeful statements, or intentional lies?

Government is exercised by fallible humans trying to follow the law as it is written. Insert fallible, morally questionable humans following unwritten laws and you have utter chaos which is what we are witnessing in the current impeachment process.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 4900 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially EVERGREEN TRUTH, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

THE TRUTH ABOUT CIRCUMSTANTIAL+

bob-stott-quote-we-had-only-circumstantial-evidence-tying-him-to-the

Circumstantial: adj. evidence suggesting possible guilt by proximity but unproven beyond a reasonable doubt

Conviction based on circumstantial evidence alone is unjust but in the real world judges and juries must make a judgment of innocence or guilt and sometimes circumstantial evidence is unfortunately the only evidence which is available and it takes a costly lawyer to convince a jury or judge that despite the overwhelming circumstantial evidence, a defendant is really not guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 2500 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

THE TRUTH ABOUT EVIDENCE*

evidence-logo-trans-2016

Evidence: n. a subset(s) which can frequently be used to help make a conclusion and/or judgment and is frequently presented in court

Evidence gathered may be relevant or irrelevant and the conclusions or judgments which you make from it may be valid or invalid.

When evidence is presented in court the primary concern is usually whether it is truthful or factual evidence and secondarily whether it is relevant to the issue being considered which is an alleged crime.

There is also the possibility that evidence may have been fraudulently placed in an attempt to frame an innocent party so trying to get to the truth of a matter is a very inexact procedure and far from being scientific.

The reputation of the plaintiffs and defendants is a critical consideration as well as the reputation of any common or professional witnesses. That a nicely staged emotional appeal to the jury is vital in most prosecutions is a fact and often a high priced lawyer is one who is not only very skilled in presenting evidence and is also skilled at making emotional appeals to the jury.

When convicting someone on circumstantial evidence it is often a question of how overwhelming it is and the more circumstantial evidence that can be presented the better or there is more certainty with much of it. 100% certainty is seldom possible so guilty beyond a reasonable doubt is the standard for judgment in court because some doubt in the minds of some jurors almost always exists.

 

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 2300 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

THE TRUTH ABOUT PRESUME+

maxresdefault

Presume: v. to assume a large probability of guilt and/or truth based on preliminary observation and evidence but still unproven in court and/or by a tribunal

 

To presume means that you are assuming something to be true before all the facts, information, or evidence is gathered to prove or disprove your assumption(s).

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 1900 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

UPDATED CRITICAL THINKING SELF ASSESSMENT!!!

critical-thinkingdan1

Circle whether you agree, somewhat agree, or disagree with the 20 communications.

  1. When considering a problem, I question my assumptions and make sure they have worked in the past on similar problems.

agree    somewhat agree    disagree

  1. I seldom question seemingly obvious assumptions

agree    somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I sometimes ask others for suggestions and opinions.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I ask a diverse group of humans for their perspective if they have some expertise or experience with the problem whether they are male or female, from a different department, or different ethnic origin.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I try to evaluate customer needs as objectively as possible for possible solutions to the problem.

agree    somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I do research if possible to gather relevant information if there is considerable uncertainty in the decision which I am about to make.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I do intimate research on what the customer really needs first and wants second using focal groups, interviews, and customer product feedback.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I sometimes consider ideas and suggestions that other humans present if I am not desperate to solve a problem even if my intuition says it probably won’t work.

agree   somewhat disagree   disagree

  1. When considering someone else’s idea, I realize it is their personal point of view and try to guess whether possibly their opinion is biased by their circumstance, prior experience, or background education.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I search for patterns and possible solutions based on existing data but supplement it with new researched data if it doesn’t seem relevant to the problem solving.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. Emotional bias is a given but I try to overcome it and be as objective and rational as possible.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. If I sense the emotional bias of other humans and feel it is obscuring an objective view of the problem then I don’t take their solutions very seriously.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I ask questions where there is some doubt to make the desired outcome or solution to the problem more certain.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I look at how my industry and similar industries are handling similar problems to get insight into whether my solution is current and competitive.

Agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. Look carefully at the experiential evidence which supports a decision to make sure it isn’t biased, especially emotionally.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I don’t randomly apply solutions to circumstances much beyond experiential evidence suggestions and/or examples.

Agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I would choose a solution that I was uncomfortable with if the experiential evidence from other similar sources strongly supported it.

Agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. Once a course of action is determined for the best solution, I make sure to monitor the most critical task of the solution procedure.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. When a circumstance changes, I sometimes adapt my initial assumptions to make sure that the solution will still be the right desired outcome.

agree   somewhat agree   disagree

  1. I recognize the need for emotional intelligence in successfully motivating those under me which means appropriate rewards, punishments, motivating language, and a generally friendly and considerate demeanor.

Agree   somewhat agree   disagree

 

Total agrees _____ Total somewhat agrees_____ Total disagrees____

A candidate who totally agrees with all or most of the good problem solving techniques is a liar to some extent because no one is perfect and he or she is afraid to reveal underlying weaknesses. That human is  potentially a good yes man or woman but not one who will be very good at realistic leadership skills in problem solving.

 

A candidate with more than a handful of somewhat disagrees can be further questioned on why they somewhat disagree and you may find a truly thinking human who has useful and even workable but different opinions from perfection in all areas.  If the somewhat disagrees seem plausible and convincing then you may have a great problem solver as an employee.

A candidate with some disagrees is also useful information because you can follow up and ask why the disagreement and how would you handle the circumstance differently. Some reasons might be totally stupid but it might also reveal a personality that is intolerant, tyrannical, unable to deal with all kinds of employee personalities, has bad problem solving skills, etc.

 

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 1500 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

THE TRUTH ABOUT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT+

images

Truth beyond a reasonable doubt or TBRD: n. is unaltered and/or unmodified audio visual dated and timed evidence in court from a reputable source proving something existed in the past with a certain amount of certainty even though audio visual evidence can be tampered with very skillfully and pose as reality when it isn’t reality

 

In an increasingly immoral society with untrustworthy witnesses it is becoming increasingly harder and harder to prove that something, especially a crime existed in the past.

 

Professionals, authorities, and humans in general can lie under testimony in court and make a seemingly highly probable event an actual fictional occurrence. This is why the reputation of testifiers is increasingly becoming important in court verdicts because traditional undated and untimed evidence in the form of pictures is highly suspect because it may have been taken two days, a few months, or even years ahead of time and presented in court as evidence for a recent occurrence theoretically matching the evidence in court.

 

Until we have a more moral secular society many court verdicts will unfortunately be shams and as highly unreliable and as irresponsible as the humans who testify in court.

 

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 1500 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

THE TRUTH ABOUT MOTION TO SUPPRESS EVIDENCE OR IDENTIFICATIONS+

indianapolis-dui-attorney-explains-the-motion-to-suppress-evidence-3-728 (1)

Motion to suppress evidence: n. a request(s) by the defendant to exclude some evidence(s) presented by the plaintiff on the grounds that it is untrue and/or deceptive and/or fraudulent and/or illegal usually pretrial and/or during trial by jury

THE MOTION TO SUPPRESS IDENTIFICATIONS is in reality a motion to suppress evidence(s) or a request by the defendant to exclude some evidence(s) presented by the plaintiff on the grounds that it is untrue and/or deceptive and/or fraudulent and/or illegal.

This occurs prior to an actual trial but still may be presented during a trial trying to convince the jury that in fact the plaintiff’s evidence was untrue, deceptive, fraudulent, or even illegal despite a ruling by a judge prior to trial that the evidence(s) are in fact admissible.

A veteran or experienced judge is usually more competent at deciding whether evidence is indeed untrue, deceptive, fraudulent, or even illegal but an inexperienced judge may not be able to tell the difference between deceptive or untrue evidence(s).

It is here that judge fallibility creeps in and a judge may indeed be guilty of bad judgment. No judge is infallible when it comes to making decisions on the truth or untruth or deception of a piece of evidence(s). Yes, most judges will make accurate judgements on whether evidence is indeed fraudulent or illegal with much greater certainty and will grant a motion to suppress evidence(s) rather quickly if such is the case. The grey area for a judge is to determine what is untrue or deceptive and that only comes from years of experience on the job determining cases in and out of court.

Experienced judges and experienced lawyers with much experience in court are your best bet when it comes to defending yourself in court but how many average men and women have the money for an experienced lawyer and a judge who has served at least 20 years or so in his or her profession.

Money is power because it can buy good experienced lawyers who are also better at winning court cases and settling cases out of court prior to trial. 

Public defendants fresh out of college, university, or law school who provide their services free of charge or at ridiculously low salaries are unfortunately frequently greatly incompetent or inexperienced to defend those who can’t afford a top rated legal defense for themselves. Unfortunately the current legal system is rigged in favor of the wealthy and not poor defendants.

 

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 1500 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/

THE TRUTH ABOUT UNPROVEN***

Screen-Shot-2014-03-17-at-3.11.19-PM-225x170

Unproven: n. not having convinced that a subset(s) exists and/or has existed and/or will exist beyond a reasonable doubt and/or not having used the scientific method

Many things in life are unproven but are highly probable which helps us to make sense out of human interactions and physical events and guides us in our decision making process.

There is basically judicial “proof” and scientific proof. Judicial proof is not very rigorous and the veracity of the proof to a large extent depends on the trustworthiness of the witnesses and the accuracy of the facts and professional testimony.

Interpreting the consequences of human past events and circumstantial facts is merely a statistical probabilistic communication(s) and proof in a court of law has an emotional component which is not very rational or logical and can lead to faulty convictions in more than just a few circumstances. Unless there is audio and video evidence which hasn’t been changed with computer software, proof beyond a reasonable doubt always has some guesswork involved.

Can you prove that a common morality is essential for a society to interact peacefully and have trusting relationships between its members? There is no scientific evidence which will ever prove the need for a commonly held moral code but it is an intuitive conclusion reached by personal experience and historical precedent.

Absolute scientific proof is possible but statistical norms are not really cause and effect absolute proofs and there are many real life exceptions to these statistical norms. Many things in life are unprovable in the absolute sense but statistical norms help us to make sense out of an otherwise confusing non absolute or frequently relative world.

Most of us are not really that concerned if something is unprovable as long as it is predictable to some extent. Good and bad habits, beliefs and opinions make humans predictable if you know them well. If you are a good judge of character then you can frequently predict their behavior to some extent and act accordingly.

Official proof beyond a reasonable doubt only exists in the courtroom and a scientific laboratory. There are informal proofs of the existence of something outside the lab and courtroom where you persuade someone that what you are saying or doing is in fact the truth and provable by demonstration or convincing discussion.

Unprovable supernatural phenomenon are simply accepted on faith and for the believer there is no need for proof because the indoctrination has been so successful that they are convinced supernatural phenomenon actually exist in all its varied forms.

Proving that there are ghosts, good and evil spirits, and paranormal activity is the realm of convincing charlatans who frequently make a good living off of their promoted mythologies. Some humans love to hear about miracles or the impossible or unprovable phenomenon and it is a human weakness which has plagued humanity since time immemorial.

Life after death is a perennial subject wished for by everyone and there are deceptive manipulators who promise it for their own personal benefit. Religions themselves are the greatest offenders of reason and logic but there is a saying that if you indoctrinate someone young enough they will be a true believer perhaps for a lifetime and believe almost any absurdity imaginable.

The sad part is that some of these believers want to protect their beliefs by sacrificing their lives and so conflict and wars are never ending in human history and on into the foreseeable future.

The world needs a commonly held secular moral code to keep it unified and operating peacefully and as long as traditional religions oppose such change then we are going to repeat history tragically and I don’t foresee any good consequences resulting from archaic mythological human beliefs passed on from generation to generation unrelentingly.

If you liked this evergreen truth blog then read more of them, about 1100 so far, or read one or more of my evergreen truth books, especially COMMON SENSE, rays of truth in a human world filled with myths and deceptions.

For a complete readily accessible list of blogs and titles go to twitter.com/uldissprogis.

Enjoy!!!!!!

If you enjoyed this blog then here is a list of my most popular ones which you may also enjoy!!!

https://uldissprogis.com/zlist-of-my-most-popular-blogs/