You’re a police detective and you just cracked the biggest case of your career. Suspect says this to you. How do you respond without sounding mad?
 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
|
Youre a police detective and you just cracked the biggest case of your career. Suspect says this to you.
>Jigsaw, you know I can't let you go... without some help
>I'd never hold you as a prisoner but this cell is built so you can only leave if you chop yourself up into small pieces that fit between the bars
>the choice is yours
Yeah you did, but I'll listen to you
get a veterinarian to chip him
>jigsaw the boomer trapper is picked up by officer zoomer
>yo them traps were straight buzzin no cap but legally that shit was mid af and you give mad bad vibes so we dungeon you for a bit but you can vape in there
>vaping
A thousand times worse than the hundred other crimes he has committed.
>officer zoomer, in front of you is a large bowl of bugs and a dot matrix display showing the median house price in your town
Not funny and all the replies are samegays
>The corps, the corps, the corps the corps.
>the corpse, the corpse, the corpse, the corpse
these threads are so hilarious to me as a Law expert, People in these Saw threads have no clue how the police, the Law and the Courts work.
just the sheer amount of People who think John Kramer would be convicted is hilarious.
>no probable cause
>insufficient evidence
>illegaly obtained evidence
>lost evidence
>unavailable witnesses
>no willingness to cooperate
>wrongful arrest
these are literally all the things that lead to a case being dismissed and they all apply to John Kramer and the Jigsaw case.
It would be a nightmare for the DA to work through this and the whole trial would take years, years the John Kramer doesnt have and with his old age and his brain tumors it would be a cake walk to get all charges dropped.
He literally kidnapped people and put them in death traps. I'm fairly certain that's illegal.
>has no evidence and no witness that Kramer actually did it
I have the movies. I just need to show the judge the scenes with John and he is done for.
judge would throw this out in 5 seconds
>hearsay, prejudicial, improperly obtained or irrelevant items
>no witness
well if he made the statement in OP's pic to a cop, thats basically an admission to at least kidnapping or false imprisonment, so you could just get the cop to come in and testify that he made that admission.
Boom, there's your evidence and witness.
Confessions without a warrant aren’t admissible in court.
a warrant just lets you seize stuff
Objection, Your Honor! The witness's testimony is irrelevant and prejudicial
>Objection sustained. The witness's testimony is stricken from the record.
>I suggest you reevaluate your case, Counselor.
>irrelevant
it goes to intent
>prejudicial
its not unfair so its fine
>I'M TELLIN YA JERRY I GAVE THEM A CHOICE
I know when folks are shit posting or saying pasta but folks like you who are either falling for bait or just copying the responses like a Tom and Jerry cartoon confuse me
its not a shitpost that there is not enough evidence to convict John Kramer.
they even teach this stuff in law school
>"a Tom and Jerry cartoon confuse me", -Anon, 2023
My uncle sweeps the floors at Nintendo, so I can confirm.
I've been a lawyer for almost 30 years now and I actually took the time to go through this video to try and disprove the 'He did nothing wrong' theory. I scrutinised every single moment, every single line of dialogue, all the little details someone not familiar with the finer points of the law wouldn't consider. I often paused to take notes when I thought I might have found some sort of angle from which to prosecute him (even if I knew it was flimsy at best). 2 hours later and I had nothing.
There is just no feasible way any court would be able to charge him. He manages to jump through just about every legal loophole there is and come out clean on the other side. I actually respect the amount of effort that's gone into his actions, clearly he knew what he was doing.
I really hate to say this, but he walks everytime. He is just saying words, gets physicly assaulted and then defends himself by legal means.
>2 hours
>10 movies
Nice LARP
>buh just lock him up
People have no idea how the legal system works. I follow this stuff very carefully and it would be practically impossible to build a case against Jigsaw in any court in the United States. You're not responsible for other people's decisions, it's pretty basic stuff.
He's right, this son of a b***h is too smart of some small town police force, unless...
Okay I'm actually a lawyer and unironically the last point is correct. This trial would take YEARS be a complete media shitshow and he would die before sentencing. Jigsaw would never serve time for his actions.
i work at nintendo and he is right no cap
>"Sure, even if you convince a judge with that bull, Manslaughter is still a thing."
A man's laughter is not a crime
>hand in your sith robe and assassins creed blade
>and your other blade
What's going on with his chin?
Answer me, you frickers!
He has a weird thin goatee
At the very least, he kidnapped a detective's child
Victim said I killed him? (It wasn't me)
Found him in a bear trap? (It wasn't me)
Saw the puppet laughing? (It wasn't me)
I just set the stage, they're the ones that flee.
Found him in the bathroom? (It wasn't me)
Chained by the ankle? (It wasn't me)
Watched the shotgun collar? (It wasn't me)
Just a moral lesson, for them to see.
Zoomers aren’t going to get the reference
zoomers still listen to shaggy. Or at least that song
>t. zoomer
Bullshit. No one listens to Shaggy. Not even Shaggy listens to Shaggy.
I hear this song at least once a month. It's still pretty popular. Check it's spotify plays
Mr. Kramer. Your actions, though technically legal, are morally dubious. Consider that you broke down and cried in Saw 3, would a innocent man cry in such a situation? Or did you perhaps realize your legacy, your life's work, your very essence, is that of a murder and that's all you ever be known for. No matter how much you try to twist legal definitions and cite precedent, there is one absolute truth that you cannot deny. And that, is that you enjoy hurting people. Earth's history has been littered with men like you, who think the ends justify the means. Your methods are cruel, your punishment unusual, and with that being said, you are under arrest.
>though technically legal
>you are under arrest
Wrongful arrest.
As far as evidence goes, was it ever said if he left fingerprints or DNA or anything? Was he ever found literally in the process of a crime by a surviving cop?
I am in university for criminal justice and after 6 years the professor makes us watch these films and has the students try to build a case against jiggy. After we all fail to find a way to convict him the professor sits us all in class and drops the bomb on us. Since 2007 not a single student has been able to build a case against jiggy. The professor let's us know, somday we will run into these cases best thing is to just let them go.
The charges? Literally None
Former ICJ judge here. Technically, he can be charged with taking people from one location to another one without their explicit will and signature. It is also true that he can be charged with putting people in situations that bear the risk of bodily injury and potentially fatal consequences. However, and this is important in understanding how such people are convicted. Jigsaw's intentions also fall into the equation which means that he a) intends to teach his "victims" a lesson for life and thus make them better persons, b) he gives them explicit instructions how to learn that lesson and c) he acts without malice.
Moreover, on the aspect of kidnapping. Evidence obviously would show that he is too frail to actively kidnap someone, ergo this would be instantly dropped in a serious court.
The chances of him being convicted of murder, let alone kidnapping are extremely low, 0.5% tops.
Lawyer here. Here's the beauty of Jigsaw by allowing his victims to choose their own fates, he technically cannot be convicted of homicide. Let me clarify.
Webster's dictionary defines murder as having the following elements:
>1. unlawful
>2. killing
>3. through criminal act or omission
>4. of a human
>5. by another human
>6. with malice afterthought
Jigsaw takes advantage of a couple of different legal loopholes. In this case, it would be in regards to point 2, 3, and 6.
>2. killing
Jigsaw never actually "killed" any of his victims, per-say. They always had a choice.
>3. through criminal act or omission
Even if Jigsaw did kill anybody, it was not through criminal act. There is nothing criminal about letting your victims choose their own fates, through their own free will. They are liable for their own actions.
>6. with malice afterthought
The whole point of Jigsaw's antics was to serve as a life-changing, positive rehabilitation. Therefore, Jigsaw acted without malice.
I hope this clear things up for anybody who previously didn't understand the legal technicalities of this series.
As a us marshal, I'd just read his rights and handcuff him.
>I never murdered anyone in my life
>Gravity did after I push them off a tall building
Problem?
THOSE VICTIMS WEREN'T YOURS TO LOSE!
Mister Jigsaw I don't care about any murders, I'm with the IRS, this is an audit and you have improperly filed your returns you sick frick
Shoot him a couple times, plant some baggies of coke on him, and then claim he was acting belligerent and resisting arrest.
Who are they gonna believe, me an upstanding officer of the law, or the old white man being accused of crimes?
>So you are saying that this geriatric cancer patient was able to physically prevent you from arresting him so you had to shoot him? And that he was also on coke the whole time?
Afraid of Jigsaw?
At this point jigsaw threads aren't even baiting for attention, they're just a circlejerk
>Not funny and all the replies are samegays
Whom are you quoting?
Some troony. Don't you see the picture?
no, child, these are your delusions speaking
>B-but it was their cho-
Wrong again, child
>they DESER-
Wrong in every detail as always.
Prison awaits
>everyone who thinks what jigsaw did was illegal will wake up in their own saw trap tomorrow
kino
my dad is formerly a retired county clerk and he said any DA that brought charges on Jigsaw would be fired for wasting taxpayer money
I love these threads,I really do. I love sawbros. Theyre the best kind of people. I love all the DAs and high profile defence lawyers we have posting here. These are great threads.