Active thread

Only the replies to the one thread you selected
Cantonica: I think one of the questions that I have with criminal contempt is whether there's any defense of it. I thought David'd point was a good one (about it being used only sparingly) but I still can't think of what it does that cant be done through civil contempt. I thought the point about involving the prosecutor was interesting – i'd like to hear that fleshed out a bit more
Oberon: what about due process? Shouldnt he know before the results of any action taken
Nilfgaard: I agree w/ whirpool--it seemed like, as a foundational matter, we were all comfortable with the judge being able to punish (rather than coerce), and I wanted to hear why people thought that.
Oberon: I think David's point was a good one but that doesn't take away from the fact that it is wrong
Hoth: oberon i totally agree
Blackeye: I agree. Just because it is rare doesn't mean it is acceptable.
Cantonica: Yeah me too – I'm just wondering, can anybody come up with a defense of criminal contempt? Like something for me to consider because at this point, I'm really one sided on the discussion
Blackeye: I can see criminal contempt for direct, but not at all for indirect.
Cantonica: can you explain that a little more blackeye?
Hyperion: what cantonica said^
Sunflower: Maybe its the MPRE talking, but I'm beginning to think criminal contempt is redundant so long as sanctions exist