american_aurora

"Why didn't they plan for a soft asteroid?" is the annoying question I am sure the team will be asked, and I do not the answer.

> It’s also one of those policies that I literally can’t force myself to imagine a “pro” argument for.

I have always assumed that the goal was to decrease flight risk for people (from the perspective of the court), thereby allowing larger swaths of people to be released pre-trial.

I do not know if I would describe it as "border-line aspergers," but there were several obvious things that his prep team/PR should have addressed (e.g., hair, suit, posture, lack of explicit cues for listening to question vs. thinking about response).

I always find it infinitely surprising that these billion-dollar companies with all their prestige are constantly making simple but serious mistakes in every field of activity they are present in.

Looking at these other responses, I think there is a quiet dignity to working at a respectable GS grade (or whatever) that the "HN crowd" just does not understand.

I think this is a ridiculous perspective, especially when virtually every European countries is on the inquisitorial system. (See The Trial.)

It is my opinion that the US is probably one of the best countries when it comes to the rights of a defendant ― well, before a guilty verdict.

I ask that you actually take a look at some of the kinds of people who run the federal courts in the United States. See something like https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXv7anhiIBY. These are serious legitimate people who are working in and trying to improve a highly developed yet highly imperfect legal system (and country).