Calguns.net

Calguns.net (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/index.php)
-   2nd Amend. Litigation Updates & Legal Discussion (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/forumdisplay.php?f=330)
-   -   Texeira vs Alameda County en-banc judges compared to other 2nd cases (http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=1321955)

Metal God 04-06-2017 9:09 AM

Texeira vs Alameda County en-banc judges compared to other 2nd cases
 
So I just happened to come across the en-banc youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMEYEBXa-E0
and as I'm watching I realized something odd to me . It appears the "random" selection of judges for this case has 6 of the Peruta judges .

There are 29 active judges and 19 senior judges on the court . What's the odds you get 6 of the 11 random judges picked are the same as another gun rights case ? Does anyone have any stats that shows how many of the same "randomly" selected judges are on other gun rights cases . It just seemed odd to me that I recognized many of the judges .

I then would ask do we know how all those same judges voted in each of the other gun rights cases ?

Do I smell a conspiracy or am I over thinking this ?

numpty 04-06-2017 10:45 AM

Of course it's a conspiracy. Just the frequency of use in 2A cases is conspiratorial in and of itself.

As for the random selection of judges? I'm sure that's rigged as necessary to ensure the outcome.

The only positive I see in this state is that they can't stop themselves from legislating our 2A away; eventually they'll legislate themselves into a corner.

Diamondi88 04-06-2017 10:47 AM

There is a 23% chance that any judge picked will have served on Peruta. The % increases from there for every subsequent judge drawn. So, 6 out of 11 does not strike me as extreme. ( This all assumes I have done my math correctly)

ironpegasus 04-06-2017 12:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Diamondi88 (Post 19924995)
There is a 23% chance that any judge picked will have served on Peruta. The % increases from there for every subsequent judge drawn. So, 6 out of 11 does not strike me as extreme. ( This all assumes I have done my math correctly)

While that increases, the percentage chance of all those same judges being on the panel should be decreasing in inverse proportion. So the closer you get to the exact same panel (or even just the same group judges that overturned the previous ruling), the more improbable the odds of picking that exact group is.

If that pattern occurs more than once for gun related cases and does not recur with similar frequency than all other types of cases then there is likely something weird going on.

This is why there should be an investigation into why so many gun cases go en banc while cases of other natures/origins don't suffer the same re-hearing fate with similar frequency. There's more than enough possibility of collusion there to warrant greater scrutiny.

press1280 04-07-2017 3:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Metal God (Post 19924467)
So I just happened to come across the en-banc youtube video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XMEYEBXa-E0
and as I'm watching I realized something odd to me . It appears the "random" selection of judges for this case has 6 of the Peruta judges .

There are 29 active judges and 19 senior judges on the court . What's the odds you get 6 of the 11 random judges picked are the same as another gun rights case ? Does anyone have any stats that shows how many of the same "randomly" selected judges are on other gun rights cases . It just seemed odd to me that I recognized many of the judges .

I then would ask do we know how all those same judges voted in each of the other gun rights cases ?

Do I smell a conspiracy or am I over thinking this ?

Senior judges normally do not participate in en banc unless they were part of the original 3 judge panel.

SonofWWIIDI 04-07-2017 4:40 AM

Of course it's a conspiracy. Liberal, activist judges trying to forward the leftist agenda.

:TFH:

Diamondi88 04-07-2017 5:52 AM

I wasn't saying there isn't a conspiracy. My point was between the two cases the number of judges being on both cases does not surprise me when considering the math of just those two cases. But as has been suggested, to advance a conspiracy theory, then if we look at the math we should be able to narrow down to which judges are on all of those cases. Then investigate why that particular judge(s) happens to be on all those cases. That would give proof to a conspiracy.


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 6:10 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.