Yulia might go ??

[lordtiberius]

How can you be guilty as hell with NO EVDIENCE?

  I agree with all of the above.  Excluding the current thieves in office, the problem is finding enough evidence on others to stick. 

Shall we throw them in jail too?

Tymoshenko left no paper trail on the billions she stole, which is why the Russia deal is what caught her up, rather than her theft of billions in Ukrainian state funds. 

You agree with me.  YOU HAVE NO EVIDENCE.

For anyone to defend this monster, who stole off the backs of pensioners, widows, and orphans, among others, is beyond the pale.

Where's the beef Boethius?

[Shadow]

So what?

Clinton was backed by Chicom money after the DNC was bankrupt in 94.  Obama was probably seed funded by foreigners and zombie donors.  Mandela was supported by the Soviet Union. 

We are not talking about exile but jail time Shadow.  Maybe Boethius doesn't care that years of her life would be spent in a cage with no privacy for saying two words "I disagree," but I do.  So do a lot of other people.  Its an insult to all democratic peoples, but some people just don't care.

My questions are as relevant as yours. It does not matter if YOU feel the court was influenced, it matters if the court had enough evidence to convict her, as even the most biased judge will not be able to uphold such a sentence.

As for Western media, most countries should give that much attention to their own courts instead of pointing fingers.

[lordtiberius]

My questions are as relevant as yours. It does not matter if YOU feel the court was influenced, it matters if the court had enough evidence to convict her, as even the most biased judge will not be able to uphold such a sentence.

As for Western media, most countries should give that much attention to their own courts instead of pointing fingers.

I have asked you, Boethius and ML to provide evidence of YT's guilt.  You all did not.  If there is no evidence, let her free.

[ML]

I have asked you, Boethius and ML to provide evidence of YT's guilt.  You all did not.  If there is no evidence, let her free.

This is not a court of law to 'provide evidence.'  Even if all the available evidence were posted in total here, you and others would disavow this 'evidence,' so it would be a futile undertaking.

The important and controlling factors are right there in my original post.

- - - - - - - -

Anyone  that is at all objective and a little bit knowledgeable knows:

1) Prosecution of Yulia was politically motivated.

2) Nevertheless, she was/is guilty as he!! for everything she was charged with, and many other things.

Now, the real challenge is to get the rest of the guilty parties in jail with her . . . which would consist of the majority of the government officials.

But, as in every country, this mess came straight from the voters.

- - - - - - -

As I wrote, it requires one to be 'objective.'  Lacking this criteria, then no 'evidence' in the world will make a difference.

And, it doesn't matter what type of court convicted Yulia, kangaroo or otherwise.  She was guilty as he!!.

If they could get all the other crooked politicians together with Yulia in one prison . . . it would be a mighty fine thing for Ukraine.

But still needed would be for some honest and capable candidates to step forward, and for the voters to THINK.

[lordtiberius]

This is not a court of law to 'provide evidence.'  Even if all the available evidence were posted in total here, you and others would disavow this 'evidence,' so it would be a futile undertaking.

The important and controlling factors are right there in my original post.

- - - - - - - -

Anyone  that is at all objective and a little bit knowledgeable knows:

1) Prosecution of Yulia was politically motivated.

2) Nevertheless, she was/is guilty as he!! for everything she was charged with, and many other things.

Now, the real challenge is to get the rest of the guilty parties in jail with her . . . which would consist of the majority of the government officials.

But, as in every country, this mess came straight from the voters.

- - - - - - -

As I wrote, it requires one to be 'objective.'  Lacking this criteria, then no 'evidence' in the world will make a difference.

And, it doesn't matter what type of court convicted Yulia, kangaroo or otherwise.  She was guilty as he!!.

If they could get all the other crooked politicians together with Yulia in one prison . . . it would be a mighty fine thing for Ukraine.

But still needed would be for some honest and capable candidates to step forward, and for the voters to THINK.

You are comfortable with keeping her in prison on bogus charges and no evidence.  I am not.  That's the difference.

[Shadow]

I have asked you, Boethius and ML to provide evidence of YT's guilt.  You all did not.  If there is no evidence, let her free.

I would say go to Ukraine and ask to review the documents. None of us has direct access, and unless you are fluent in Ukrainian or Russian reading or seeing back what was published at the time is not going to help.
The Court in Ukraine has seen the evidence, they made the sentence. If you want her free, go to ask them.

You are claiming the charges are bogus. Perhaps you can provide evidence for your claim?

[Boethius]

I would say go to Ukraine and ask to review the documents. None of us has direct access, and unless you are fluent in Ukrainian or Russian reading or seeing back what was published at the time is not going to help.
The Court in Ukraine has seen the evidence, they made the sentence. If you want her free, go to ask them.

You are claiming the charges are bogus. Perhaps you can provide evidence for your claim?

Tymoshenko has paid millions to influence Western opinion that she is innocent.  Although the court case was not perfect, even in the West, no criminal trial is.  I did watch the trial, and while I did not view the documents, from what was presented in court, she was, beyond a reasonable, doubt, guilty of the crimes with which she was charged.
 

[lordtiberius]

I would say go to Ukraine and ask to review the documents. None of us has direct access, and unless you are fluent in Ukrainian or Russian reading or seeing back what was published at the time is not going to help.
The Court in Ukraine has seen the evidence, they made the sentence. If you want her free, go to ask them.

You are claiming the charges are bogus. Perhaps you can provide evidence for your claim?

So you, Boethius and ML are chucking the presumption of innocence?  How very democratic of you . . .

I did watch the trial, and while I did not view the documents, from what was presented in court, she was, beyond a reasonable, doubt, guilty of the crimes with which she was charged.

At a corruption trial the evidence is secret?  Even Blagoviech got to see the evidence against him and show it to the world

[lordtiberius]

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/yulia-tymoshenko-impasse-threatens-eu-ukraine-deals-1.1570885

The EU has told Kiev that it will only be offered political association and free trade pacts next month if it resolves the case of Ms Tymoshenko

With the key word being "only,"  Yanukovych wants more concessions from the EU.  The EU is rather weak,  divided and in some instances discredited.  That said, free trade would certainly help the average Ukrainian and weaken the stranglehold of the oligarchs.

Further, this step toward the EU by Yanukovych signals just how badly the rift between Yanukovych has with Moscow.  It puts both the Party of Regions and Tymoshenko's Fatherland party on a pro-Europe course away from Putin.  Recall Putin's forays with other world leaders.  If Putin cannot keep Ukraine within its sphere of influence, how much is it offering, i.e. how effective is it in asserting itself as a counterweight to Washington?

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_10_23/Putin-Yanukovych-to-discuss-Ukraine-EU-association-agreement-on-Oct-24-Ushakov-0901/

Let us presume that Yanukovych releases Tymashenko to Germany, where she would presumably imitate the Ayotollah Kohmeni in Paris.  She would bide her time and attempt to orchestrate a return to power.  How effective would those efforts be?  How popular is she in Ukraine now?  Yanukovych is unpopular now, but it is uncertain the effective the EU free trade impact would be.  Disbarring extra-Constitutional events, Yanukovych will be President until 2016.  When and if she does return, can she summon that popularity that brought her into office or will she be like Hillary Clinton, a tainted stale brand?  And with both parties on a pro-Western course, will there be more collegiality in the Rada which has been rocked by violence? 

[Shadow]

So you, Boethius and ML are chucking the presumption of innocence?  How very democratic of you . . .

At a corruption trial the evidence is secret?  Even Blagoviech got to see the evidence against him and show it to the world

She is proven guilty.
You are the one who goes against that logic, and make a presumtion of innocence AFTER proven guilty..as you make that claim, you might want to present the backup for it.

[Shadow]

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/world/europe/yulia-tymoshenko-impasse-threatens-eu-ukraine-deals-1.1570885

With the key word being "only,"  Yanukovych wants more concessions from the EU.  The EU is rather weak,  divided and in some instances discredited.  That said, free trade would certainly help the average Ukrainian and weaken the stranglehold of the oligarchs.

Further, this step toward the EU by Yanukovych signals just how badly the rift between Yanukovych has with Moscow.  It puts both the Party of Regions and Tymoshenko's Fatherland party on a pro-Europe course away from Putin.  Recall Putin's forays with other world leaders.  If Putin cannot keep Ukraine within its sphere of influence, how much is it offering, i.e. how effective is it in asserting itself as a counterweight to Washington?

http://voiceofrussia.com/news/2013_10_23/Putin-Yanukovych-to-discuss-Ukraine-EU-association-agreement-on-Oct-24-Ushakov-0901/

Let us presume that Yanukovych releases Tymashenko to Germany, where she would presumably imitate the Ayotollah Kohmeni in Paris.  She would bide her time and attempt to orchestrate a return to power.  How effective would those efforts be?  How popular is she in Ukraine now?  Yanukovych is unpopular now, but it is uncertain the effective the EU free trade impact would be.  Disbarring extra-Constitutional events, Yanukovych will be President until 2016.  When and if she does return, can she summon that popularity that brought her into office or will she be like Hillary Clinton, a tainted stale brand?  And with both parties on a pro-Western course, will there be more collegiality in the Rada which has been rocked by violence?

Russia is negotiating free trade as well, but if they need Ukraine as pass-through they will not object. Works for gas as well, and it is highly profitable even if some percentage is lost in the trade (and some stomen by Tymoshenko).

As for a return, just like Berlusconi some people manage to always get back. Guess some weeds are hard to kill.

[lordtiberius]

She is proven guilty.

You, Boethius and ML agree with that verdict.  You also agree that it is fine when a defendant cannot face their accusers, cannot make a defense in court and based on secret evidence.  That on its face is grounds for a mistrial in America and most normal Western countries - even in Canada.

You are the one who goes against that logic,

 

and make a presumtion of innocence AFTER proven guilty..as you make that claim, you might want to present the backup for it.

I am a Westerner.  I spent most of my life with the benefit democratic freedoms, civil rights and notions of fair play.  So forgive me if to an anti-Westerner, that one who benefited from these norms would espouse them.  It must be tough for a man without a country.

In America, we presume innocence.  Then we offer a fair trial.  A fair trial even in backward totalitarian regions of America, such as California, we offer the defendant opportunity to face their accusers, make a defense or exculpatory argument in court and we base convictions on PUBLIC evidence.   We have a President in America who wants to fundamentally transform that, but most of us normal people believe that.  If that makes me illogical and you, Boethuis and ML logical, I embrace your epithet as a badge of honor.

Russia is negotiating free trade as well, but if they need Ukraine as pass-through they will not object. Works for gas as well,

I doubt these negotiations will go very well.  Perhaps some influential oligarchs will shepherd this through the Byzantine channels within the Ukrainian state.  But the dislike Putin and Yanukovych have for each other, though I concede that there is one who sinks below Yanukovych  in Putin's esteem.

and it is highly profitable even if some percentage is lost in the trade (and some stomen by Tymoshenko).

I blame earthquakes on Bush as well.  Again, maybe the reach of Tymoshenko is such that like Escobar she can manipulate her criminal empire from behind bars.  Perhaps she who she is stationary in her bed most of the day and cannot receive visitors, communicates telepathy or maybe with the devil.   Satan himself manipulates the actions of others without their consent to serve Yulia to extract some perverse pleasure from her.   

As for a return, just like Berlusconi some people manage to always get back. Guess some weeds are hard to kill.

Yes, I agree Shadow.  Let's kill Berlusconi  as well.  I can can see why you are so anti-Western.  It simplifies one's moral calculus.




Yulia Tymoshenko has never lived in a Western country for any significant period.  Her daughter is English educated.  Perhaps her exile will give her a unique perspective.  But like all political immigrants, they all almost always want to go back.  What the great unknown is will that separation lesson her influence and popularity - the true measure of political power in a democracy.  We do not know how long her exile will be.  This deal between the EU and Ukraine could fall apart or could be settled days if not hours before Vilnius.  In that way, Mexico has greater advantages than Ukraine.

[GQBlues]

You, Boethius and ML agree with that verdict.  You also agree that it is fine when a defendant cannot face their accusers, cannot make a defense in court and based on secret evidence.  That on its face is grounds for a mistrial in America and most normal Western countries - even in Canada.

 

I am a Westerner.  I spent most of my life with the benefit democratic freedoms, civil rights and notions of fair play.  So forgive me if to an anti-Westerner, that one who benefited from these norms would espouse them.  It must be tough for a man without a country.

In America, we presume innocence.  Then we offer a fair trial.  A fair trial even in backward totalitarian regions of America, such as California, we offer the defendant opportunity to face their accusers, make a defense or exculpatory argument in court and we base convictions on PUBLIC evidence.   We have a President in America who wants to fundamentally transform that, but most of us normal people believe that.  If that makes me illogical and you, Boethuis and ML logical, I embrace your epithet as a badge of honor.

I doubt these negotiations will go very well.  Perhaps some influential oligarchs will shepherd this through the Byzantine channels within the Ukrainian state.  But the dislike Putin and Yanukovych have for each other, though I concede that there is one who sinks below Yanukovych  in Putin's esteem.

I blame earthquakes on Bush as well.  Again, maybe the reach of Tymoshenko is such that like Escobar she can manipulate her criminal empire from behind bars.  Perhaps she who she is stationary in her bed most of the day and cannot receive visitors, communicates telepathy or maybe with the devil.   Satan himself manipulates the actions of others without their consent to serve Yulia to extract some perverse pleasure from her.   

Yes, I agree Shadow.  Let's kill Berlusconi  as well.  I can can see why you are so anti-Western.  It simplifies one's moral calculus.




Yulia Tymoshenko has never lived in a Western country for any significant period.  Her daughter is English educated.  Perhaps her exile will give her a unique perspective.  But like all political immigrants, they all almost always want to go back.  What the great unknown is will that separation lesson her influence and popularity - the true measure of political power in a democracy.  We do not know how long her exile will be.  This deal between the EU and Ukraine could fall apart or could be settled days if not hours before Vilnius.  In that way, Mexico has greater advantages than Ukraine.

Have you not heard that US citizens are subjected to predatory execution WITHOUT due process? Haven't you heard in the US it is now well within the government to deny anyone's basic civil and Constitutional right - Habeaus Corpus - and not allow anyone the privilege to access information that may be used for their defense?


It wasn't too long ago the silly moralistic pundits declared it is morally wrong to interrogate/torture known and confessed combatants/terrorists. Now, exterminating without due process, incarceration and presumption of guilt over innocence of a US citizen without due process, are not only an accepted norms under the present Administration, it is apparently - by virtue of silence amongst the outspoken many before - to be the preferred methodology to carry out our current judicial and moral practices.

So before you start to dabble about anything morally superior in the US today, understand the platform you're standing on had long since been trampled over.

At least Yulia was afforded a trial.

[lordtiberius]

Have you not heard that US citizens are subjected to predatory execution WITHOUT due process? Haven't you heard in the US it is now well within the government to deny anyone's basic civil and Constitutional right - Habeaus Corpus - and not allow anyone the privilege to access information that may be used for their defense?


It wasn't too long ago the silly moralistic pundits declared it is morally wrong to interrogate/torture known and confessed combatants/terrorists. Now, exterminating without due process, incarceration and presumption of guilt over innocence of a US citizen without due process, are not only an accepted norms under the present Administration, it is apparently - by virtue of silence amongst the outspoken many before - to be the preferred methodology to carry out our current judicial and moral practices.

So before you start to dabble about anything morally superior in the US today, understand the platform you're standing on had long since been trampled over.

At least Yulia was afforded a trial.

That is a good point.  It's hard to argue the American point of view when we have a President who is worthy of a jail cell in charge.  It is good to see we agree yet again.  And I think we can also agree that Yulia's trial was unjust.

[SANDRO43]

Let's kill Berlusconi  as well.

That'd be a relief, at least we would not be hearing about him every single day here, and be laughed about worldwide .

As for a return, just like Berlusconi some people manage to always get back. Guess some weeds are hard to kill.

Indeed, he's managed that for about 20 years, but now he's probably going to sink rather rapidly now:

1. A trial for fiscal fraud, that he didn't manage to stop with additional self-serving legislation as in other cases, has reached its final, unappealable verdict: sentenced to 2 years, he can opt for house arrest or civil service since it's his 1st penal sentence and a less than 3 years imprisonment. It also involves being barred from public office for a number of years, but the latter requires a parliamentary vote to be made final.

2. Our parliament will vote on that in a few weeks' time, and his once solid party is already showing splits on how to vote on the issue.

3. Two other trials are approaching initial sentence, both related to his sex parties: charges are 'abetting prostitution' and 'sex with a minor'.

4. A new trial has started in Naples based on the public confession of a former senator who admitted receiving a 'gift' of €300,000 from him to quit his party and vote against a previous center-left government, thereby causing its fall along with others who were probably also similarly bribed.

However, not everything is going against him: last week a civil court accepted his appeal to halve the alimony to his ex-wife, down from € 3 million/month .

[GQBlues]

...That is a good point.  It's hard to argue the American point of view when we have a President who is worthy of a jail cell in charge.  It is good to see we agree yet again.  And I think we can also agree that Yulia's trial was unjust.

There is no such thing as an injustice in a society void of the rule of law. Yulia was deemed guilty by virtue of his peers. That is what you persist to ignore.

[lordtiberius]

There is no such things as injustice in a society void of the rule of law. Yulia was deemed guilty by virtue of his peers. That is what you persist to ignore.

I am not the only one genius apparently the entire Western Press and the European Union agree with me.  But whatevs, this is RWD anything goes.

[GQBlues]

I am not the only one genius apparently the entire Western Press and the European Union agree with me.  But whatevs, this is RWD anything goes.

Maybe my initial point didn't fully register.

Saying the western media agrees with you is an empty declaration in light of the garbage they feed us with everyday. Don't you ever believe that the EU, like the US, is as benevolent as it would like for you to believe either.

[lordtiberius]

Maybe my initial point didn't fully register.

Saying the western media agrees with you is an empty declaration in light of the garbage they feed us with everyday. Don't you ever believe that the EU, like the US, is as benevolent as it would like for you to believe either.

Maybe your initial point didn't register because you really do not have a point.  If you are comfortable with selective justice, not being able to defend yourself in a court of law, to face your accusers and to be tried on public evidence, then you need to revise your arguments for civil rights and economic conservativism and take your place among Boethius, ML, Shadow and the other totalitarians that are OK with justice for the oligarchs by the oligarchs.

If you have an argument toward her guilt or due process, of course I will listen.  But if this is going to be another one of your ventures into sophistry. Spare us your wit.  We are stocked full of nits.

[GQBlues]

Maybe your initial point didn't register because you really do not have a point.  If you are comfortable with selective justice, not being able to defend yourself in a court of law, to face your accusers and to be tried on public evidence, then you need to revise your arguments for civil rights and economic conservativism and take your place among Boethius, ML, Shadow and the other totalitarians that are OK with justice for the oligarchs by the oligarchs.

If you have an argument toward her guilt or due process, of course I will listen.  But if this is going to be another one of your ventures into sophistry. Spare us your wit.  We are stocked full of nits.

You're just simply being obtuse for the clear sake of trolling.

The very clear point being made ad mauseum is, she was convicted, tried and persecuted by the jury of her peers. Whether or not you agree with the judgment or the process has nothing whatsoever to do with the validity of the ruling court that admonish justice towards Yulia.

What you *think* have as much weigh with the decision as a piss in the ocean.

[BillyB]

 
 

Yulia was deemed guilty by virtue of his peers. That is what you persist to ignore.

The very clear point being made ad mauseum is, she was convicted, tried and persecuted by the jury of her peers.
.

Yulia asked for a trial by jury but she was denied. She probably commited as many crimes as much as the next Ukrainian politician but the lack of jury and the fact she and a disproportionate amount of people in her party are prosecuted for crimes compared to Yanukovych's party leads people and nations to believe otherwise as stated in Wikipedia below.
 
"the trial against Tymoshenko has been rated as "selective justice" and "political persecution" in statements by the U.S.A, Russia, United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Spain and other European countries; and in statements of the European Union, NATO, the European People's Party; as well as by human rights organizations: Transparency International, Freedom House, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch"
 
 
Maybe those nations and organizations are wrong but they aren't going to change their mind until Yulia gets a fair trial.
 

[SANDRO43]

Yulia asked for a trial by jury but she was denied.

I don't know about Ukrainian trial proceedings - maybe Boethius does? - but if that is within the discretion of the magistrate/court to decide, it does not necessarily negate 'a fair trial' .

Maybe she was hoping a popular jury might more easily be swayed in her favour, using some convincing means ?

[Boethius]

She was hoping that, like her supporting protesters, a jury could be purchased.

Ukraine's constitution does guarantee jury trials, albeit in a seemingly conflicting manner.  It's unclear whether it calls for common law type jury trials, or jurors acting in a quasi judicial manner, as they do in many civil law jurisdictions.  However, the process for jury trials, or the legislative framework to provide for them, is yet to be established by legislation, and no Ukrainian government ever tackled the task, until Yanukovych, who introduced legislation about 15 months ago.  I would have to research where that legislation sits, currently.

Tymoshenko is not the first Ukrainian to demand, and be denied, a jury trial but oddly, during her years in office, drafting the legislation to enable jury trials was never her priority. 

WRT evidence, all the evidence presented at Tymoshenko's trial was available online in Ukraine, as was the evidence implicating her in the murder of Yevhen Shcherban and his wife.  I can't recall offhand if he demanded the removal of the trial evidence, but the evidence WRT Mr. Shcherban was sealed on the request of Tymoshenko's lawyer.

[BillyB]

 

- but if that is within the discretion of the magistrate/court to decide, it does not necessarily negate 'a fair trial' .

 
Even if it was up to a judge to decide, this situation is bigger than him, can get out of hand, and he should allow a jury to decide. Imagine Obama prosecuting Mitt Romney and a bunch of Republicans after he wins the presidency. There will be riots and deaths especially if there isn't a jury to decide Romney's fate.
 
 

Ukraine's constitution does guarnatee for jury trials

Exactly
 
 

She was hoping that, like her supporting protesters, a jury could be purchased.

Is that fact or speculation? If fact, they should allow a jury in her trial and charge her with bribing the jury to pad her sentence. The thing is they wouldn't be able to catch her bribing anybody because when she was locked up, she had cameras on her 24/7 including when she's showering and taking a dump.
 
 If bribing juries happens in Ukraine often, maybe they should do away with jury trials all together? What's fair for one should be fair for all.

[GQBlues]

BillyB-

That is why I keep referring to jury of her peers. If such a trial is lawful in the state of Ukraine then it isn't an injustice to be tried under such proceeding. Anymore that it is unlawful in the United States today to be a US citizen and be denied habeus corpus, or worst, be executed without due process.
 
It doesn't appear anywhere in the Constitution that such is acceptable but is openly exercised and carried on anyway without any form of justification, protest or persecution; hence by presiding authorities, it is just, lawful and fair to carry out.
 
You even celebrated that simple fact not too long ago and further justified it in your eyes regardless if it wasn't within our Constitution, saying mainly, it's *just*. Now all of the sudden you're debating clear on the other side of the fence crying mistrial, injustice, whatever, etc...


So the point remains as previosuly stated, there isn't an injustice in a state void of the rule of law.