"Voodoo Doll" accepted as evidence in court??

I coudnt resist lol enjoy



hilarius

Originally posted by zaper

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

So yes, Vodoo based on the same Roman concepts of a Christian God can factor into a legal proceeding.

Kings, Queens, Presidents, Prime Ministers and Nations all derive their power from God.

Understanding that the entire system of authority is based on that is very important if you ever want to truly challenge authority.

Then you mean that there doesnt exist any secular state if we are all tied to the power of God and weird beliefs could influence the decisions of the nations and hence its institutions. I always believed that its a matter only in our third world (ie LatinAmerica and Asia) not in the first world (ie Europe and USA).

Pull out any denomination of U.S. Currency and you are going to see "In God We Trust" recite the pledge of allegience "One nation under God" listen to any public or elected official take an oath of office "So help me God".

Subtle and entirely easy to dismiss by those you want to dismiss the notion.

Kings and Queens derive their power by "The Grace of God" they colonized the nations that are seemingly independent but "Under God".

All this is a form of Talmudic Law that dates back to when the Jews were in Egypt.

Later the Holy Roman Empire expanded this system using those same style of religious based laws as Cannonical Law.

This Law is actually the very root of our 'morality' and our 'laws' and in large part this is why all Kings and Queens, Presidents and Premiers, and Prime Ministers, whether they are Christian, Muslim or Communist will defer to the Pope and kiss his ring and eagerly seek out an audience with him.

As God's legal representative on earth, the basis of all law, and all authority, he has far more power and influence over the system than they actually would like the average person to know or understand.

Every time you spend a dollar you are taking part in a religious ceremony.

It does not matter if you believe in this concept of God or in God at all, or if you believe that this is really the basis of the entire system of authority world wide, but the truth is that it is.

In a world where only the truth will set you free, truth itself has a value far exceeding what most people imagine which is why we live in a world where truth is hard to come by.

Welcome to Rome, please note the exit signs, there are none.

just sayinjg, our legal system is very different of the US. You don't swear to God about your confessions, even when is a catholic country.

Well, the promised translation, I hope is at least a bit clearer than the google one (it's a free translation, not a literal transcription)

Voodoo dolls acepted as evidence in La Quintrala's trial
During this day, María del Pilar Perez ex couple, Julio Castillo, finally declared on court. He was wearing a wig and a fake beard.
"Voodoo dolls" accepted as proof agains La Quintrala Ex mate of the architect on charge (UPI)

Western Metropolitan Prosecutor's office was able to add a new proof to the legal process against Maria del Pilar Perez and the presunct hitman Jose Ruz: This are some voodoo dolls found on La Quintrala's house The Third Oral Tribunal acceded to fiscal Carlos Gajardo's claims, even with the hard opposition of the defendant, that sustained it's not possible to add evidence found when the investigation was closed and also doesn't have anything to do with the facts why the Public Ministry took both defendants to trial.

The black magic items were found by Rocío Zamorano (defendant's daughter)'s husband in the house that was inhabited by the architect till her detention on nov. 7th 2008, after she was accused to be the mastermind behind the crime of Diego Schmidt-Hebbel, Francisco Zamorano (her ex husband) and Héctor Arévalo

Close to the end of Perez ex couple testimony, Julio Castillo, who came into courtroom characterized with a wig and a fake beard, defendant's defence asked him if he felt his physical integrity was on risk or if he was threaten by the woman while their had their love relationship.

The witness answer was negative, even with the posterior insistence of fiscal Gajardo. Then the prosecutor asked the tribunal to add a new proof that was accepted by majority with just one vote against (Doris Ocampo)

DOLLS WITH PINS

In that moment, fiscal Gajardo put a pair of gloves on his hands and took from her belongings some cotton dolls, that had the faces of the mother of one of Castillo's daughters, one of Castillo's daughter and an ex parent in law of Castillo.
The dolls had pins in face and legs, along with a black tape crossing their necks.
Castillo recognized their relatives and read a message that was among those belongings and pictures, "leave him alone bastards, forget him". The witness admited that the calligraphy belonged to Perez.

Geez, it sucks, but I hope it helps you all to understand better the news

-Cags

Originally posted by Xcalibur254
reply to post by zaper

 

Before it was introduced as evidence it's owner would have been determined beyond a reasonable doubt. As others have stated this would be used in court to establish intent. For example say there's a case where someone is murdered and when the suspect's house is searched they find pictures of the victim. This would establish that the suspect knew the victim and had an obsession with them.

When did Chile transform from its legendary inquisitional civil law based system to adopt the American burden of proof? Even in the U,S., there would be no need to prove ownership of the doll beyond a reasonable doubt. Only the elements of a crime need be proven beyond a reasonable doubt and ownership of a voodoo doll is not an element of a crime. It may be relevant, i. e., make the existence of an element more likely, but it is not an element for which the prosecution has the risk of non-persuasion (burden of proof) beyond a reasonable doubt.

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler

Pull out any denomination of U.S. Currency and you are going to see "In God We Trust" recite the pledge of allegience "One nation under God" listen to any public or elected official take an oath of office "So help me God".

woha its true, i forget it. The famous "in God we trust" also i can imagine it sets a precedent for its legal institutions, as in this case ... the system to bring lawsuits.

It does not matter if you believe in this concept of God or in God at all, or if you believe that this is really the basis of the entire system of authority world wide, but the truth is that it is.

In a world where only the truth will set you free, truth itself has a value far exceeding what most people imagine which is why we live in a world where truth is hard to come by.

Welcome to Rome, please note the exit signs, there are none. .

weird, in our country there is not that trend. It doesnt exist that thing of "swear" in holy books, also oral trials existed until 1929, when it was exercised by random elected juries.

i dont know i think of the dangers of "the jury", which represents (in most cases) an expression of the average prejudices of a society and their decisions would be easily manipulated by public opinion.

I liked your last sentence (added bold)

Originally posted by Caggy
just sayinjg, our legal system is very different of the US. You don't swear to God about your confessions, even when is a catholic country.

Well, the promised translation, I hope is at least a bit clearer than the google one (it's a free translation, not a literal transcription)

-Cags

Thanks for the translation Caggy. You are in Chile then you are more close to this news, How many people this woman killed? I am asking because you say she is a serial killer.
This next question is insane lol but She used any black items or voodoo dolls to "damage" her other victims too? Is the stuff also acepted as evidence?

she killed three, it appears on the article I've wrote, but due the evidence, she had intentions of killing at least 2 more. The last guy she killed was a mistake, because he was the real victim's boyfriend (he jumped ut of nowhere to fight for her, and the hitman killed him in the fight)
This lady was a real mastermind, I remember the psychologyst who interviewed her on jail saying she was cold, manipulative and emotionless against what she did. The only time she had showed an emotion on the trial whas when her house was presented as a piece of evidence, she cried a little

The real importance of the vooodoo dolls was proving she was calculating another two murders plus the one who failed it's target (the victim's girlfriend).

reply to post by 4nsicphd


we changed our law system 6 or 7 years ago. Oral trials are very alike to US ones, but without a jury. There's three judges, a fiscal and the defendant's attorney plus witnesess and public (also TV and another journalists can attend the trials in almost all of the courrt sessions, take pictures and videos).

Our country has changed a lot since the dictatorship of Pinochet, you'll see... and is very different from the other countries in south america (also, our legal system is one of the best in the area, corruption almost doesn't exist too). We don't live in huts or eat bananas with coconut milk, for God's sake! hahahaha

Originally posted by Caggy
...

The real importance of the vooodoo dolls was proving she was calculating another two murders plus the one who failed it's target (the victim's girlfriend).

thanks,
yes i see but i do not stop thinking about the connotation of such persuasive evidence ... even if they do not belong to her.
It has demonstrated the intent, bizarre evidence (vodoo dolls) anyway

Originally posted by ProtoplasmicTraveler
All courts except in communist nations are based on religion. Judges, Lawyers, and Jurists, witnesses and defendants swear oaths to God.

Originally posted by EvillerBob
Actually you can swear an oath on a holy book, or give an affirmation instead - at least in the UK. The affirmation takes the following form in both civil and criminal cases:

“I do solemnly, sincerely and truly declare and affirm that the evidence which I shall give, shall be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.”

I also think that stating "all courts... are based in religion" is a little disingenuous, though I can understand (but still disagree with) the argument from the "divine right" point of view.

...gosh, bob - thats what i was gonna say (minus the UK part and probably not as nicely put)...

.... i've served on juries and attended court proceedings and i've never seen a bible being used to swear anyone in or ever heard anyone mention god... i've said before that i thought that stuff only happened on tv and in movies but, from what i've read lately, i was wrong... theres still some backasserds places in the good ol usofa...