Please miss me with that Pagan shit. I should’ve know that as a vegetarian you were probably Wiccan as well.
But we have the 2A!!! Dear rest of the world,I bet you never had a referee shot in the head by a canon during a college sports event. A canon brought by a spectator, to the game...Muirica Referee shot in the head by cannon during college football game: https://t.co/JWys41cCKc— ALT-immigration (@ALT_uscis) September 29, 2019
Not a mass shooting but Texas... BREAKING: A judge has ruled a jury can consider the Castle Doctrine - basically a Stand Your Ground law - during deliberations to determine whether a Texas woman should be punished for entering the wrong apartment and fatally shooting an unarmed Black man. https://t.co/MO3tpCynwb— Shannon Watts (@shannonrwatts) September 30, 2019
This is similar to the Pistorius situation previously discussed. It can't be self defence because there was no threat But if she was mistaken as to the circumstances such as that she thought she was in her own home, it could apply in a putative self defence situation Personally I think her story is not believable Private defence is a defence excluding unlawfulness, which is judged objectively and ‘putative’ or ‘supposed’ private defence, relates to the mental state of the accused. Where the accused raises the defence of private defence, the judicial inquiry commences with an examination of the unlawfulness or the lawfulness of the accused’s conduct. If the conduct is lawful, then an acquittal results. If the conduct is unlawful, then the inquiry might not end there. Provided a foundation is laid for the ‘putative’ private defence, then the court proceeds to examine whether the accused genuinely, albeit mistakenly, believed that he or she was acting in lawful private defence (where the charge requires intention to be proved) or whether this belief was also held on reasonable grounds (where negligence is sufficient for liability). The use of force in private defence is justified if it was reasonably necessary to repel an unlawful invasion of person, property or other legal interest, and the test of whether an accused had acted justifiably is an objective one. Putative private defence on the other hand could be raised successfully to show lack of intention where an accused had acted defensively in the honest but erroneous belief that his life or property was in danger.
Yeah - that was a big outrage factor in the original failure to charge her with anything Some aspects of her story simply don't ring true. 1. Outside the guys front door was a door matt etc that she doesn't have. So how could she get that wrong? 2. He lives on a different floor - so how did she "mistakenly" drive her car to the wrong parking level? 3. How did she get in with no keys? She claims the door was propped open (its self closing) but that seems like utter bullshit and one coincidence to many for me
Probable defense - she was so busy sexting her married partner & horned up that she had the wrong floor entirely.
It seems like the Guyger trial isn't going to resolve any of that stuff. The DA has instead taken the approach that it was murder even on the facts the defense pleaded. Feels like a case the DA was not too interested in winning
I want to be so much more critical of this, but I know the history of Skipper at Virginia Tech. The crew takes firing Skipper very seriously now. Nobody is close to it when it is fired or when it misfires. You will be tackled by a cadet if you are going into the path of it even if it's not being shot in the moment. A couple weeks ago I watched as there was a misfire during pre-game and they would not let anyone get close to the path of the shot before they made sure it was completely safe. It's normally moved to the practice field north of the stadium during the game and fired when the team scores and at the end of wins. It has been pretty quiet recently. There's video of his apartment from the body cameras and there are photos of her apartment. They don't look similar. He was on the couch that was significantly within the apartment. Even if she shot him from the door, there's a lot to look at and process. //I've watched that video a bunch of times and never noticed that I can find myself in a crowd shot
Guilty. #BREAKING: A former Dallas police officer has been found guilty of murder in the fatal shooting of her unarmed, neighbor in his apartment. https://t.co/HLPUns0iZ5— WSVN 7 News (@wsvn) October 1, 2019
That's not right! In Texas. She's white, a cop, standing her ground in his apt. Scared for her life. He's black, unarmed, sitting on his couch. A clear case of self defense.
I think the defense didn't emphasize the Fruit Loops enough. He was eating Fruit Loops. As a cop, she figured he was setting up a twinkie defense and she better fire first.
It's sad to think the last thing the poor guy saw between spoonfuls of cereal is this insane cop walking into his apt, screaming at him and then shooting him.
I wonder if the demographics of the jury played a roll in her guilty charge? From what I was seeing in the news, it was majority African-American. I wouldn't think a majority A-A jury would be as sympathetic to her simply because of the victim's race. A majority white jury may have come to a different result..