Originally posted by Quick Mix Ready
Your own media was pushing the growing threat that China is becoming and would have a huge strategic edge in the Pacific if they put bases there.
as they sell off the country
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by frala
I mean maybe he will but at least know what the charges are if you are going to say what the case is/isn’t about because he’s literally being charged for being a minor in possession of firearm and violating a curfew that was in place.
Oh, they'll get him on those things, but they won't get him on the shooting.
Originally posted by aldra
as they sell off the country
Well that might be. but it's going to happen. pushed on you by the media aiding in selling your nation out and the attitudes of your people who will become fat, lazy and willing. they'll start thinking "What is it worth dying for this Racist nations that we stole from the indigenous people" just like what is happening in the USA.
there is no way that the Mill and Zoomers will defend the USA on the level that they once did in the Revolutionary war and Civil War in the USA. the schools poisoned our children way of thought. turned them on their parents. want the boomers to die off. Australia is a mirror image of that.
Originally posted by Sudo
That's debatable. It was also a JURY trial which means 12 people that heard the evidence in the courtroom believed that intent was formed. I personally with that ive seen wouldn't have convicted him of 2nd degree murder but still would have sentenced him to death. Your defense is "the pig just doesn't know that restricting someone's airway as they say they can't breathe before going limp doesn't mean he knew what everyone else can tell he was doing"
"OMG a jury convicted a pig of a higher degree of criminal responsibility for someone's death, let's all be tearful victims about it"
Shut up. Nobody cares because they have better things to worry about. Take up your feelings with the cops you dress up like Ron Swanson to fellate
A jury only gets to hear what the judge decide is admissible.
Originally posted by Solstice
Oh, they'll get him on those things, but they won't get him on the shooting.
Hopefully this. Although depending on the state, illegal possession of a firearm can sometimes nullify self defense claims.
Regardless, I hope he walks. He didnt shoot anyone for protesting or rioting. He shot people who were attacking him. It doesnt matter whether you think he shouldve been there or not. Its kind of a moot point.
When the NFAC marched hundreds of armed and poorly trained black folks around town to try to prove a point, that still wasnt a deadly threat to anyone (except the ones that shot themselves on accident). When the NBPP carried weapons around town after the Ahmaud Arbery shooting, no one told them they had no business being there. Nor should they have. My feelings are the same across the board. If you cant abide someone tossing a wrench in your arson and looting plans- to the point where you have to chase and attack them- i sincerely dont give a single fuck if you get shot.
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
This a huge score for the defense during the preliminary hearing as final ground rules for the hearing are set. The judge has ruled the the prosecution may not refer to the people who were shot as victims. He also ruled the the defense may refer to the people shot as looters or arsonists. To understand why you must understand this is a self defense case. In that scenario the people who were shot are in a sense on trail themselves. If the defense can prove self defense then those shot are not victims they are dead criminals.
Originally posted by Speedy Parker
This a huge score for the defense during the preliminary hearing as final ground rules for the hearing are set. The judge has ruled the the prosecution may not refer to the people who were shot as victims. He also ruled the the defense may refer to the people shot as looters or arsonists. To understand why you must understand this is a self defense case. In that scenario the people who were shot are in a sense on trail themselves. If the defense can prove self defense then those shot are not victims they are dead criminals.
Remember though, Wi is pretty liberal in that part of the state and the Pros will try to fill his half of the 12 jury selections to sympathetic of the people shot. This may cause a mistrial and the next judge may allow the term "Victims" to be used.
Originally posted by Quick Mix Ready
Remember though, Wi is pretty liberal in that part of the state and the Pros will try to fill his half of the 12 jury selections to sympathetic of the people shot. This may cause a mistrial and the next judge may allow the term "Victims" to be used.
Originally posted by General Butt.Naked
Hopefully this. Although depending on the state, illegal possession of a firearm can sometimes nullify self defense claims.
Regardless, I hope he walks. He didnt shoot anyone for protesting or rioting. He shot people who were attacking him. It doesnt matter whether you think he shouldve been there or not. Its kind of a moot point.
Sure it doesn’t matter what we think but it’s not a moot point though. If the prosecution shows that he legally should not have been there and that he was also in possession of a firearm illegally then it’s going to be difficult to claim self defense…
The following users say it would be alright if the author of this
post didn't die in a fire!
Originally posted by Solstice
God smiled when Kyle removed those criminals and child molesters from this Earth.
So why do u fink that It matters who victins are and blane victims then and not that he was carrying a gun to hurt someone across state lines to begin with? If you have a record in ur vuew u cant be a victim of crime? Blame the victins guy? What about blame the hookers then?
I already told u that in Poland and much of the run u can’t even defend itself with a knife much less hubs or assault rifles how difficult is this concept for u Americans to comprehend?
