National Protest and 'disband the cops' discussion (please review page 1)

[Ooh-Rah]

Yep...doesn't mention anything about George Floyd or his trial specifically. Do you see them the same topic as national protests and disband the cops? I don't. While his case may've been a catalyst for those things, the trial details certainly is a separate topic.

Read the first page again.

And don’t get into a debate about semantics with me or any of the staff for that matter on this topic.

Patience level = zero

 

[ThunderHorse]

So typically in states that require a grand jury to indict felonies, an empaneled grand jury will be given evidence for multiple cases throughout the day for indictments. Usually between 15-20 and upwards of 40 sometimes in a day. The rates for indictments in this system is very high. The standard to indict with a grand jury is much lower than for a jury to convict. The standard for indictments is Probable Cause, which is the lowest standard in judicial practice for criminal cases.

In Civil cases you have four different standards.

My first point is that getting an indictment is the lowest for criminal standards of proof. Now to my second point, the grand jury recordings for the Breonna Taylor case are over 20 hours long. Usually Grand Juries have left and right limits, but unlike juries they are not bound by them. A jury cannot ask questions. Grand juries can and in effect can expand the scope for which charges can be place and indictments granted.

Breonna Taylor grand jury audio: Officers testified they knocked before entering

This is all important because the Commonwealth's Attorney and now the AG of Kentucky doesn't have the ability to indict someone on his own, Kentucky is a grand jury state, so the legal team on this case had intentions to take this to trial, otherwise there would be no grand jury. Which is different from Arizona (my location), we're not a grand jury state, therefore you don't need to use a grand jury to indict. Effectively if a Grand Jury chose not to indict in Arizona that could be considered a political shield tactic by the prosecution.

 

[Kraut783]

In Texas, all police shootings go through a county grand jury after an investigation is completed, either for murder or aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. The GJ gets a brief of the case/investigation...the Grand Jury members can ask questions of the testifying witnesses or prosecutor presenting the case. The GJ then decides to true bill (indict) or no-bill (not indict).

The case cannot go back to the GJ indictment process , unless new evidence is found and presented.

 

[ThunderHorse]

This is really bad rhetoric.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=359204811941979

 

[Kaldak]

This is really bad rhetoric.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=359204811941979

Vanished.

 

[ThunderHorse]

Vanished.

Looks like I found another one for now, 3 hour stream of the NFAC in Lafayette, Louisiana.

"All Black "NFAC" Militia gathers in Lafayette, Louisiana"

Their leader starts talking at 1:15.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

Meanwhile in Minneapolis....

As Carjackings Climb In Minneapolis, Ages Of Offenders Are Dropping

Then Monday morning, three boys no older than 16 years old died after crashing in a car near that police say was carjacked a day earlier.

Minneapolis police typically label the crimes as auto thefts or robberies in their reports, but a spokesman tells WCCO carjackings have happened so much this year that they’ll now categorize them as a “carjacking” in their reports to better track them.

 

[ThunderHorse]

So, how do we remove civil liability protections from prosecutors?

This is stupid.

St. Louis couple indicted for waving guns at protesters

The DA wanted to make an example out of the couple by the way and get them to accept a plea deal.

 

[Kraut783]

Thought the state AG was going to squash that?

 

[BlackSmokeRisinG]

Shame in my opinion. How do you handle a raging group in front of your house? Brownies???

 

[Ooh-Rah]

Shame in my opinion. How do you handle a raging group in front of your house? Brownies???

Yes.

To a point.

Was there any precedent to believe that the group (raging?) was going to attempt to enter their home on camera and in the middle of the afternoon to cause them harm?

No.

Those two with their buffoonish posing did nothing but cause undue tension; especially the way she kept sweeping the crowd.

 

[Florida173]

 

[ThunderHorse]

Yes.

To a point.

Was there any precedent to believe that the group (raging?) was going to attempt to enter their home on camera and in the middle of the afternoon to cause them harm?

No.

Those two with their buffoonish posing did nothing but cause undue tension; especially the way she kept sweeping the crowd.

Don't really need to rehash this one, as I've a few posts on this. Under Missouri's castle doctrine your lawn falls under it and there is also no duty to retreat.

So then we add to the numerous nights of violence and arson that preceded that harassment and intimidation within a private neighborhood I'm siding with the home owner. For example- Photos: 4 Police officers shot, buildings looted, fires set in downtown St. Louis riot

 

[Ooh-Rah]

...sigh...

The guy in this video lost me when he suggested that the police tampered with her weapon just to charge her; his referencing Joseph Goebbels sealed the deal.

if there were as many conspiracies around ever corner as the internet tends to believe, they’d have to come up with a new definition of the term.

 

[DA SWO]

...sigh...

The guy in this video lost me when he suggested that the police tampered with her weapon just to charge her; his referencing Joseph Goebbels sealed the deal.

if there were as many conspiracies around ever corner as the internet tends to believe, they’d have to come up with a new definition of the term.

Crime lab admits they tampered with the pistol to make it functional. It was a prop, and the AR was unloaded.

 

[Ooh-Rah]

Don't really need to rehash this one, as I've a few posts on this. Under Missouri's castle doctrine your lawn falls under it and there is also no duty to retreat.

Agreed, they had no duty to retreat. However, they were not in danger of great bodily harm at that time, and they came out of their home to engage these people.

 

[Florida173]

Agreed, they had no duty to retreat. However, they were not in danger of great bodily harm at that time, and they came out of their home to engage these people.

How could you possibly know this?

 

[Ooh-Rah]

How could you possibly know this?

I missed the memo that said tresspassing is a reasonable reason to fear for your life in the middle of an afternoon. Again, they left their house to engage these people....they were looking for trouble; of course they were charged.

Had this group of protesters started banging on their windows or tried to enter their home, sure....engage. But this was just silly theatrics and they end up looking like the d-bags who go to Starbucks or Chipotle in full kit....because they can.

To be clear, I don’t want to see them charged for anything, it will set precedent for future cases, but they used zero common sense and failed situational awareness 101

 

[Raksasa Kotor]

I missed the memo that said tresspassing is a reasonable reason to fear for your life in the middle of an afternoon.

You're kidding, right?

 

[medicchick]

Agreed, they had no duty to retreat. However, they were not in danger of great bodily harm at that time, and they came out of their home to engage these people.

Antagonizing vs defending, I get what you are saying. By all means arm up but you don't need to escalate a situation before anything happens directly to you.