A Mistrial? Really?
#1
These jurors have some splannin to do. Hard to believe there was something in the trial that excused the cop from gunning down a man running away from him unarmed. Oh shit I forgot, it was a black guy, they are particularly dangerous when running away. Never mind. 

http://www.wistv.com/story/33871733/judg...ager-trial

Reply
#2
(12-05-2016, 06:08 PM)Valuesize Wrote: These jurors have some splannin to do. Hard to believe there was something in the trial that excused the cop from gunning down a man running away from him unarmed. Oh shit I forgot, it was a black guy, they are particularly dangerous when running away. Never mind. 

http://www.wistv.com/story/33871733/judg...ager-trial


  I believe It was just one juror. I'm disappointing that you decided this was about race. How do you know that cop wouldn't have shot a white guy?

I watch a lot of crime shows on TV. Shows about real crime, real victims and jurors. Sometimes it's obvious that someone is guilty and the jury acquits the defendant anyway.
I hope to hell my fate is never in the hands of a jury. It's far from a perfect system when all it takes is one nitwit to acquit a person who should have at the least been convicted on manslaughter.

BTW the cop is still facing federal charges and My guess is he won't be so lucky again.
Reply
#3
(12-05-2016, 07:04 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 06:08 PM)Valuesize Wrote: These jurors have some splannin to do. Hard to believe there was something in the trial that excused the cop from gunning down a man running away from him unarmed. Oh shit I forgot, it was a black guy, they are particularly dangerous when running away. Never mind. 

http://www.wistv.com/story/33871733/judg...ager-trial

  I believe It was just one juror. I'm disappointing that you decided this was about race. How do you know that cop wouldn't have shot a white guy?

I watch a lot of crime shows on TV. Shows about real crime, real victims and jurors. Sometimes it's obvious that someone is guilty and the jury acquits the defendant anyway.
I hope to hell my fate is never in the hands of a jury. It's far from a perfect system when all it takes is one nitwit to acquit a person who should have at the least been convicted on manslaughter.

I didn't blame the cop for shooting a black man, he very well may have done the same to a white man. It should have been easy to get some kind of verdict against this cop because you just can't repeatedly shoot someone to death as they are increasingly non threatening.

It's the jury I have a problem with. I'll let one of the Trumpsters explain to us why this juror thinks the cop has the right to do what he did.
Reply
#4
(12-05-2016, 07:04 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 06:08 PM)Valuesize Wrote: These jurors have some splannin to do. Hard to believe there was something in the trial that excused the cop from gunning down a man running away from him unarmed. Oh shit I forgot, it was a black guy, they are particularly dangerous when running away. Never mind. 

http://www.wistv.com/story/33871733/judg...ager-trial


  I believe It was just one juror. I'm disappointing that you decided this was about race. How do you know that cop wouldn't have shot a white guy?

I watch a lot of crime shows on TV. Shows about real crime, real victims and jurors. Sometimes it's obvious that someone is guilty and the jury acquits the defendant anyway.
I hope to hell my fate is never in the hands of a jury. It's far from a perfect system when all it takes is one nitwit to acquit a person who should have at the least been convicted on manslaughter.

BTW the cop is still facing federal charges and My guess is he won't be so lucky again.

None of us were in the courtroom, and only know what the media has told us.

Therefore to "convict" the guy on this forum is fucking stupid.  I have no opinion one way or the other, because I have ZERO first hand knowledge.
Reply
#5
(12-05-2016, 07:29 PM)Hugo Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 07:04 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 06:08 PM)Valuesize Wrote: These jurors have some splannin to do. Hard to believe there was something in the trial that excused the cop from gunning down a man running away from him unarmed. Oh shit I forgot, it was a black guy, they are particularly dangerous when running away. Never mind. 

http://www.wistv.com/story/33871733/judg...ager-trial


  I believe It was just one juror. I'm disappointing that you decided this was about race. How do you know that cop wouldn't have shot a white guy?

I watch a lot of crime shows on TV. Shows about real crime, real victims and jurors. Sometimes it's obvious that someone is guilty and the jury acquits the defendant anyway.
I hope to hell my fate is never in the hands of a jury. It's far from a perfect system when all it takes is one nitwit to acquit a person who should have at the least been convicted on manslaughter.

BTW the cop is still facing federal charges and My guess is he won't be so lucky again.

None of us were in the courtroom, and only know what the media has told us.

Therefore to "convict" the guy on this forum is fucking stupid.  I have no opinion one way or the other, because I have ZERO first hand knowledge.

No quite true. We have "Some" knowledge. There is a video showing the perp running away. What we don't know is why a police office would shoot the guy in the back multiple times. 
But, I agree with you that we were not in the jury box and there are facts we don't know. 
And, as TVg said, there is "more to come". 
Sad, all around!
Reply
#6
What do we know about the lead muffin?
Maybe, it somebody really really bad.
Reply
#7
(12-05-2016, 07:29 PM)Hugo Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 07:04 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-05-2016, 06:08 PM)Valuesize Wrote: These jurors have some splannin to do. Hard to believe there was something in the trial that excused the cop from gunning down a man running away from him unarmed. Oh shit I forgot, it was a black guy, they are particularly dangerous when running away. Never mind. 

http://www.wistv.com/story/33871733/judg...ager-trial


  I believe It was just one juror. I'm disappointing that you decided this was about race. How do you know that cop wouldn't have shot a white guy?

I watch a lot of crime shows on TV. Shows about real crime, real victims and jurors. Sometimes it's obvious that someone is guilty and the jury acquits the defendant anyway.
I hope to hell my fate is never in the hands of a jury. It's far from a perfect system when all it takes is one nitwit to acquit a person who should have at the least been convicted on manslaughter.

BTW the cop is still facing federal charges and My guess is he won't be so lucky again.

None of us were in the courtroom, and only know what the media has told us.

Therefore to "convict" the guy on this forum is fucking stupid.  I have no opinion one way or the other, because I have ZERO first hand knowledge.

the ONLY way I could agree with you would be if I considered the video might be fake. And the odds of that must be a billion to one. If not then I don't see how ANYONE could not see that Walter Scott was executed for trying to escape and the cop is OBVIOUSLY guilty of manslaughter or murder.

Scott was shot in the back five times. The video proved the cop lied about what led up to the shooting.

To convict the guy on the forum is "fucking stupid'? Based on the evidence I think it's fucking stupid to not.
Reply
#8
Rolling Eyes Zipped
Reply
#9
(12-06-2016, 03:57 PM)cletus1 Wrote: Rolling Eyes Zipped

Well, at least we can come away with complete trust and faith in a "jury of our peers". 

You know: Like the O.J. jury.  Sad
Reply
#10
At this point what difference does it make
Reply
#11
(12-06-2016, 05:18 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 03:57 PM)cletus1 Wrote: Rolling Eyes Zipped

Well, at least we can come away with complete trust and faith in a "jury of our peers". 

You know: Like the O.J. jury.  Sad

Well I can blame some of that on blacks simply not trusting "the man" I mean the WHITE man. And some on the inability to understand science.
But In the Scott case I think it's stupidity , and a lack of common sense or logic.
Reply
#12
(12-06-2016, 06:06 PM)tvguy Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 05:18 PM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(12-06-2016, 03:57 PM)cletus1 Wrote: Rolling Eyes Zipped

Well, at least we can come away with complete trust and faith in a "jury of our peers". 

You know: Like the O.J. jury.  Sad

Well I can blame some of that on blacks simply not trusting "the man" I mean the WHITE man. And some on the inability to understand science.
But In the Scott case I think it's stupidity , and a lack of common sense or logic.

I guess we will know in time. Some num-skull who served on the jury will HAVE to tell People Magazine all about it. For a good sized check of course.
Reply
#13
Just another fat ass liberal getting their exercise jumping to conclusions, typical of the left and the mental disorder afflicting you guys. There will be another trial very soon that will most likely result in the officer getting his just dues. Even their governor came out in support of another trial and the officer getting convicted. The one thing we will never know is why the guy decided to fight and then run.
Reply
#14
(12-07-2016, 08:15 AM)orygunluvr Wrote: Just another fat ass liberal getting their exercise jumping to conclusions, typical of the left and the mental disorder afflicting you guys. There will be another trial very soon that will most likely result in the officer getting his just dues. Even their governor came out in support of another trial and the officer getting convicted. The one thing we will never know is why the guy decided to fight and then run.
NOW I know what "stream of consciences"  writing (thinking) looks like.  Wink
Reply
#15
(12-07-2016, 11:04 AM)Wonky3 Wrote:
(12-07-2016, 08:15 AM)orygunluvr Wrote: Just another fat ass liberal getting their exercise jumping to conclusions, typical of the left and the mental disorder afflicting you guys. There will be another trial very soon that will most likely result in the officer getting his just dues. Even their governor came out in support of another trial and the officer getting convicted. The one thing we will never know is why the guy decided to fight and then run.
NOW I know what "stream of consciences"  writing (thinking) looks like.  Wink

More like stream of moronienciences .. This guy must see liberals in his sleep
Reply
#16

““There’s a jury full of people and they cannot decide if it’s illegal to shoot someone who is running away from you?” said activist Johnetta Elzie, who is black. “What do you say about a country that feels this way about black people? If you can’t see the humanity in that, I don’t know what we’re talking about anymore.” said activist Johnetta Elzie, who is black. “What do you say about a country that feels this way about black people? If you can’t see the humanity in that, I don’t know what we’re talking about anymore.”

This woman is an IDIOT. First she says.....

“There’s a jury full of people and they cannot decide if it’s illegal to shoot someone who is running away from you?” 

 What part of it was only ONE juror does she not get? But it gets worse. She goes on to blame the entire country?????








From the associated press...




POLICE SHOOTING
NORTH CHARLESTON
Judge’s mistrial ruling mystifies observers
By Errin Haines Whack and Jeffrey Collins
The Associated Press
COLUMBIA, S.C. — The video was unambiguous: A white police officer fatally shot an unarmed black man in the back as the man ran away.
But a South Carolina jury was unable to agree on a verdict in one of the nation’s ghastliest police shootings, with a lone holdout forcing a mistrial. The outcome stung many African-Americans and others. If that kind of evidence can’t produce a conviction, they asked, what can?
“There’s a jury full of people and they cannot decide if it’s illegal to shoot someone who is running away from you?” said activist Johnetta Elzie, who is black. “What do you say about a country that feels this way about black people? If you can’t see the humanity in that, I don’t know what we’re talking about anymore.”
Prosecutors plan to retry officer Michael Slager, who is scheduled to be tried separately next year on federal charges that he violated Walter Scott’s civil rights.
North Charleston city officials approved a $6.5 million civil settlement for Scott’s family earlier this year. Slager remains free on bail.
South Carolina Republican Gov. Nikki Haley voiced her support for Scott’s family, saying in a statement that justice “is not always immediate, but we must all have faith that it will be served.”
Scott, 50, was killed in April 2015 after he was shot five times. A barber on his way to work recorded the slaying on his cellphone.
The panel of 11 white jurors and one black juror deliberated for 22 hours. At one point, a juror sent a letter directly to the judge saying he could not “with good conscience approve a guilty verdict” and that he was unlikely to change his mind.
Reply
#17
I remember when I lived in Arizona, that the police could shoot a fleeing felon.
Then they passed a law, that running from a cop was a felony.
Right after they passed that law, I ask a cop that, "now that it's a felony to run from a cop and you can shoot at a fleeing felon, can you...?"
He just looked at me and smiled.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)