>> What other facts should be included?
Can we wait until the trial and see?
Or would justice better be served by you taking a rope to the jail and personally hanging the obviously guilty officers?
By the way, can you tell me where your sacred “time line” came from?
Was it an impartial third party — like a jury — that has examined ALL the facts? Or was it from the prosecutor’s office? You know, a party with an ax to grind, and therefore highly motivated to pick suitable facts and even to distort them? A party with NO obligation and NO motivation to present opposing evidence?
I think we know the answer.
Been here before with Angela Corey, and the oh-so-corrupt prosecution team on that kangaroo court.
I know way better than to blindly accept the prosecutor’s version of ANYTHING.
But since you have an ax to grind yourself, you will happily swallow this one-sided crapola as gospel — and promulgate it as such.
Like I told you before — I understand your motivations. You’re a liberal troll. A skillful one, but still...
No sale.
Of course we can. Odd that you started in the thread by criticizing the DA for bringing charges, but are now saying that we should "wait until the trial." How do you think we get to the trial? Charges are the first step. That's the whole point of this process.