Posted on 10/15/2017 7:12:10 AM PDT by Elderberry
If you would stop having a menstrual meltdown every time the def counsel has a sissy fit because the judge rules against one of his ridiculous motions, you might have time to read the applicable Texas Statutes and case law to understand that the judge is spot on here.
Jail for a speeding ticket?
You seem to be an advocate for thug-gov "justice"...
It’s an old lawyers joke. Everyone else understood that!
“Thug justice?”
Actually, no.
I am, however, a strong advocate for murderers going to prison. Why do the supporters of these drug dealing motorcycle scum have a problem with that?
“Who isn’t innocent? “
The dudes with bandido and Cossacks patches.
“I am, however, a strong advocate for murderers going to prison. Why do the supporters of these drug dealing motorcycle scum have a problem with that?”
Because the don’t want their brothers going to prison.
No, "everyone else" did not understand your bully-gov "joke"...
As a matter of fact, you just proved that you're in favor of railroading the accused.
I don’t claim to be a lawyer by any means. I just noted that you were actually honest about the prosecutors counting on juries with a dog in this fight.
You don’t owe the defendants any presumption of innocence, you are welcome to you prejudices. The jury does.
Again, you assume something that is totally legally incorrect regarding the often misapplied “presumption of innocence” concept.
Despite what some people think, prospective jurors owe defendants a promise to consider only the evidence to be heard in court, and an ABSENCE of any presumptions of either guilt or innocence.
JURIES do NOT owe defendants a presumption of innocence, any more than they can owe the government a presumption of guilt.
The COURT owes Defs a “presumption of innocence,” but juries are expected to be neutral, not for innocence nor guilt, until all testimony is heard, depending on that testimony and admitted evidence only, and the judge’s charge to the jury is given.
Regarding that “presumption of innocence,” for prosecutors, that only lasts until LE has developed a provable case, as they have so obviously done in the instant Waco matter.
The reason these Def lawyers (and FR posters) are trying so hard to argue this case in the newspapers and “on the courthouse steps” is because they know they have such a bad case inside the courtroom. If they thought the overwhelming evidence gave them any chance before the jury, they would be making their case there, not everywhere else.
re: Your not being a lawyer. Not to be critical, but that has been so obvious from so much more than just this one post.....
“As a matter of fact, you just proved that you’re in favor of railroading the accused.”
LOL!
They should and will get a fair trial! No one here is arguing against that.
You are just trying to taint the jury pool!
We would not be here posting except to counter the false narratives we see here!
“Despite what some people think, prospective jurors owe defendants a promise to consider only the evidence to be heard in court, and an ABSENCE of any presumptions of either guilt or innocence.”
In fact, they are not found to be innocent; only not guilty as charged.
A bit of a fine distinction for the shorthand of "presumption of innocence". Yes, the jury should have no preconceived opinions about the case or any personal or financial interest in the out come. And you implied that no defendant would stand a chance in civil cases precisely because the juries will have a personal interest in the outcome.
And the little insult doesn't really bother me.
I’m sorry, but each of our posts shows how little you know about the law, which, in the case of your trying to defend these murdering, drug dealing scum, is probably a good persona to project, although in your case, it seems to not be a projected persona, but the very real you.
Since you have repeatedly demonstrated you know nothing about law, no further time will be wasted to replying to you.
“these murdering, drug dealing scum”
Murdering Charges: State/County
Drug Dealing Charges: Federal
Child Pornography Charges: TBD
I’ve come to believe TG is simply a bad person, with meanness in his heart.
Either that or a female loved one absconded with a biker.
Whatever it is, he’s got hostility.
It has been found that 4 of the dead were killed by police bullets.
Should those police be charged with murder too?
Wait, don’t answer that. I tire of you verbal diarrhea.
If I really wanted their asses, as Texas and the Feds do, I’d add Federal RICO, Texas Little RICO, Federal deprivation of Civil Rights, State drug laws, Staring With Intent To Gawk, Mopery in the 3d Degree, various associating with criminals as probation/parole violations and, of course, POPO.
4 were killed with 5.56. Cops had 5.56 AR-15. Perps had Mini-14s. Also, police with rifles were well within rights if shooting perps who were also shooting. If they did, thank God they did. It prevented more killing.
There was biker group that day who were composed solely of former Marines, who do volunteer work and raise money for charitable causes.
There was another group there composed entirely of ministers, whose goal is to spread the Gospel.
Do you want those people executed too?
You ignorance and hate is an odd fit here on FR. I don’t get it.
No, just the ones who fit the legal definition of Criminal Street Gangs under Texas Penal Code Chapter 71 and were involved in the murders there that day..
PS: Everyone gets to ask me one stupid question that I will answer. That was yours.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.