Posted on 02/11/2023 3:32:18 AM PST by marktwain
Maybe drugs were involved?
Weird. Mental illness or drugs can strike anybody. First time I’ve ever read a civil attorney who writes scholarly articles is a “prominent criminal,”
I’m struck by how well written Sgt Christian‘s statement is. It is sequential, straight-forward, logical and clear. It is rare to see good writing like that these days.
This “journalist” Dean Weingarten, posts a title that reads, “Homeowner Shoots Man Who Acted Violently & Charged Fiancé”.
He writes this as if it is absolutely proven, indisputable fact.
Lots and lots of people reading this article, including freepers will come away from this article absolutely convinced that this is the case, without any skepticism or question.
That’s the way information and learning in todays world works...
Lots and lots of people convince themselves of things they KNOW to be true, but they don’t at all.
The evidence? The words of one man, the shooter. No video, no investigation, no nothing.
But the journalist already sets down the facts absolutely, with no caveats whatsoever
Wow...article says he was shot in the chest with a shotgun. Then police tried to do CPR. Was there anything left to push on ???
In case you missed it, he was quoting the police report by Sgt. Christian..........Sheesh!
That's why they use "quotation" marks.......
You sound just like a demonrat.
It’s Texas, so the homeowner is very unlikely to be charged with anything unless there is more to the story (unlikely IMHO).
The dead dude sounds like one of Paul Pelosi’s pals.
The journalist should have written he “allegedly” shot the man in the chest? He doesn’t know if he shot him, or where he was shot. C’mon man!
The police report was well written.
“Maybe drugs were involved?”
Judging by his photograph, he may have been one of those ‘alternative lifestyle’ types.
“The dead dude sounds like one of Paul Pelosi’s pals.”
Looks that way, too.
Gonna have to agree a bit, police not on scene. However, the fiance is a witness, so that is two statements. There is something crazy about an criminal civil attorney being so reckless, that doesn’t add up.
What’s to say this wasn’t a set up, only two witnesses were there, was it reall about a “truck”? Talk about a cliche about Texans and their trucks.
Was the name Stella?
Read the title again.
“Homeowner Shoots Man Who Acted Violently & Charged Fiancé”
No caveats, no quotation marks, no mention that this information is solely hearsay from the man who killed the guy.
As a journalist, you can’t get away with writing a line like this anywhere in the article. If there are any caveats then every line must include hedgewords like “reportedly” or “according to...”.
Even worse, keep in mind that huge numbers of readers, probably most, will often only look at the title and make their judgement.
"prominent criminal and civil attorney"
“You sound just like a demonrat.”
On a scale of 1 to 10, how surprised would you be to find out one of these scenerios had happened...
# The shooting victim knew the couple, and had been having an affair with the spouse. He never charged the wife, the husband found out and shot him.
# There was some other prior interaction with the man, who had reason to be angry, and the couple agreed among themselves to stick to the story that he was crazy and charged them.
# The man was trying to steal a vehicle, the man knew he used excessive force to stop it, but made up the story about him charging his wife to protect himself from prosecution.
I don’t know that any of these happened, but neither does the journalist, neither does the police, neither do you.
No video, no investigation, no nothing. \
Just write a title that what the man said happened absolutely.
Imagine someone kills your son and lies to a police officer claiming your son “charged his wife” to cover up the real motive and what happened.
Would anyone who doubts this be a democrat?
This thread could get verrrrry interesting.....and stupid.
“However, the fiance is a witness, so that is two statements.”
Your response further supports my complaint.
You have convinced yourself that there were two statements, that the police interviewed the fiancee and her statements were included in the report.
But the article does not say this anywhere.
It only says the report cited the statements of the homeowner.
You assumed this to be the case, you think you KNOW absolutely that this happened and is true, but you don’t know this at all.
Very possible she was not interviewed, or chose not to say anything. Or was too shaken to speak.
A lot of these psychotic episodes since the clot shots.
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.