Posted on 11/14/2013 9:12:37 AM PST by aimhigh
Oregon ping
Loses on appeal?
but they can smoke dope and feel good about it...
No one in Oregon is safe.
Wow... Did Bloomberg get to hand pick this jury?
Go to the source and read the comments. Jeez, what a bunch of liberal, good for nothing people. Hard to believe they didn’t try to give this guy the death penalty.
Karmatic justice would be for each of the jury members that voted guilty to be viciously attacked in a grocery store check out lane.
A hollow-point bullet is an expanding bullet that has a pit or hollowed out shape in its tip, often intended to cause the bullet to expand upon entering a target in order to decrease penetration and disrupt more tissue as it travels through the target. It is also used for controlled penetration, where over-penetration could cause collateral damage (such as on an aircraft). In target shooting, they are used for greater accuracy and reduction of smoke, fouling, and lead vapor exposure, as hollow point bullets have an enclosed base while traditional bullets have an exposed lead base. In essence, the hollow point bullet has several purposes: hollow points are designed to increase in diameter once within the target, thus maximizing tissue damage and blood loss or shock, and to remain inside the target, thereby transferring all of its kinetic energy to that target (some fraction would remain in the bullet if it passed through instead).
As if any of us didn’t know the above.
Oregon. spew!!!
Apparently, Oregon has manipulated the law to allow a majority to convict, rather than a unanimous jury.
This effectively renders the jury requirement moot, as crooked prosecutors and Judges can easily use state power to stack a jury with shills. Nine members of this jury were not gun owners.
Oregon is one of 2 US states that only requires 10 jurors to reach a verdict. In any other state it would have been a hung jury. Note to self, avoid Oregon.
I guess the prosecutor would have preferred the defendant to have used a solid ball round so he’d have had the possibility of trying two murder cases.
“Jurors, in a 10-2 verdicts, found Harryman guilty on both second-degree assault and unlawful use of a firearm.”
When did unanimous juries go out of fashion? I’m not a lawyer so can someone explain how that works in Oregon?
ahh I see....in the time it took me to post my question a few other people answered it for me
“Harryman was in line right behind Young and Young’s wife, Dorothy, and 9-year-old grandson. Dorothy Young was recovering from surgery and seated in a motorized scooter.
Young testified he believed Harryman was too close to Dorothy Young, who was flustered as she attempted to enter a personal identification and complete a purchase.
“Back off, man,” Young told Harryman. They exchanged obscenities. When Harryman flipped the bird, Young quickly circled around the check stand and confronted him. During the brief struggle, both men threw punches and wrestled. Then Harryman pulled a .380 automatic pistol and shot Young in the lower left leg.
Harryman “introduced a gun into a fistfight, and that quickly ended it,” said prosecutor Bryan Brock.
Harryman and Young are not youthful – Harryman is now 67 and Young is 60. Both are overweight, and each has medical problems. Young said he takes anti-depressants for post traumatic stress disorder and has short-term memory problems.
Given the threat he faced, Harryman’s use of deadly force was unreasonable and unjustified, Brock said. Especially not in a busy grocery store in the middle of the day, Brock said.”
http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamascounty/index.ssf/2013/10/self-defense_of_asault_jurors.html
I might have voted to convict as well. It is hard to justify the use of deadly force - which is what you are doing anytime you shoot someone - for a brawl between two old, overweight men in the middle of a crowded store.
The article is incorrect. When in front of police or in court, the response to any question about hollow points should be:
“I use hollow points for the same reason that the FBI does. As a responsible gun owner, I do not want any bullet to over penetrate my target and potientially injure someone else.”
The response to police should be, “I’m too shaken up by the attempt on my life to discuss it further. I want to speak to an attorney.”
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.