I refuse to accept the view that mankind is so tragically bound to the starless midnight of racism and war that the bright daybreak of peace and brotherhood can never become a reality. - MLK
“I think if Thomas Jefferson were looking down, the author of the Bill of Rights, on what’s being proposed here, he’d agree with it. He would agree that the First Amendment cannot be absolute.” - Chuck Schumer (D). Yet, Madison and Mason wrote the Bill of Rights, according to Sheila Jackson Lee, 400 years ago. Yup, it's a fact.
Btw, had they just cuffed the guy standing and he died from stress induced heart attack on the spot, the autopsy may not have read "Natural", but still have read "Homicide". MEs do this sometimes to trigger a greater investigation into the events.
Here's that "or" you keep thinking is an "and":
Homicide—‘‘occurs when death results from...’’ an injury or poisoning or from ‘‘...a volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death. Intent to cause death is a common element but is not required for classification as homicide.’’
Last edited by clownboy; 12-05-14 at 09:55 PM.
I'm not wearing blinders. No sir. But I have no doubt there will come a day that you will discover you are blind in one eye and can't see out of the other.
It doesn't matter that he was killed 4 months ago, the Grand Jury has been debating the case for over 9 weeks. And with their decision coming off the heels of Ferguson it was prime to milk this verdict for all it was worth for special interests, after all it was a white cop that subdued a black criminal that resulted in his death.
Today after Al Sharpton made a personal appearance with the widow of Garner, milking it for all he could get using her emotion to fuel it, he jotted off to another part of the country to do the eulogy at a funeral for another black man that was killed during an altercation with police with media coverage of course. Yeah, folks like Sharpton who like to be called Reverend, who use churches as a backdrop to promote hatred and discord among races, must have a special place in Hell with his name on it. I've attended the funerals of several officers who gave their life in law enforcement taken by some piece of slime who has no respect for life or the rule of law. I've heard the bagpipes played too many times over the years for these men. I have a niece in law enforcement. I know what she faces everyday on the job putting herself on the line to protect the innocent. I wonder how long it will be before she will be put into a position to be made a racist just for doing her job. Yeah there has to be a special place in Hell for people who provoke such divisiveness.
Not only that, but it's NOT just a volitional act, but a "volitional act committed by another person to cause fear, harm, or death".
Last edited by clownboy; 12-05-14 at 09:56 PM.
The crazy thing about all this, to me, is that the grand jury's job isn't to determine culpability, it is simply to determine if something happened that needs determination as to whether the guy involved was to blame. This particular case seems absolutely open and shut regarding that. It is simply baffling to me that a grand jury looked at the tape and said "nah, this doesn't have to go to trial." Utterly mind-boggling.
One thing that happened in both this case and the Ferguson case that is a major deviation from protocol is allowing the focus of the grand jury hearing -- the police officers involved -- to make statements to the grand jury. The cop in the Garner case talked for two hours to the grand jury about how he didn't mean to hurt Garner. Prosecutors simply don't treat cop defendants like regular defendants.
Freedom of speech is not freedom from criticism.
Is society was made of coral our world would be floral.
It basically looks over the prosecutor's evidence and decides if it's sufficient for an indictment.The grand jury's accusatory function is to determine whether or not there is probable cause to believe that one or more persons committed a certain offense
Second, we don't know for sure, but I think it's a given that the video wasn't the only piece of evidence they examined. There is quite a lot about the event that those videos do not cover. And yes, videos, as in more than the one we see everywhere.
That last paragraph is not true. And again, grand jurors are allowed to ask questions of the witnesses directly, there is no time constraint.
Last edited by clownboy; 12-05-14 at 10:44 PM.