Two of 'Jena Six' defendants present BET award - Page 29

dixon76710 · 11-15-07, 05:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citizen

This is a bogus account. No reporter would write a report so biased.

Yeah, I noticed you shun reporters and instead get your info from a dead advocacy site, jenasix.org that "was set up to provide news on the plight of the Jena Six and information on how to support their cause". Im sure their version of the facts did more to bring in the contributions.
For future reference, dont ask for a source and then simply write it off as false. Especially when you rely on dead advocacy sites for your truth.

Caine · 11-15-07, 05:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dixon76710

Yeah, I noticed you shun reporters and instead get your info from a dead advocacy site, jenasix.org that "was set up to provide news on the plight of the Jena Six and information on how to support their cause". Im sure their version of the facts did more to bring in the contributions.
For future reference, dont ask for a source and then simply write it off as false. Especially when you rely on dead advocacy sites for your truth.

Don't forget about those who rely on articles from The Final Call founded by Minister Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam

The black supremacy group....

DeeJayH · 11-15-07, 05:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caine

Intending to threaten someone with a gun is different from defending yourself when being chased down by 3 thugs.

Anything else?

those Black Thugs, as you refer to them, were obviously just out for some exercise and whitey overreacted

duh

Stinger · 11-15-07, 06:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citizen

When a bunch of kids beat up on one kid, that is no common first fight.

Agreed the Jena Six attack was a planned assault.

Quote:

Priors don't count in a court of law.

Yes they do, ever hear of three strikes laws? And they especially do you are are on probation for them, they have DIRECT COUNT in a court of law.

Quote:

Besides, no one had priors except Bell. So why should they be charged.

Because they took part in a premeditated criminal act.

Quote:

Threatening with a gun is against the law.

Depends.

Quote:

Why was that kid not charged.

He was defending himself.

Citizen · 11-15-07, 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stinger

Agreed the Jena Six attack was a planned assault.

Yes they do, ever hear of three strikes laws? And they especially do you are are on probation for them, they have DIRECT COUNT in a court of law.

Because they took part in a premeditated criminal act.

Depends.

He was defending himself.

you are spinning my words. I was talking about the white kids who beat up the black kid and only one was convicted of a minor charge. The black kid was never asked to testify. And now you are the judge and jury. How do you know it was premeditated? Are you a reader of minds now?

And for you to say that threatening a person with a gun is not against the law is pure idiotic. It appears that you want to give the white kids the benifit of the doubt and not the black kijs. You are racist.

Three strikes you are out does not apply to minors.

Citizen · 11-15-07, 08:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dixon76710

Yeah, I noticed you shun reporters and instead get your info from a dead advocacy site, jenasix.org that "was set up to provide news on the plight of the Jena Six and information on how to support their cause". Im sure their version of the facts did more to bring in the contributions.
For future reference, dont ask for a source and then simply write it off as false. Especially when you rely on dead advocacy sites for your truth.

Did you read the second article I posted? I Doubt it.

Citizen · 11-15-07, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Caine

Negative.
There is no evidence to show that there were multiple whites beating on the black kid during the Barn Party Fight. Only the one black kid victim's statements, which were contrary to the witnesses, who stated there multiple subjects on both sides of the fight.

Intending to threaten someone with a gun is different from defending yourself when being chased down by 3 thugs.

Anything else?

What witnesses. None of this was tried in a court of law. Just here Say. From what the D.A. said, it does not coincide with you side of the story. Blacks are thugs and whites defend themselfs. (likely Story)

dixon76710 · 11-15-07, 10:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citizen

What witnesses. None of this was tried in a court of law. Just here Say. From what the D.A. said, it does not coincide with you side of the story.

I dont recall the DA stating anything that didnt coincide with this "side of the story". I think you just make this shiite up as you go along.

Caine · 11-16-07, 07:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DeeJayH

those Black Thugs, as you refer to them, were obviously just out for some exercise and whitey overreacted

duh

I don't recall calling them black thugs.
I could be wrong though.

Caine · 11-16-07, 08:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Citizen

you are spinning my words. I was talking about the white kids who beat up the black kid and only one was convicted of a minor charge. The black kid was never asked to testify. And now you are the judge and jury. How do you know it was premeditated? Are you a reader of minds now?

You know VERY LITTLE about criminal justice my friend. But first..
A. You have the facts wrong. The "white kids beating up the black kid" story is completely fabricated, as evidence by my link earlier in the thread that nobody bothered to read because it didn't come from a black supremacy group, or a liberal new outlet that got their information from a black supremacy group.. you know, like The Final Call founded by Minister Louis Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam
B. Do you think maybe the black kid was never asked to testify to the minor charge placed against the one white who initiated the fight (and thus was the primary aggressor) was because maybe that one white kid plead guilty? Testimony isn't required when the defendant admits guilt.

Quote:

And for you to say that threatening a person with a gun is not against the law is pure idiotic. It appears that you want to give the white kids the benifit of the doubt and not the black kijs.

Threatening a group of thugs chasing you down and threatening to harm you with a gun to defend yourself.... Hmm.... lets think about this....
Nope, sorry your wrong. Your just here to race bait is all. As evidenced by....

Quote:

You are racist.

DING DING DING DING DING! WE HAVE A WINNER!!!!!

I was waiting for someone to throw that accusation out there because several of us do not fit the mold of being apologetic towards racial violence perpetrated by blacks due to the ever magnificent "N" word, or the symbolism in a noose (which was used LONG, LONG, LONG, LONG, LONG before American Slavery, and could be a symbol of many things).

Quote:

Three strikes you are out does not apply to minors.

That depends on what the statutes are for the age of a minor, or mental competency, or other contributing factors in the specific state in which the "minor" is charged.

That kid would be sitting in jail right now if he were charged in N.C., since you are charged as an adult at age 16, regardless.