Your Verdict on Guyger

[Big Green]

You have also been exposed to evidence the jury was not allowed to see.

You can still vote on

#2 - guess what jury will do
#3 - bangworthiness of defendant

#3. You must have seen some pictures I haven’t. I’ll pass and not think twice about it.

 

[diesel1959]

I find it interesting that the judge has been so interested in her texts (and the deleted ones) that they are allowed into testimony. She was off duty, her mental state is allowed to be where ever she wants it! Or are we supposed to not allow 'sluts' in the DPD? Definitely trying to kick a downed dog. That is the real problem with the case. No change of venue, no delay allowed, selecting evidence to be shown to the jury. The LE that shot the car lot guy (when he began his attack) was fired IIRC for not following policy of waiting for backup - but his partner was on the scene. So just wait for swat to come and have a gun battle in an apartment? Too many possible scenarios to afternoon quarterback! Which is what the prosecutor is doing. We want the Fl boss to never get another LE job as his training program caused kids to be killed, yet the same training and rules apply here? Oh, double tap is standard practice.

You don't think those texts (undeleted or deleted) go towards showing the state of mind of the defendant, both before and after the killing? They're the very definition of relevant and admissible evidence.

 

[jordanmills]

I'm going with hung jury. Half "cops can do no wrong and we must sacrifice anything to make sure these heroes with the most dangerous jobs ever get home safe every night" and half "white oppressor shot a poor unarmed black man".

 

[AustinN4]

#3. You must have seen some pictures I haven’t. I’ll pass and not think twice about it.

Same reaction for me.

 

[majormadmax]

That would be nice. This is just a poll thread and, as such, it stands alone. However, it would be nice if discussion of the minutiae stayed in the other thread.

Geez, it's nothing avvidclif has to get his sphincter all knotted up about! There simply was no way to insert a poll in the ongoing discussion. If a mod wants to merge the two, then I am sure they will do so; otherwise this wouldn't be the first time TGT has several threads on the same topic!

 

[benenglish]

I don't think anyone is getting all knotted up. I appreciate when people point out threads they think are redundant.

Can't we all just get along?

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

As to threads in general: Don't like - Don't read - Easy!

 

[oohrah]

I just can't help feeling there's something missing here that has not come out (yet?).

 

[majormadmax]

I don't think anyone is getting all knotted up.

How about keeping all the trial s&*^ in one place.

Looks like sphincter knotting to me!

 

[benenglish]

Looks like sphincter knotting to me!

Really? "Sphincter knotting", to me, is when people go ape-shit and start demanding to know the physical address needed for legal service so they can sue TGT out of existence. Short of that, folks may not like the way the board organizes itself sometimes and may toss off a bit of censored profanity to indicate that they wish everyone else thought like them...but that hardly rises past the "squeeky wheel" level. IOW, most folks won't be bothered by it.

We're probably just hung up on terminology. You say "sphincter knotting" and think it's out of line. I say "visibly peeved" and think it's just part of normal business.

It's a distinction without much difference, if any. IMO, of course.

 

[Pistol Pete]

The charge is murder, she ain't guilty of murder. Looks like a kangaroo court to me. Should have been manslaughter and a deal made. Playing politics again.

 

[majormadmax]

Really? "Sphincter knotting", to me, is when people go ape-shit and start demanding to know the physical address needed for legal service so they can sue TGT out of existence. Short of that, folks may not like the way the board organizes itself sometimes and may toss off a bit of censored profanity to indicate that they wish everyone else thought like them...but that hardly rises past the "squeeky wheel" level. IOW, most folks won't be bothered by it.

We're probably just hung up on terminology. You say "sphincter knotting" and think it's out of line. I say "visibly peeved" and think it's just part of normal business.

It's a distinction without much difference, if any. IMO, of course.

It's nothing to get so excited about. All he had to do is report it, and you mods/admins will decide if they need to be merged or left as is.

Honestly, I don't care. I didn't start the poll, I only suggested it in the first thread; and if there was a way to add it to that discussion, that would have been better but I guess that wasn't possible...

 

[Renegade]

#3. You must have seen some pictures I haven’t. I’ll pass and not think twice about it.

I have not voted on #3.

eta

just saw I have not voted on 1 or 2. FIXED.

 

[Renegade]

I vote guilty because I am old school and was brought up that you take responsibility for your actions, not try and make excuses or blame others. Every mistake she made was of her own decision making. You choose to carry a gun, you own the consequences of your bad decision making. "She was tired", "She was on the phone", I don't care, she should have paid more attention, instead of running around Condition WHITE. The devil did not make you do it, you did it. I do not accept Affluenza boy or any of the other people who make excuses either. So I am consistent.

As for the jury. I think 60/40 for acquittal. Americans (not me as much), tend to be a forgiving lot. the old phrase "...but for the grace of God go I" is in a lot of folks heads, if not in those words. I think jury demographics works against her though.

 

[sidebite252]

That would be nice. This is just a poll thread and, as such, it stands alone. However, it would be nice if discussion of the minutiae stayed in the other thread.

Ok, I had to google minutiae

 

[chas019]

I think this shows the lady didn't have enough training to be a officer and thought the weapon was a good equalizer between her and a bigger person in any circumstance.

 

[Southpaw]

Ok, I gave it some thought and finally voted.

 

[chas019]

I also think she should loose her right to carry a firearm in any capacity except in her residence and whoa be to anyone who is in a relationship with her.

 

[TxStetson]

I also think she should loose her right to carry a firearm in any capacity except in her residence and whoa be to anyone who is in a relationship with her.

I believe the whole convicted felon thing will take care of that problem. If the life in prison thing ever expires.

 

[ZX9RCAM]

I think this shows the lady didn't have enough training to be a officer and thought the weapon was a good equalizer between her and a bigger person in any circumstance.

Welcome to the Forum!