Does anything you posted "justify" a 2nd degree murder conviction of the driver? I'll save you some time and unnecessary bandwidth: No!
The publicity stunt by "the DA" was a politically motivated over-indictment, and may well have closed the door on ever trying the case in Baltimore where she actually wants to put on her dog and pony show to attempt to "make a name for herself." She has made herself a target by bringing inappropriate attention to herself. The "book" on her is she doesn't have the prosecutorial skills to win a murder conviction, nor the evidence or the law on her side.
Originally Posted by LexusLover
You are the very same moron that vehemently argued the Michael Brown case, because you believed the "courts" made the appropriate decision based on the "facts" available to them.
So what changed this time around? Why do you think this was a "politically motivated over-indictment" and the Michael Brown case NOT an "under-indictment" caused by institutional failure?
I'll tell you why. It's because you're a fucking hypocrite. And a huge fucking MORON
The publicity stunt by "the DA" was a politically motivated over-indictment, and may well have closed the door on ever trying the case in Baltimore where she actually wants to put on her dog and pony show to attempt to "make a name for herself." She has made herself a target by bringing inappropriate attention to herself. The "book" on her is she doesn't have the prosecutorial skills to win a murder conviction, nor the evidence or the law on her side.
Is there a single fact in this drivel? I'll save you the "time and unnecessary bandwidth": No. There isn't.
Is anyone surprised that you always (EVERY.SINGLE.FUCKING.TIME) end up on the side of the police and against the (usually black) victims.
I mean Jesus Christ, you gotta wonder about this yourself sometimes.
Are you sure you aren't WTF? You have the same lack of reading comprehension and inability to form logical conclusions as him.
Where did I state or imply that the police are excused from breaking his friggin spine? Dumbass troll.
Originally Posted by gnadfly
I'm glad you used "imply". Because the "implication" started the moment you started this thread. Let's see here
I didn't catch the entire interview but he brought out some significant points:
-The toxicology reports shows Freddie had heroin and marijuana in his system at time of death And your point is?
-Freddie was arrested in the an alley that was known for drug deals and had been arrested there before. Again, your point is?
-The Baltimore police force feels betrayed by the mayor and the DA equivalent Point?
-The van had a camera system but it hasn't been working for several years Point?
-The van driver is known as an on the up and up cop and many in the department are aghast that he's being scapegoated.Yes, he's being scapegoated. yet you don't believe the police are excused from "breaking his friggin spine". You sure make a lot of sense.
You might think everyone else is as stupid as you or LL but I can assure you, that is definitely not the case.
Your only argument is calling me WTF? You've done that to anyone and everyone since I've been here. This very same line:
Are you sure you aren't WTF? You have the same lack of reading comprehension and inability to form logical conclusions as him.
You've used it every single time you can't reply with a logical argument.
And you have the gall to call the other person "stupid"?