Another Example of Juror Bias in DC

good thing no one took out the mccloskeys for doing precisely that

mark-mccloskey-new-gun-433.jpg
 
and maybe next time you shoot someone you shouldn't put texts and social media posts fantasizing about killing BLM protestors...could have affected how the jury looked at the case

it is quite a sequence

1) put out texts and social media posts saying you hate BLM protestors and want to shoot them

2) pull up your car and stop in middle of a group of BLM protestors

3) shoot one of them
 
Last edited:
I'm honestly curious if you believe this verdict is correct... Can you just post that you believe the Uber driver was the criminal here?
 
sturg33 said:
I'm honestly curious if you believe this verdict is correct... Can you just post that you believe the Uber driver was the criminal here?
Click to expand...

i've only clicked on a couple news stories about it...i'm sure the jury knows a lot more about it than i do...and the judge too

i think his social media posts show a man looking for trouble...and he and trouble found each other...with tragic results
 
nsacpi said:
and his texts and rantings about wanting to go to shoot them are also in the public domain
Click to expand...

That is irrelevant.

I want to beat the **** out of these BLM terrorists.

If one of them ever tries to assault me, I very much hope this post doesn't make me guilty of I decide.to defend myself and win that confrontation
 
i assume you would have been ok with someone taking out the mccloskeys cuz they pointed guns at them
 
nsacpi said:
i've only clicked on a couple news stories about it...i'm sure the jury knows a lot more about it than i do...and the judge too

i think his social media posts show a man looking for trouble...and he and trouble found each other...with tragic results
Click to expand...

He was in a car and a person pointed an illegal gun at him

I don't care if he was looking for trouble. When the thug that you loved threatened his life, it's game on.
 
austin jury...what can i say

life has a certain amount of unfairness toward criminals

i recommend next time you plan to disrupt a protest you don't post about wanting to kill them

and take care to pick a friendly jurisdiction

and i'll add the observation that the gentleman can appeal...i imagine he might find a friendly judge or two in texas
 
Last edited:
nsacpi said:
austin jury...what can i say

life has a certain amount of unfairness toward criminals

i recommend next time you plan to disrupt a protest you don't post about wanting to kill them
Click to expand...

When thethe says the left is pro criminal, he really is correct

You are taking the side of the criminal here

I know you love tyrant tradeau but do you believe in the concept of self defense?
 
sturg33 said:
When thethe says the left is pro criminal, he really is correct

You are taking the side of the criminal here

I know you love tyrant tradeau but do you believe in the concept of self defense?
Click to expand...
...
i'm sure the gentleman will find a friendly judge or two to appeal to in texas...he should be ok...surely the entire texas judiciary has not been taken over by woke commie judges
 
Two months into those protests, on Sat*ur*day, July 25, 2020, Perry, a sergeant stationed at Fort Hood and working as a rideshare driver in Austin, accelerated his car into a crowd of protesters at the corner of Fourth Street and Congress Avenue. Garrett Foster, a 28-year-old Air Force veteran openly carrying an AK-47 across his chest, approached the car. The driver's side window opened and Perry shot Foster four times in the chest and abdomen. Perry turned himself in to Austin police seconds later, claiming he'd shot in self-defense after Foster raised the barrel of his gun. Austin Police Department officers questioned Perry and let him go. Garza presented the case to a Travis County grand jury shortly after taking office in 2021. The grand jury indicted Perry for murder and assault.

The testimony confirming Perry's anger toward protesters came on the third day of the trial as prosecutors displayed text messages and social media comments showing that he thought about killing them. "I might have to kill a few people on my way to work, they are rioting outside my apartment complex," Perry wrote to a friend in June of 2020. "I might go to Dallas to shoot looters," he wrote on another occasion. Perry also encouraged violence in a variety of social media posts.

In addition, Perry speculated about how he might get away with such a killing – by claiming self-defense, as he is now doing. Prosecutors presented a Facebook Messen*ger chat between Perry and a friend, Michael Holcomb, which occurred two weeks before he shot Foster. In it, Perry argued that shooting protesters was legal if it was in self-defense. Holcomb, who was called to the stand Wednesday afternoon, seemed to try to talk Perry down. "Aren't you a CDL holder too?" he asked, referring to the men's licenses to carry concealed handguns. "We went through the same training ... Shooting after creating an event where you have to shoot, is not a good shoot."

premeditation

boyz you gotta zip up if you gonna try to live out these fantasies
 
This claim – that Foster raised the barrel of his AK-47 – is, of course, Perry's principal hope to escape a murder conviction. It was refuted over and over during the first three days of the trial by witnesses who were near Foster that night. All repeated a version of the same story: They heard squealing tires as a car sped into a group of about 20 protesters. The protesters, some of whom had almost been hit by the car, slapped and kicked it. Garrett Foster strode to the car's side and issued an order to the driver. All of the witnesses insisted that Foster did not raise the barrel of his gun.

seems kinda relevant that witnesses contradicted the defendants claims about the gun being aimed at him
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top