deanrd
Gold Member
- May 8, 2017
- 29,411
- 3,633
- 290
- Banned
- #1
This Judge’s Excuses for Acquitting Jason Stockley of Murder Are Pathetic
In Judge Timothy J. Wilson’s 30-page ruling you can see the mental gymnastics that went into acquitting a man who said to his partner of Smith, “we’re killing this motherfucker, don’t you know,” minutes before killing him.
Stockley’s statement was not the only piece of evidence against him. Prosecutors alleged that he planted a gun that was found in Smith’s car. The evidence for this is that his DNA was found on the gun while Smith’s was not, he can be seen rifling through a bag in his police vehicle after the shooting, and he was seen returning to search Smith’s car before the gun appeared to him.
One of Stockley’s fellow officers at the time who arrived on the scene immediately after the shooting, Elijah Simpson, had testified that he didn’t see a gun in the vehicle when he lifted up the airbag and looked in the car. Simpson also testified that it was strange that Stockley was allowed to go back and forth between his own car and the scene of the shooting, and that Stockley was the only officer to remove his gloves during evidence gathering. (This was how Stockley's defense team says the gun was contaminated with his DNA. The prosecution says he removed the gloves on purpose to have that excuse.)
-----------------------------------------
When they check a gun for DNA, they not only check the handle, but also the barrel, the bullet chamber, the trigger and any seams in the gun. If you carry the gun in your pocket, sweat, which carries DNA could get all over the gun. You're hands are greasy, loading the chamber could add more DNA. I don't think you can own and handle a gun and not have your DNA on it.
The defense for the police officer is saying that just by picking up the gun, the officer's DNA got on the gun, but the guy who owned, loaded, and carried the gun left none? Even if ignored, DNA evidence is important.
In Judge Timothy J. Wilson’s 30-page ruling you can see the mental gymnastics that went into acquitting a man who said to his partner of Smith, “we’re killing this motherfucker, don’t you know,” minutes before killing him.
Stockley’s statement was not the only piece of evidence against him. Prosecutors alleged that he planted a gun that was found in Smith’s car. The evidence for this is that his DNA was found on the gun while Smith’s was not, he can be seen rifling through a bag in his police vehicle after the shooting, and he was seen returning to search Smith’s car before the gun appeared to him.
One of Stockley’s fellow officers at the time who arrived on the scene immediately after the shooting, Elijah Simpson, had testified that he didn’t see a gun in the vehicle when he lifted up the airbag and looked in the car. Simpson also testified that it was strange that Stockley was allowed to go back and forth between his own car and the scene of the shooting, and that Stockley was the only officer to remove his gloves during evidence gathering. (This was how Stockley's defense team says the gun was contaminated with his DNA. The prosecution says he removed the gloves on purpose to have that excuse.)
-----------------------------------------
When they check a gun for DNA, they not only check the handle, but also the barrel, the bullet chamber, the trigger and any seams in the gun. If you carry the gun in your pocket, sweat, which carries DNA could get all over the gun. You're hands are greasy, loading the chamber could add more DNA. I don't think you can own and handle a gun and not have your DNA on it.
The defense for the police officer is saying that just by picking up the gun, the officer's DNA got on the gun, but the guy who owned, loaded, and carried the gun left none? Even if ignored, DNA evidence is important.
