Gov. Abbott Pardons Sgt. Perry After Killing BLMer with an AK-47

Court documents, testimonies. Does this mean you support open carry?
You mean court documents in which Perry both speculated how he could kill someone and get away with it claiming self-defense and actually said he might have to kill some protesters?

Or maybe the video of his interrogation where he stated he wanted to prevent (not stop) the victim from aiming at him?

Or is it the AK 47 of the victim entered into evidence on safety and without a bullet in the chamber.

Or maybe the multiple eyewitness who denied the victim aimed the weapon?

To what exactly are you referring?
 
Court Documents, there was no video of the shooting. And testimony of the witnesses said that the victim didn’t point his weapon at anyone. So, where is this information I couldn’t find?
It doesn't exist. He's lying.
 
Funny thing that. I can't find any such video. And I looked.

Not only that but I did see messages from Perry that were presented in court where he clearly states he was going there and he might have to kill some protesters. Furthermore. As I said. The self-defense argument was REJECTED by the jury. UNANIMOUSLY.
So what if he said that? Any citizen has the right to say they might have to defend themselves against a mob.
 
Last edited:
Republicans love lawlessness, that's why they do not deserve to be in power.
That is why we must separate the nation into a loose confederation of states. You and those who agree can be part of your own semi nation and we can end this.
 
That is why we must separate the nation into a loose confederation of states. You and those who agree can be part of your own semi nation and we can end this.
Refer to the Civil War.

Thanks.
 
It doesn't exist. He's lying.
Because there is no video and conflicting testimony means all was well with a protestor carrying a rifle? You define lawlessness when the Governor had enough information to pardon m and the only reason you are so supportive of a protestor openly carrying a gun is because he did so under the BLM flag.
 
So what if we said that? Any citizen has the right to say they might have to defend themselves against a mob.
Sure, just like every citizen can tell a friend that he can shoot somebody who's armed and claim self-defense to justify it regardless if he's actually threatened.

However if 2 weeks later that person shoots a protester who's armed, those posts can and will be used in a court of law to establish intent. Just like his initial interrogation in which he says he was trying to prevent (not stop) the person from aiming at him. Just like the prosecution can point out that the AK 47 didn't have a round chambered and was on safety.

A person can say whatever he likes. But a jury can look at those words and make their own inferences from them.
 
Here he is raising his elbow up to aim the rifle at Sgt Perry.
IMG_5754.jpeg



Fuck around, find out.
 
This sets a bad precedent. The Gov is telling the people of his state that the juries cannot be trusted and that he alone knows better than the jury that sat through the trial and saw all the evidence.
 


the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

"
Many people" have decided that partisanship allows them to simply ignore some pretty basic rights.

Redress he GOVERNMENT, not preventing your fellow citizens from lawfully using roadways for their own purposes.
 
So you then condemn every single pardon done by every single governor or President?

Most of them yes, for sure all the Presidential ones.

If new evidence comes to light and there is an actual reason behind the pardon, I can support that use of the power.

But that was not the case here, the pardon happened because the Gov supported the action of the accused. It was 100% political and not based on any legal issues.
 
Good!

It as the right thing to do after a far left prosecutor, in a far left city prosecuted him. 🤔 Sounds familiar.


Texas Gov. Greg Abbott (R) on Thursday issued a pardon for Daniel Perry, an Army sergeant who was convicted of murder for fatally shooting a Black Lives Matter (BLM) protester in 2020.
In April, a jury found Perry guilty of murdering Garrett Foster during a July 2020 protest in Austin, Texas. The jury did not find him guilty of an aggravated assault charge.
Perry was sentenced to 25 years in prison, and Abbott asked the state’s parole board to review the case expeditiously. Perry’s conviction and sentencing have angered conservatives, who say he was acting out of self-defense.
The board, appointed by the governor, announced its unanimous recommendation to pardon Perry, and Abbott’s proclamation followed, The Associated Press reported.
In a statement Thursday, the governor said Texas has one of the strongest “Stand Your Ground” laws of self-defense.
The proclamation grants Perry a full pardon and “restoration of full civil rights of citizenship.” Abbott thanked the review board for its unanimous decision.
...






Crime does pay for MAGATS.
 
Most of them yes, for sure all the Presidential ones.

If new evidence comes to light and there is an actual reason behind the pardon, I can support that use of the power.

But that was not the case here, the pardon happened because the Gov supported the action of the accused. It was 100% political and not based on any legal issues.

Plenty of political Pardons done in the past, and in this case the jury was made up of gun hating Austinites.
 

Forum List

Back
Top