Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
So do I, in fact no video was available for anything. But since it is, and we can judge those videos. Not to mention for those adept at using the internet other available information. We can judge a large part of the available evidence if you want to be intellectually honest.I remember a time when there wasn't five different videos of every moment everywhere...
As perry explained it to the deputy it was half way up and in his general directionHE SAID it wasn't aimed at him.
There are a lot of things that are legal but unethical. They are different things, and sometimes we don't like something that the law allows.While pardoning someone is lawful, that doesn't mean it's ethical.
Your crying has you forgetting to put random words in bold.Republicans love lawlessness, that's why they do not deserve to be in power.
We already knew Abbott is a piece of shit. This is further proof.There are a lot of things that are legal but unethical. They are different things, and sometimes we don't like something that the law allows.
For the third time my friend, your point above has already been responded to by numerous posters, showing how Perry’s act was an act of self-defense.HOW DOES ANY OF THIS JUSTIFY MURDER BY A CIVILIAN, even if I would grant you everything you post here as true (which I don't)
I didn't say it. The prosecution did.As perry explained it to the deputy it was half way up and in his general direction
You say there was no round in the chamber
If so why carry it around at all?
Or at least carry it at sling arms?
So it wasn’t pointed at him and therefore he didnt have grounds to claim he was actually threatened by it.As perry explained it to the deputy it was half way up and in his general direction
You say there was no round in the chamber
If so why carry it around at all?
Or at least carry it at sling arms?
Nobody showed anything. I see a lot of claims. Claims that are contradicted by among other people, Perry himself. Claiming they somehow have the weight of established facts is again an opinion. A very unsupported one at that.For the third time my friend, your point above has already been responded to by numerous posters, showing how Perry’s act was an act of self-defense.
In a way he redeemed himself for allowing a state funeral for George Floyd.Your crying has you forgetting to put random words in bold.
The person is a display of lawfulness and justice.
Thank God men like Abbott are IN power.
I think most people talk too much and say things they later regretI didn't say it. The prosecution did.
By the way. That's all you want to reply to? I offered the court filing stating Perry's statements. Plus, some of his highlights. NO opinion on them whatsoever?
Only it wasn't "a legal excuse" it was an illegal one. As demonstrated by the guilty verdict. A guilty verdict overturned by a governor who claimed it was partisan in nature. Without evidence.I think most people talk too much and say things they later regret
If perry was looking for a legal excuse to kill BLM wackos they sure gave him one
They put the wrong person into harms way that night
It was a perfectly legal and justified pardon. All pardons after all convictions overturn jury verdicts. Thought you should know, fuckup.Only it wasn't "a legal excuse" it was an illegal one. As demonstrated by the guilty verdict. A guilty verdict overturned by a governor who claimed it was partisan in nature. Without evidence.
Was it murder? Did the guy get out of his car, walk up and shoot the armed protester unprovoked or not threatened? If he did, then I would call it murder. But, the reality is that there is a lot of conflicting testimony and interpretation as to whether the victim provoked the driver.This makes MURDER a reasonable response?
How does one know the gun does or does not have a chambered round when pointed at them?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?
Sure, they do. They do however tell me that this particular governor has ZERO respect for the law because of his stated reason for the pardon. if you think it's OK for a governor to simply reject a jury verdict and ABUSE his right to grant clemency that's a you problem. So are your well-documented reading comprehension problems/It was a perfectly legal and justified pardon. All pardons after all convictions overturn jury verdicts. Thought you should know, fuckup.
Oh, forkup. Lying isn’t a good rejoinder. But it’s typical of your limited ability to think or post intelligently.Sure, they do. They do however tell me that this particular governor has ZERO respect for the law because of his stated reason for the pardon. if you think it's OK for a governor to simply reject a jury verdict and ABUSE his right to grant clemency that's a you problem. So are your well-documented reading comprehension problems/