Trump administration fails to secure indictment against sandwich thrower

[cnm]

Innocent? He's on tape doing it. That wasn't innocent.

Yet he has not been found guilty of any offence. That's about as close to innocence as anyone can get.

 

[meaner gene]

Innocent? He's on tape doing it. That wasn't innocent.

Ironically the tape they had on him, was exculpatory.
It also showed the officer lied in his description of the assault.

 

[Meister]

Ironically the tape they had on him, was exculpatory.
It also showed the officer lied in his description of the assault.

My premise was the guy wasn't 'innocent' as marener had stated.

 

[Meister]

Yet he has not been found guilty of any offence. That's about as close to innocence as anyone can get.

He wasn't found "not guilty".

 

[cnm]

My premise was the guy wasn't 'innocent' as marener had stated.

He'd be guilty if that was the case. Man, these MAGAts just love the taste of the jackboot, don't they?

 

[meaner gene]

My premise was the guy wasn't 'innocent' as marener had stated.

Our criminal justice system doesn't make that determination.
The person is either guilty or not guilty.
And the evidence they had, including the video, could not show an assault on the officer.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

What did they expect when appointing a severely unqualified drunk to her position? Her only qualification was praising trump on fox.

 

[cnm]

He wasn't found "not guilty".

Oh. What was he found guilty of?

 

[meaner gene]

He wasn't found "not guilty".

Illegal use of double negative.

Please recompute.

 

[Meister]

The person is either guilty or not guilty.

Wrong. Federal prosecutors failed to secure a felony indictment from a grand jury. Period
Doesn't mean he wasn't guilty, just that there wasn't enough evidence for a felony.
The guy still can be charged for a lesser crime

 

[cnm]

He wasn't found "not guilty".

I'm tired of this. At least make your bullshit entertaining.

WASHINGTON — Jurors showed no appetite for the Justice Department's case against "sandwich guy," the D.C. resident who chucked a Subway sandwich at the chest of a federal officer, finding him not guilty on Thursday after several hours of deliberations.​

 

[meaner gene]

Wrong. Federal prosecutors failed to secure a felony indictment from a grand jury. Period
Doesn't mean he wasn't guilty, just that there wasn't enough evidence for a felony.
The guy still can be charged for a lesser crime

And he was charged with a lesser crime, that the jury unanimously found him NOT guilty of.

 

[cnm]

Wrong. Federal prosecutors failed to secure a felony indictment from a grand jury. Period
Doesn't mean he wasn't guilty, just that there wasn't enough evidence for a felony.
The guy still can be charged for a lesser crime

Words really don't mean much to MAGAts any more, do they?

 

[Meister]

I'm tired of this. At least make your bullshit entertaining.

WASHINGTON — Jurors showed no appetite for the Justice Department's case against "sandwich guy," the D.C. resident who chucked a Subway sandwich at the chest of a federal officer, finding him not guilty on Thursday after several hours of deliberations.​

He was acquitted, He still can be charged with a misdemeanor. If he was "not guilty",
he wouldn't be charged

 

[meaner gene]

He was acquitted, He still can be charged with a misdemeanor. If he was "not guilty",
he wouldn't be charged

Please look up the facts.
He was just found NOT GUILTY of the lesser misdemeanor charge.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

Why did your cult think it was ok to set fire to federal vehicles, attack them, and burn 120 plus cities in the name of St. Floyd?

They didn't.

Who claimed it was OK?
When did anyone deny it happened?

Why do you nut jobs consistently deflect to a non sequitur?

 

[cnm]

They didn't.

Who claimed it was OK?
When did anyone deny it happened?

Why do you nut jobs consistently deflect to a non sequitur?

It assuages the burning feefee of victimhood for a few seconds.

 

[Nuthin' Fancy]

So if I've got this right, you think Chump and his cult are psychotic fanatics. Fair?

Or just stupid and gullible.
Well, look who they defend and support?

 

[meaner gene]

They didn't.

Who claimed it was OK?
When did anyone deny it happened?

Why do you nut jobs consistently deflect to a non sequitur?

Nobody said what they did was O.K.

They just said those accused deserved all of their constitutional protections during their prosecution.

 

[pknopp]

Nobody said what they did was O.K.

I did. Violence will be a natural reaction to a government violating your civil rights.

Even the founders understood this.