Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
3 hours ago, Koko78 said:

 

I'm somewhat torn on this. On the one hand, I can see her story being plausible. Let's not pretend that anyone who just worked a 13 hour shift is going to be paying attention to a freakin' doormat.

 

On the other hand, she killed a guy in his own apartment while he was enjoying a bowl of ice cream. I'm not cool with that.

 

Depends on the severity of the murder charge.  "Criminally negligent homicide" seems reasonable (or whatever the equivalent in TX statute.)

 

It's unfortunate that she's likely to be punished more severely than her department, which policies seem more to blame.

Posted
1 minute ago, DC Tom said:

 

Depends on the severity of the murder charge.  "Criminally negligent homicide" seems reasonable (or whatever the equivalent in TX statute.)

 

It's unfortunate that she's likely to be punished more severely than her department, which policies seem more to blame.

 

I agree, this was pretty clearly a Manslaughter-type case, not a murder case. As for severity, from the news articles, it seems the punishment range is between 5 and 99 years.

 

Apparently the jury decides the sentence as well. Mitigation is going to be a B word for the defense, especially after the jury rejected the 'mistakes were made' defense at trial.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Koko78 said:

 

I agree, this was pretty clearly a Manslaughter-type case, not a murder case. As for severity, from the news articles, it seems the punishment range is between 5 and 99 years.

 

Apparently the jury decides the sentence as well. Mitigation is going to be a B word for the defense, especially after the jury rejected the 'mistakes were made' defense at trial.

 

But the equivalent under TX law might just be "murder."  They may have "capital murder, premeditated homicide, and murder" on the books or something, and no "manslaughter" charge, and she still got the least charge.

 

I'm honestly not interested enough to look it up.

Posted
51 minutes ago, B-Man said:

 

In other words, when asked if her gun control ideas would stand up to constitutional scrutiny, she shrugs as if "who cares"? Her campaign is going to go over like a lead Mondale.

  • Like (+1) 1
Posted
12 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said:

NO MORE GUN SAFETY CLASSES!!!!!

 

 

Won't need safety classes once they have confiscated all the guns,  duh!!!!

Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, /dev/null said:

 

one of the cardinal rules of gun safety, always keep those things pointed in a safe direction

 

She’s only carrying one. ?

 

Oh and she’s going to need more than those two billets she’s carrying 

Edited by Chef Jim
Posted
9 hours ago, Chef Jim said:

 

She’s only carrying one. ?

 

Oh and she’s going to need more than those two billets she’s carrying 

i dunno... they knocked me down.

Posted
11 hours ago, /dev/null said:

 

one of the cardinal rules of gun safety, always keep those things pointed in a safe direction

Seeing her equipped like that makes me think of BANG, BANG.

×
×
  • Create New...