Whoa! Liberals REALLY hate God, and the REASON will surprise you. Patriots, pay attention.

Ian Jeffrey

Council Hall
Mar 2013
78,082
47,859
Vulcan, down the street from Darth Vader
Never mind "Points of LAW".
So you do not care what the law is; you just want to kill someone. The logical problem you have is that, without law, you have no basis for punishing him in any way, much less killing him.
Accident or not ,it was still depraved indifference.
The jury decided otherwise - and it was its decision, not yours. You just want to kill someone irrespective of the law.
I think it is time for The American People to get rid of the "Double Jeopardy" Law.
That will never happen. It is built into the U.S. Constitution's Fifth Amendment for good reasons - reasons of which you are apparently unaware. Get an education before spouting such vengeful nonsense.
Zarate will die in the gutter. Just like Miranda.
That is his business, not yours.
Last word. GOOD!
Sorry to disappoint you. I was working late yesterday afternoon, and Shabbat came along. And, of course, I was not working or online for Shabbat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Leo2
Jul 2011
4,172
6,315
UK/Australia
What a crock. Never mind "Points of LAW" . The FACTS are supposed to determine the case. Undisputed fact !. Kate was KILLED by a gunshot. Fact two. That illegal FIRED the shot. Undisputed. Accident or not ,it was still depraved indifference. The JURY was wrong. Guilty go free all the time. I think it is time for The American People to get rid of the "Double Jeopardy" Law. And yes. PERSONALLY! I want that guy to BURN. Why? Because he DID it. Kates life was worth something. Zarate will die in the gutter.Just like Miranda.
The USA is a society governed by the rule of law. I am only a student of British laws and jurisprudence and I defer in all such matters to Counselor Jeffery who has outlined the relevant aspects of the legal case.

You do not appear to be interested in the niceties of the law, so to put it in the simplest terms - the only proven fact is the man concerned was holding the firearm when it discharged. Whether it was fired deliberately or inadvertently are matters of consequence, but even in the event that the discharge was deliberate, it would be difficult to establish mens rea - as he was not pointing the weapon at the victim, and she was struck by a ricocheting missile, over which he had no control. In other words, the circumstances do not indicate that he intended to kill, or in any way, harm the victim. And a conviction of murder or manslaughter would be unsound under any system of justice.
 

HCProf

Council Hall
Sep 2014
29,459
19,007
USA
bmanmcfly has been banned from this thread. Please do not respond to his posts. Thank you.