- Nov 30, 2012
- 22,840
- 617
- 121
I would think there needs to be extraordinary circumstances for me to think the jury got the verdict wrong.
You understand that there is such a thing as intent right? Why are you so hung up on the ricochet aspect rather than the intent one?So right now, go rob the 7/11 down the street. Point the gun at the wall and floor and fire it. Hit one or two people with richochets and kill them.
Scott free!
Hell.. make it even easier. You don't even TOUCH the gun. Have your buddy rob the 7/11 and you just stand dumbly by and watch as an accomplice. Have him fire the gun at the floor and richochets kill someone.
You'll get off Scott free. I promise.
You understand that there is such a thing as intent right? Why are you so hung up on the ricochet aspect rather than the intent one?
I think you're making it sound too simple. Had the bastard not been here in the first place it wouldn't have happened. How the fuck do you "accidentally" pull the trigger? Never mind the fact the cock sucker was deported 6 damn times and was a multiple felon. Why would you have a gun in the first damn place? This right here underscores the fact this verdict is bullshit to the highest order. I personally think this San Fran nut job jurists wanted to stick it to Trump, and in the process a murderer gets off Scott free, the family gets no justice and your "murcia" is up in arms.
Intent doesn't matter dummy.
Then why exactly are there differrent degrees in murder, robbery, manslaughter and a whole host of other crimes like intent to distribute?
Do you try and be this stupid or does it come naturally?
Do you even bother to read anything before posting?You understand that there is such a thing as intent right? Why are you so hung up on the ricochet aspect rather than the intent one?
Then why exactly are there differrent degrees in murder, robbery, manslaughter and a whole host of other crimes like intent to distribute?
Do you try and be this stupid or does it come naturally?
You answered your own question.
Do you even read your posts. You're point was that this decision somehow meant that ricochets negated culpability irregardless of other factors.Do you even bother to read anything before posting?
The whole case revolves around these "aspects".
Do you even read your posts. You're point was that this decision somehow meant that ricochets negated culpability irregardless of other factors.
You're really getting dumber by the post. The whole point is there is no valid ricochet defense when there is the intent to harm or that there's a reasonable belief that harm may be caused by a specific action.So I am gonna pull the ricochet defense when I kill someone. Yeah, that'll work out for me.
As king of the a$$hats.One thing is for sure. Trump just got reelected.
Dude, you are just showing how uneducated you are. God is in that courtroom, God found him not guilty. This is a court of law. The man was judged on the evidence which demanded an acquittal except that he should have known that as a felon he couldn't possess a gun. There is no evidence that he even intended to fire the gun, much less at the victim. The bullet hit the ground before it hit her.This right here just goes to show you just how damn fucked up California and San Fransisco truly. is. This is an outrage and this despicable piece of shit will be judged by the only true judge, God.
Is that John Wayne speaking?Yet if illegals weren't here they wouldn't be killing any Americans now would they?
not necessarilyYet if illegals weren't here they wouldn't be killing any Americans now would they?
the hard work is really paying offIt's both natural *and* you work at it?
You understand that there is such a thing as intent right? Why are you so hung up on the ricochet aspect rather than the intent one?
It does, always.