|
https://twitter.com/jdmiles11/status/1181626673864810497?s=21 I don’t know much about the legal system (straight white male) but my cynicism has me wondering if they could try to get this menacing drug addict/dealer’s testimony thrown out on appeal and bring our noble police officer home?
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 18:57
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 10:56 |
|
|
colachute posted:https://twitter.com/jdmiles11/status/1181626673864810497?s=21 This conspiracy theory was already shot down. joat mon posted:I'm not sure how he was a KEY witness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 19:03
|
|
|
So the fact that he’s basically the Pablo Escobar of the weed world (which is how they’d probably spin it) doesn’t discredit his testimony? What you quoted doesn’t seem to take any *~*he was no angel*~* character flaws into account.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 19:05
|
|
|
colachute posted:So the fact that he’s basically the Pablo Escobar of the weed world (which is how they’d probably spin it) doesn’t discredit his testimony? What you quoted doesn’t seem to take any *~*he was no angel*~* character flaws into account. I dont think that he bought weed once has anything to do with him testifying whether or not he heard the murderer yelling. I'm not a lawyer or a Texan. Maybe someone who is can elaborate.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 19:12
|
|
|
colachute posted:So the fact that he’s basically the Pablo Escobar of the weed world (which is how they’d probably spin it) doesn’t discredit his testimony? What you quoted doesn’t seem to take any *~*he was no angel*~* character flaws into account. No it doesn't discredit his testimony, nor is it going to have the slightest effect on her appeal. On appeal it'd be the defense's fault for not investigating the witness better. And an ineffective assistance of counsel claim would totally fail. (in part because the dude was not a key witness) Character evidence is [generally] not admissible unless it goes to a person's character for honesty or truthfulness. (using, buying or selling drugs isn't a truthfulness issue) Even at trial, a suspicion or feeling or accusation that he'd bought or sold weed would not be admissible. It would be admissible if it was a felony conviction, or if he had charges pending with the same DA's office, but not otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 19:28
|
|
|
That’s good news then. I feel like I’m turning into my parents with the way conspiracy theories circle around in my brain.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 20:09
|
|
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uDBv-Vo7B5M
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2019 23:37
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/DallasPD/status/1181633348915142657 Dallas PD laying the groundwork.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 00:10
|
|
|
It all came prewrapped in evidence bags too for some reason! So thoughtful
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 00:18
|
|
|
It's like they asked a fresh academy grad to stage a cover-up
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 01:11
|
|
|
Maybe the only thing that this murder has to do with the case is that Guyger was originally supposed to be the one pulling the trigger, but she went into the wrong “wrong” apartment, so it got delayed
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 01:15
|
|
|
I just find it weird that this guy’s apparently extensive hobby as a drug dealer didn’t come up in the trial. Well maybe I was wrong but it’s still unnerving me a bit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 06:50
|
|
|
the smell of smokeless powder from Guyger murdering a black guy covered up the smell of his three tons of marijuana
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 06:55
|
|
|
The giant pile of bullshit PD is selling smells stronger than the weed.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2019 15:33
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:https://twitter.com/DallasPD/status/1181633348915142657 https://twitter.com/DallasPD/status/1181634938300436481 Totally not ominous or threatening!
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2019 01:42
|
|
|
So let’s suppose for the sake of argument that Brown was killed purely because of drug trade. Then the reasonable statement at this time is that there is zero evidence of his death being related to the trial. Not a declarative that it was not related to the trial with added “watch yourself” tones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2019 04:41
|
|
|
I helped you find a home for this article which cites Breaking Bad in its deconstruction of the motivations of people killing each other over illegal substances/money and their actions subsequent to committing a murder. Not for nothing, I've had first hand experience with people who travel greater distances than that for marijuana and who have killed for less. I get why people want to assume the worst here with regard to DPD ("ACAB", etc), and I would hope another agency (State? FBI?) is able to thoroughly unpack the investigation for the public in order to restore some modicum of faith in the community that their local law enforcement agency isn't trying to murder and intimidate them into submission. Or, you know, prosecute the entire DPD if that is exactly what is going on.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2019 09:30
|
|
|
Victor Vermis posted:Or, you know, prosecute the entire DPD if that is exactly what is going on. Y'all cry when we suggest this because what if your friend only lightly hate crimed??? DPD and the Rangers need to be removed entirely from this case.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2019 09:40
|
|
|
Wasabi the J posted:Y'all cry when we suggest this because what if your friend only lightly hate crimed??? Totally normal thing to say to a stranger on the internet. Cool. Agreed, (again, for the sake of public trust if nothing else) but I'd be curious if such a thing is feasible with a murder investigation where I assume time is not a luxury and (speculating now), or the integrity of the investigation could suffer with an abrupt hand-off to a different agency. Curious how much insight cop goons can provide (granted, "well I'm not a Dallas/TX cop..")
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2019 09:54
|
|
|
It just seems the police are afraid of getting punished for killing people, because they consider it a part of their job. This is problematic and police departments historically racist organizations; we are only a generation or two removed from the civil Rights movement. We need to cut out the white nationalists that hide behind "locker room talk" and a complicit Justice system that protects it's members better than it protects the Citizens of the United States. So yes, I'm quite positive every cop, even by the book, just and kind cops, turn plenty of blind eyes to alarming behavior from friends, at best, or are willing accomplices to stacking the deck against minorites, particularly Blacks, Hispanics, sex workers, and the mentally ill.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2019 10:26
|
|
|
Victor Vermis posted:I helped you find a home for this article which cites Breaking Bad in its deconstruction of the motivations of people killing each other over illegal substances/money and their actions subsequent to committing a murder. So think about it this way. Can you think of any other person or organization, when public rumor suggests they may have been involved in a crime, gets away with making those sort of open if lightly veiled threats towards their critics during an ongoing investigation?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 13:12
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:So think about it this way. To be clear, and I know nobody is soliciting approval from me but I do want to express this: I believe you are being sincere when you say you see a veiled threat in that tweet. But I do not. It might as well be a MagicEye poster because I cannot find the sail boat in DPD PR's limp-dicked appeal to community comradery.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:04
|
|
|
Victor Vermis posted:To be clear, and I know nobody is soliciting approval from me but I do want to express this: I believe you are being sincere when you say you see a veiled threat in that tweet. I dont see it either. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:12
|
|
|
"We encourage those leaders to be mindful because their words may jeapordize (sic) the integrity of the city of Dallas and DPD" reads like being told "be careful what you say, for your own safety" accompanied by a hard stare.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:13
|
|
|
McNally posted:"We encourage those leaders to be mindful because their words may jeapordize (sic) the integrity of the city of Dallas and DPD" reads like being told "be careful what you say, for your own safety" accompanied by a hard stare. It does if you work from the assumption that they planned a murder to protect one of their own. If you dont think that then it sounds like they're trying real hard to keep the peace and they're worried that people pushing conspiracy theories without evidence are going to make it hard to do that. Edit It could definitely have been phrased more eloquently, but I doubt the DPD chief is well versed in leftist twitter or PR. Chichevache fucked around with this message at 23:18 on Oct 11, 2019 |
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:15
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:It does if you work from the assumption that they planned a murder to protect one of their own. If you dont think that then it sounds like they're trying real hard to keep the peace and they're worried that people pushing conspiracy theories without evidence are going to make it hard to do that. I mean, it works equally well if you don't think that they planned a murder but are complicit in covering one up. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:19
|
|
|
McNally posted:I mean, it works equally well if you don't think that they planned a murder but are complicit in covering one up. I'll give you that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
It says their words may jeopardize the integrity of the PD. Not that the words impugn the integrity. Not that the words are doubting their integrity. The words, in and of themselves, jeopardize the integrity. There are like a dozen versions of “no one can take your integrity from you; but you can give it away” quotes out there. Saying that words from others expressing doubt in the PD’s integrity may cause the police to shed their own integrity reads as a threat.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:23
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:It says their words may jeopardize the integrity of the PD. In fairness, I think this ascribes more competence with the English language than the person who misspelled "jeopardize" possesses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:25
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:
So you're going with the "cops intentionally made this threat" interpretation instead of the "whichever moron was too fat to work the street and got stuck on social media duty cant write good" interpretation? Or more eloquently phrased: McNally posted:In fairness, I think this ascribes more competence with the English language than the person who misspelled "jeopardize" possesses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
I dont know what you meant is always been spelled jepardee 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
Chichevache posted:So you're going with the "cops intentionally made this threat" interpretation instead of the "whichever moron was too fat to work the street and got stuck on social media duty cant write good" interpretation? Why can't it be both? You can still argue "if you know what's good for you you'll be quiet about this" is a valid reading of the tweet AND say "wow, way to wordsmith that tweet guys"
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
Deaportize me
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:27
|
|
|
McNally posted:Why can't it be both? This is more realistically where I am.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:28
|
|
|
McNally posted:Why can't it be both? You can still argue "if you know what's good for you you'll be quiet about this" is a valid reading of the tweet AND say "wow, way to wordsmith that tweet guys" That would be dubble jeapordy
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:28
|
|
|
mlmp08 posted:Saying that words from others expressing doubt in the PD’s integrity may cause the police to shed their own integrity reads as a threat. This. That's where the threat is implicit. 'Don't say these things or we may forget our integrity and make you regret it.' 'Jeopardize the integrity of the City of Dallas' is another explicit threat to simply stop doing their job. If you're not aware of what a 'blue flu' looks like, take a minute to read up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2019 23:28
|
|
|
making strikes illegal is loving stupid
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2019 00:35
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:This. That's where the threat is implicit. It's too bad they dont get blue aids, where they all lose their jobs
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2019 01:06
|
|
|
Slow news day?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2019 02:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 10:56 |
|
|
Just the thin blue line
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2019 02:39
|
|