Isn't that what Mosby thought about Freddy G?This is a DC Prosecutor's career-making case. I'm wondering
Isn't that what Mosby thought about Freddy G?This is a DC Prosecutor's career-making case. I'm wondering
Very well said.I'm seeing the people realize any security by their government is an illusion, that the conditioning we've had to not fight back and let the law handle it breaking down, that self-preservation is more important than the fear of retaliation by the law, that at some point it's either we take a stand and ensure we have a safe world or live in fear as evil takes over.
True, but this is a 13-Year-Old "quiet and inquisitive scholar who loved fashion and football".Isn't that what Mosby thought about Freddy G?
What their not seeing is the larger picture; that this is a small part of an overall ploy to institute a federal police force. This is where all the 'let the criminals loose-unfund the police-start vigilanteism' is headed.I'm seeing the people realize any security by their government is an illusion, that the conditioning we've had to not fight back and let the law handle it breaking down, that self-preservation is more important than the fear of retaliation by the law, that at some point it's either we take a stand and ensure we have a safe world or live in fear as evil takes over.
What their not seeing is the larger picture; that this is a small part of an overall ploy to institute a federal police force. This is where all the 'let the criminals loose-unfund the police-start vigilanteism' is headed.
We damn sure don't want any type of federally controlled police force. Their key role will be firearms confiscation...from us.If that's the case, this is what would comprise the Federal Police Force. I wonder if we'd be safer with the average criminal:
View attachment 399174
...and I'm pretty sure it wasn't the kid's car.Per the commissioner he fired the 1st shot while the kid was sitting in a car…
Per the commissioner he fired the 1st shot while the kid was sitting in a car…
See here: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/district-of-columbia-gun-laws-what-you-need-to-know/...and I'm pretty sure it wasn't the kid's car.
I really don't know what DC's rules for firearms use are, but I have a feeling it's not going to work out well for the accused. Am I wrong?
See here: https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/district-of-columbia-gun-laws-what-you-need-to-know/
D.C. is neither a stand your ground nor a duty to retreat jurisdiction. The District case law has established a middle ground.
Also see from MPD (.PDF): https://mpdc.dc.gov/sites/default/files/dc/sites/mpdc/page_content/attachments/District Law Pertaining to Self Defense.pdf
You are entitled to claim self-defense:
(1) if you actually believe you are in imminent danger of bodily harm; and
(2) if you have reasonable grounds for that belief.
Yup. He's got a real problem if the facts gleaned from the investigation, on video and from witness testimony, are different than the initial statements he made to Police.
Boom! Right there, 12th line down...
Now I didn't read the whole PDF, but I didn't see where deadly force was okay to use on thieves.
He is definitely screwed. You can not introduce deadly force to a property crime then claim self defense....and I'm pretty sure it wasn't the kid's car.
I really don't know what DC's rules for firearms use are, but I have a feeling it's not going to work out well for the accused. Am I wrong?
And I just heard on the news that he shot at a car and someone from another car began running towards him, so he shot him?He is definitely screwed. You can not introduce deadly force to a property crime then claim self defense.
I never want to rely on an eye witness for my defense. I have been screwed by prejudicial witnesses before.Whoever witness 1 is stated the shooter yelled at the deceased at which point the deceased charged the shooter. When he was about 5 feet away the shooter fired the first round, paused and then shot the second round.
Sounds like the video evidence combined with the shell casing placement/ballistics are such that the Defendant is going to have a real issue on defense.I never want to rely on an eye witness for my defense. I have been screwed by prejudicial witnesses before.
Sounds like the video evidence combined with the shell casing placement/ballistics are such that the Defendant is going to have a real issue on defense.
I'm curious what his lawyer is going to argue: