Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 151

Thread: Kelly Thomas trial: 'Not guilty' verdicts a blow to D.A.

  1. #1
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077

    Kelly Thomas trial: 'Not guilty' verdicts a blow to D.A.

    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...#axzz2qLILzXhF

    “Now you see my fists? They’re getting ready to …. you up.”



    Chris Dorner, where are you when we need you........
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  2. #2
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    I find it encouraging the DA actually brought this to trial.

    Now cue the libertarian crowd who screams jurors have a right to nullify coming in and bashing the verdict in 3....2....

    Chris Dorner, where are you when we need you........
    exactly, in response to this outrage over a homeless man being beat to death, we need a homicidal maniac to go skull cap some mid 20s college student and her boyfriend, that's exactly how we defend civil rights in america, why wait? you can go out and shoot some people and mail a manifesto to CNN.....
    Last edited by EMNofSeattle; 01-13-2014 at 11:03 PM.
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  3. #3
    Regular Member Primus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2013
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    4,216
    I wonder if the video "that showed he was the primary aggressor " had anything to do with the jury finding them not guilty? Naahhhh they are all corrupt.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    "The wicked flee when no man persueth: but the righteous are as bold as a lion" Proverbs 28:1

  4. #4
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    I find it encouraging the DA actually brought this to trial.
    I just heard the prosecutor making a statement on the radio a little while ago. He didn't sound all that disappointed.

    I wonder if the indictment and prosecution were merely in response to public pressure. It would be interesting to see just how vigorously the prosecution pressed its case.

    Hmmmm. I wonder.
    Last edited by Citizen; 01-13-2014 at 11:25 PM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Fallschirmjäger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Georgia, USA
    Posts
    3,915
    You'd have to have a pretty poor idea of the concept if you thought 'jury nullification' had anything to do with this trial.

    But then, I think we all know what EMS's agenda truly is. All a lawyer has to do is introduce enough doubt by going on at length about how 'valuable' the service of the officers was and how long they had served the community an contrast that against some worthless bum's life. It's all for the greater good, you know.
    Last edited by Fallschirmjäger; 01-13-2014 at 11:32 PM.

  6. #6
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I just heard the prosecutor making a statement on the radio a little while ago. He didn't sound all that disappointed.

    I wonder if the indictment and prosecution were merely in response to public pressure. It would be interesting to see just how vigorously the prosecution pressed its case.

    Hmmmm. I wonder.
    The prosecutor put a retired FBI agent on the stand who testified kelly had a right to use deadly force against the officers..... Sounds pretty involved to me....
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  7. #7
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by Fallschirmjäger View Post
    You'd have to have a pretty poor idea of the concept if you thought 'jury nullification' had anything to do with this trial.

    But then, I think we all know what EMS's agenda truly is.
    The officers were clearly guilty and the jury acquitted them, textbook nullification.....
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I just heard the prosecutor making a statement on the radio a little while ago. He didn't sound all that disappointed.

    I wonder if the indictment and prosecution were merely in response to public pressure. It would be interesting to see just how vigorously the prosecution pressed its case.

    Hmmmm. I wonder.
    The DA is a well known police supporter and is almost always on the side of the police.

    It was very rare for him to try a case since he personally hasn't tried a case in over 6 years.

    Yes, the DA bowed to public pressure to bring charges and YES the DA did NOT want a conviction.

  9. #9
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    This verdict is a major victory for police. It once again shows that police are simply above the law and can murder innocent people in the streets and get away with it.

    However, in this case we have to lay a tremendous amount of blame with the jury.

    America still has a ton of police worship and I work everyday to change that.

  10. #10
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    The prosecutor put a retired FBI agent on the stand who testified kelly had a right to use deadly force against the officers..... Sounds pretty involved to me....
    Good point. I had forgotten, I heard the same thing, the only difference being the retired FBI aspect of the witness.

    Still, I can't help but wonder. I saw the videos--more than one witness recorded on his phone. How can people not see that as murder, especially if a litigator does a good job of explaining the evidence? At the moment, I just don't understand it; and, I'm not willing to dismiss it so quickly by blaming the jury.

    Don't forget, I well recall the democide* of the native American woodcarver in Washington state. The one where the coroner's inquest neatly avoided any discussion about whether the officer had RAS to seize the homeless man in the first place. Without that RAS to make a seizure, everything else the officer did after that was out-of-bounds. Yet, the inquest never examined that point. Given that it was so obvious a point--a nobody, anonymous yapper on a gun forum (me) noticed it--how could the legal minds involved have failed to raise the point...unless they didn't want to. So, I'm viewing the Kelly Thomas killing--through a lens ground with the wood-carver case.

    I guess I'll just have to wait until more information comes in.



    *Democide: the extra-judicial killing of a person by his own government. As in, some estimates say that as many as seventy million people were killed extra-judicially by their governments during the 20th century: Stalin vs Ukranian peasants, Mao's Great Leap Forward, Khymer Rouge's Killing Fields, Turkey's genocide of Armenians...
    Last edited by Citizen; 01-14-2014 at 12:03 AM.
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  11. #11
    Regular Member FreeInAZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Secret Bunker
    Posts
    2,573
    Coming out of CA - nothing surprises me anymore. Police are no longer accountable and that is on all of us to some extent. Civil cases (Fed. 1983 suits) DO NOT hold them accountable, they "awards" are not paid by the guilty they are paid by US!

    Criminal cases are almost unheard of and when they do happen, those who should go to jail often walk.

    It's a marked deck we are dealt...we (the people) often lose...as the system has been perverted by design to work that way.

    Ask yourself this: if any regular citizen did what these officers did, do you think they would be Scott free? Police are regular citizens paid to enforce laws (LE) or once they're on trial they magically revive the term "peace officers". Oh I'm being too harsh, I know, they are just following orders ..(as this most likely came from politicians - to rid the streets of the homeless and other undesirables).

    Just following orders has done wonders for our humanity in the past ...
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zi7E-g6scY4

    When any society gives a select group a unchecked domain over them in exchange for "security" it is only a matter of time before those of the select group turn on those who enabled their rule. We are beginning to reap what we have sown over the last 60+ years.
    Last edited by FreeInAZ; 01-14-2014 at 01:44 AM.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world" by Mahatma Gandhi

    “Your beliefs become your thoughts. Your thoughts become your words. Your words become your actions. Your actions become your habits. Your habits become your values. Your values become your destiny.” by Mahatma Gandhi

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I'm not willing to dismiss it so quickly by blaming the jury.

    ...
    How can you not blame the jury completely ?

    This was a unanimous verdict. 12-0 for acquittal.


    Not a single person voted guilty.

    Based on everything I am reading online and also polling on television its about 80-20 in favor of guilty.

  13. #13
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by onus View Post
    How can you not blame the jury completely ?

    This was a unanimous verdict. 12-0 for acquittal.


    Not a single person voted guilty.

    Based on everything I am reading online and also polling on television its about 80-20 in favor of guilty.
    Because of what I said just a couple posts above. I'm wondering how a good litigator intent on conviction could fail to make the case based on the available evidence.

    Blaming the jury completely means the prosecutor argued and counter-argued and cross-examined thoroughly and completely--something I'm not yet convinced of based on the a) his lack of disappointment in his public statement, and b) the woodcarver inquest.

    Look, just because you're willing to jump to a conclusion doesn't mean the rest of us have to. Besides, what if the prosecutor deliberately overlooked some possible cross-examination questions, omitted to highlight some inconsistencies, etc., in a game to make it look like he prosecuted the cops but didn't really try too hard? Your rush to judgment about the jury would leave such a prosecutor's faux prosecution out of sight and out of mind. You wouldn't want to let a law-enforcement officer get away with something like that, would you?
    I'll make you an offer: I will argue and fight for all of your rights, if you will do the same for me. That is the only way freedom can work. We have to respect all rights, all the time--and strive to win the rights of the other guy as much as for ourselves.

    If I am equal to another, how can I legitimately govern him without his express individual consent?

    There is no human being on earth I hate so much I would actually vote to inflict government upon him.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Because of what I said just a couple posts above. I'm wondering how a good litigator intent on conviction could fail to make the case based on the available evidence.

    Blaming the jury completely means the prosecutor argued and counter-argued and cross-examined thoroughly and completely--something I'm not yet convinced of based on the a) his lack of disappointment in his public statement, and b) the woodcarver inquest.

    Look, just because you're willing to jump to a conclusion doesn't mean the rest of us have to. Besides, what if the prosecutor deliberately overlooked some possible cross-examination questions, omitted to highlight some inconsistencies, etc., in a game to make it look like he prosecuted the cops but didn't really try too hard? Your rush to judgment about the jury would leave such a prosecutor's faux prosecution out of sight and out of mind. You wouldn't want to let a law-enforcement officer get away with something like that, would you?
    Here in Los Angeles area the trial was covered daily.

    The only criticism I heard about the prosecutor was he failed to file a pitches motion for both defendants and enter their records into evidence.

    Beyond that, everyone said the prosecutor did a good job. The evidence was powerful and overwhelming....just not to the jurors.

    The only conclusion I am jumping to is the defendants were guilty and it was obvious. I could understand if it was a hung jury with a few jurors voting not guilty but for all 12 to vote not guilty is mind boggling.

    I feel like 1995 all over again.

    So Cal jurors are just brain dead.

  15. #15
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    nj
    Posts
    3,277
    Hi Folks

    In my opinion although the criminals were found innocent in the criminal procedure, the victims family will prevail in a wrongful death suit.

    Regarding the good folks of CA, please be on alert that as long as these criminal thugs and those that support their criminal actions are free to breathe air, that your family and your loved ones are not safe. We can only pray that these murders live a long agonizing life and upon their death they encounter the flames of hell.

    My .02

    Regards.

    CCJ
    " I detest hypocrites and their Hypocrisy" I support Liberty for each, for all, and forever".
    Ask yourself, Do you own Yourself?

  16. #16
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Quote Originally Posted by Fuller Malarkey View Post
    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...#axzz2qLILzXhF

    “Now you see my fists? They’re getting ready to …. you up.”



    Chris Dorner, where are you when we need you........
    Defense attorneys said their clients should not be convicted for simply doing their jobs. Ramos' attorney, John Barnett, told reporters: "These peace officers were doing their jobs... They did what they were trained to do."

    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...#ixzz2qM9oHvR2



    OK....now we know ....

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2013
    Location
    idaho
    Posts
    760
    Quote Originally Posted by davidmcbeth View Post
    [SIZE=1] "These peace officers were doing their jobs... They did what they were trained to do."
    ....
    Sadly this is the truth.

  18. #18
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Primus View Post
    I wonder if the video "that showed he was the primary aggressor " had anything to do with the jury finding them not guilty? Naahhhh they are all corrupt.

    Sent from my XT907 using Tapatalk
    Let me watch this supposed video, that would allow the murder of someone who was an unarmed "primary aggressor" by state costumed agents who are supposed to be limited in their use of force.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  19. #19
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    I just heard the prosecutor making a statement on the radio a little while ago. He didn't sound all that disappointed.

    I wonder if the indictment and prosecution were merely in response to public pressure. It would be interesting to see just how vigorously the prosecution pressed its case.

    Hmmmm. I wonder.
    He wasn't EMN is missing several factors.

    Quote Originally Posted by EMNofSeattle View Post
    The officers were clearly guilty and the jury acquitted them, textbook nullification.....
    1. They have grand Jury's in California if I recall, it may not have been the DA's choice to try these murderers.

    2. The DA who is a cop supporter, and wasn't disappointed, had a hand in picking the Jury, so someone with a vested interest in a not guilty outcome was the prosecution and they got too choose with the "defense" the deciders.

    3. It's not text book jury nullification, if it was I wouldn't be so disappointed,
    a) were the jury fully informed
    b) It can not be a trial by pais if the government dictates the rules the jury must follow
    c) If the jury was not randomly chosen and not discriminated against because of their knowledge.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  20. #20
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    The defense used the dead guys past legal entanglements to sway the jury. The dude was a violent nut. The cops could not know that at the time and nor should they be required to. They, the cops, beat to death who they thought was just another uppity citizen. This case is nothing more than another example of "failure to comply begets the most extreme consequence."

    A civil suit will be far more easy to win now that a bunch of evidence is available and the family can get a real attorney to press their case. But, it is a SoCow jury pool. I would not be surprised if the case is move far and away due to the "prejudicial coverage" of the criminal trial. It would be nice to sue the thug cops into absolute poverty, like living in a cardboard box under a freeway overpass poverty.

  21. #21
    Regular Member SFCRetired's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Montgomery, Alabama, USA
    Posts
    1,770
    Sadly, I firmly believe that we are, and will be, seeing more and more of this type of situation. I just as firmly believe that neither the criminal nor the civil courts will bring about a change in the methods of far too many police officers.

    Understand that I am not advocating breaking the law nor am I advocating violence against police officers. I want to see neither of these things.

    What I am doing is predicting that, sooner or later, someone, or a group of someones, is going to react in a very negative way to a case like this one. It won't matter whether the cops involved were right or wrong; it will be the public perception of what they did. When it does, and it will, happen, it is going to be horrible.
    "Happiness is a warm shotgun!!"
    "I am neither a pessimist nor a cynic. I am, rather, a realist."
    "The most dangerous things I've ever encountered were a Second Lieutenant with a map and a compass and a Private who was bored and had time on his hands."

  22. #22
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Rodney King. His civil suit had little affect on CA LE it seems.

  23. #23
    Campaign Veteran Running Wolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    Corner of No and Where
    Posts
    431
    Quote Originally Posted by SFCRetired View Post
    Sadly, I firmly believe that we are, and will be, seeing more and more of this type of situation. I just as firmly believe that neither the criminal nor the civil courts will bring about a change in the methods of far too many police officers.

    Understand that I am not advocating breaking the law nor am I advocating violence against police officers. I want to see neither of these things.

    What I am doing is predicting that, sooner or later, someone, or a group of someones, is going to react in a very negative way to a case like this one. It won't matter whether the cops involved were right or wrong; it will be the public perception of what they did. When it does, and it will, happen, it is going to be horrible.
    I'm sure you're right that there will be more of these types of situations. I hope you're prediction is right regarding public reaction. I suspect that, even though there will be more of these types of situations, there will be a reduction in the number of police/government representatives prosecuted. I suspect our government will become more clandestine in it's activities, and most of the illegal activity engaged in by .gov employees will never see the light of day.

    Again I hope you're right. And I hope I'm wrong . . .
    When rights are outlawed only outlaws will have rights.

    Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. - Hanlon's Razor

    No American citizen should be willing to accept a government that uses its power against its own people. - Catherine Engelbrecht

  24. #24
    Regular Member Fuller Malarkey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    The Cadre
    Posts
    1,077
    "I've never seen something so bad happen to a human being, and have it done by on-duty police officers," Thomas said. "And they can walk away scot-free."

    Laura Eimiller, a spokeswoman for the FBI's Los Angeles field office, said the agency opened a civil rights investigation into the case in 2011. Now that the state court trial has concluded, she said, "investigators will examine the evidence and testimony to determine if further investigation is warranted at the federal level."

    Orange County District Attorney Tony Rackauckas, who prosecuted the case himself, said the trial was fair.

    After the jury returned the not guilty verdict -- after about eight hours of deliberation -- Rackauckas said he would not continue to pursue a case against Officer Joseph Wolfe, who was charged with involuntary manslaughter.

    Hm. Was this representation of justice a token act by the prosecutor?

    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...#axzz2qOYUVRIp
    Liberty is so strongly a part of human nature that it can be treated as a no-lose argument position.
    ~Citizen

    From the cop’s perspective, the expression “law-abiding citizen” is a functional synonym for “Properly obedient slave".

    "People are not born being "anti-cop" and believing we live in a police state. That is a result of experience."

  25. #25
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    earth's crust
    Posts
    17,838
    Just all part of the obamacare package ! Now this will lower all of our health care costs....


    Really, I think if the guy did not have a mental illness the verdict would have been the other way around.

    People still do not understand this illness and think that all with it are raving killers.

Page 1 of 7 123 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •