I think there is more to the story, I mean how can you not notice someone else's furniture? Did she think he broke in and redecorated? No, she had it in for him.
Pity party is right - 'I'm sorry I have to live with this.'
Really? No heartfelt apologies for killing a member of someone's family? No comments about feeling the pain THEY are having to go thru? Just poor poor pitiful me.
If she decided before opening the door that she would just kill whoever was inside, that probably counts as a plan, so ... murder then? I'm not a law-talking guy so I don't know.
Give her credit though: she didn't kill him because he was black, so I guess that's progress.
I know both parties do it. But I don’t think it’s a good practice, and any benefit to it is only to power grab or to counter a power grab. I see it as fitting into the same dysfunction as the Electoral College. My inclination is to have one person, one vote. I know it doesn’t cover some of the concerns of middle America, and that should be addressed. But every time we allow some of our electorate to have more authority than the others, it ended in corruption. Again, I don’t know what the solution is, because when the corruption creates so much one-sidedness, you have to equalize that, I assume using the current mechanisms, as a priority before you can start to enact better practices. I think better practices wouldn’t include gerrymandering.
That’s why I mentioned our military problem. IMO, it’s another box we’ve opened with no safe way to close, before we could ever hope to change protocol.
Also too, does the murderer not ever lock her door when she leaves? She just opened it and then shot a guy. If it was her apartment, her key wouldn't have fit into the victim's lock if she had tried it. So happy she's going to the big house.
I’m not sure why you are getting worked up over me, but there really is no need. I’m not trying to argue. I have opinions regarding the political theory and I know the practice is different. Nothing is ideal.
"I never want anybody to ever have to go through or even imagine what I had to go through that night."
So why did you put us through the trial and spend hours telling everyone present what you had to go through that night? You know you aren't constitutionally required to tell a sob story about how horrible it is that a black man forced you to kill him by living in an apartment behind a door that happened to resemble yours a little bit, right?
You know you have the 5th amendment right to STFU, right?
I wanted the lawyer to say, "We know she's lying, because her own lawyer asks you to think about what she experienced that night. If she was honest in not wanting you to think about what she was going through that night, she doesn't have to present a defense that requires you to think about what she was going through that night."
That probably is over the line, but seriously, Fuck.Her. Bullshit.
It's such an obvious lie. It's such a bad lie. Crying, "Woe is me," at the top of your lungs and "I don't want anyone to think about my sorrow," at the same time is beyond fucking duplicitous. That's the kind of blatant contradiction that would be estopped if you could estop someone from stating their preferences in a closing statement.
I think there is more to the story, I mean how can you not notice someone else's furniture? Did she think he broke in and redecorated? No, she had it in for him.
Pity party is right - 'I'm sorry I have to live with this.'
Really? No heartfelt apologies for killing a member of someone's family? No comments about feeling the pain THEY are having to go thru? Just poor poor pitiful me.
She had her gun drawn before opening the door. Or at least an itchy trigger finger, seeing as how she shot him seconds after barging in.
I call BS
Bull fkg shit.She shot him in less time than those cops shot Tamir Rice, and for the same damn reason.
GOOD.Because she is guilty of murder.
If she decided before opening the door that she would just kill whoever was inside, that probably counts as a plan, so ... murder then? I'm not a law-talking guy so I don't know.
Give her credit though: she didn't kill him because he was black, so I guess that's progress.
There really wasn't a way for her to avoid taking the stand with the defense she presented.
I know both parties do it. But I don’t think it’s a good practice, and any benefit to it is only to power grab or to counter a power grab. I see it as fitting into the same dysfunction as the Electoral College. My inclination is to have one person, one vote. I know it doesn’t cover some of the concerns of middle America, and that should be addressed. But every time we allow some of our electorate to have more authority than the others, it ended in corruption. Again, I don’t know what the solution is, because when the corruption creates so much one-sidedness, you have to equalize that, I assume using the current mechanisms, as a priority before you can start to enact better practices. I think better practices wouldn’t include gerrymandering.
That’s why I mentioned our military problem. IMO, it’s another box we’ve opened with no safe way to close, before we could ever hope to change protocol.
I love it when a plan doesn't come together.
Thanks for the inside info.
Does she have to be sentenced before the governor can pardon her?
Also too, does the murderer not ever lock her door when she leaves? She just opened it and then shot a guy. If it was her apartment, her key wouldn't have fit into the victim's lock if she had tried it. So happy she's going to the big house.
I’m not sure why you are getting worked up over me, but there really is no need. I’m not trying to argue. I have opinions regarding the political theory and I know the practice is different. Nothing is ideal.
"I never want anybody to ever have to go through or even imagine what I had to go through that night."
So why did you put us through the trial and spend hours telling everyone present what you had to go through that night? You know you aren't constitutionally required to tell a sob story about how horrible it is that a black man forced you to kill him by living in an apartment behind a door that happened to resemble yours a little bit, right?
You know you have the 5th amendment right to STFU, right?
I wanted the lawyer to say, "We know she's lying, because her own lawyer asks you to think about what she experienced that night. If she was honest in not wanting you to think about what she was going through that night, she doesn't have to present a defense that requires you to think about what she was going through that night."
That probably is over the line, but seriously, Fuck.Her. Bullshit.
It's such an obvious lie. It's such a bad lie. Crying, "Woe is me," at the top of your lungs and "I don't want anyone to think about my sorrow," at the same time is beyond fucking duplicitous. That's the kind of blatant contradiction that would be estopped if you could estop someone from stating their preferences in a closing statement.