LogFAQs > #886818258

LurkerFAQs, Active DB, DB1, Database 2 ( 09.16.2017-02.21.2018 ), DB3, DB4, DB5, DB6, DB7, DB8, DB9, DB10, DB11, DB12, Clear

Topic List	Page List: 1
Topic	The judge who acquitted Stockley gives his reasoning (cop who shot black man)
Darksaber310 09/18/17 10:10:43 AM #11:	That_Happened posted... Ammonitida posted... Wilson also noted none of the officers standing next to the vehicle were called to testify that Stockley planted a gun. And he recounted witness testimony that the absence of a person’s DNA on a gun does not mean that person did not touch the gun. “Finally, the Court observes, based on its nearly thirty years on the bench, that an urban heroin dealer not in possession of a firearm would be an anomaly,” the judge wrote. That's a shame. Set free because of a lack of evidence, but the reason then they base their reasoning on speculation. Not only is it an "anomaly" that this guy didn't have a gun, but it's assumed that he had that exact gun. Officer could have planted any type of gun and it was going to be assumed to be this person's. It's exactly that the cop COULD have. You want prosecutions? Stop supporting prosecutors who throw such B.S. charges at cops? Seriously? Planting a gun with zero evidence? What did you expect? --- Once again snatching defeat, From the jaws of victory. <cite>Darksaber310 posted [p:886818258] in The judge ... [t:75786193]...</cite> <quote><cite>That_Happened posted...</cite> <quote><cite>Ammonitida posted...</cite> <quote>Wilson also noted none of the officers standing next to the vehicle were called to testify that Stockley planted a gun. And he recounted witness testimony that the absence of a person’s DNA on a gun does not mean that person did not touch the gun. “Finally, the Court observes, based on its nearly thirty years on the bench, that an urban heroin dealer not in possession of a firearm would be an anomaly,” the judge wrote.</quote> That's a shame. Set free because of a lack of evidence, but the reason then they base their reasoning on speculation. Not only is it an "anomaly" that this guy didn't have a gun, but it's assumed that he had that exact gun. Officer could have planted any type of gun and it was going to be assumed to be this person's.</quote> It's exactly that the cop COULD have. You want prosecutions? Stop supporting prosecutors who throw such B.S. charges at cops? Seriously? Planting a gun with zero evidence? What did you expect? --- Once again snatching defeat, From the jaws of victory.</quote> ... Copied to Clipboard!
Topic List	Page List: 1