Casey Anthony walks... This guy gets life in prison...

Snaggletiger · « **Reply #40 on:** July 12, 2011, 10:50:44 AM »

Quote from: GarMan on July 12, 2011, 10:33:07 AM

Well, he is white, and he did shoot an unarmed black man... Does anything else matter?

I think you nailed it. No need for a trial. He should have saved the taxpayers mucho $$$ and immediately entered a guilty plea.

The discussion here has centered around this guy's state of mind. Was he shitting his pants? Was he cool, calm and collected? Was he angry? Did he perceive an additional threat? I'm quite sure that counsel on both sides played that angle to help make their case.

Kaos · « **Reply #41 on:** July 12, 2011, 10:55:22 AM »

Quote from: GarMan on July 12, 2011, 09:57:49 AM

Pot meet kettle? Isn't that exactly what you're doing by criticizing his actions?
Pathetic... Seriously... We don't know how we'd react in that situation, but in the heat of that particular moment, the same rational perspective that you're conveying sitting in front of your computer right now will not likely be on your mind. You're goal is to reduce and potentially eliminate the threat. I'm not suggesting that I'd be a tough guy with my statement above. I did admit that the 5 slugs seem to be a bit overkill, but even with the thug on the ground, he still posed a threat. I'd be inclined to take action, as any reasonable person should be expected. To speculate anything else is nonsense.

When my garage was broken into and I was watching out the upstairs window as the crackhead tried to get into vehicles would you care to guess what I was told by the Sheriff's deputy both on the phone and later in person?

"If you have any indication that he's trying to get inside your house, take your gun and shoot him. Don't threaten to shoot or tell him you're going to shoot or try to scare him. Shoot him. And don't try to shoot to wound or incapacitate. Aim for the torso. Stop shooting when you are absolutely sure he is not going to move again. How do you know? When you are out of bullets. Don't stop shooting him until you are out of bullets."

He didn't try to get in the house so I didn't have to do that.

But I was ready to do it. And I would have pumped all six into his ass.

Saniflush · « **Reply #42 on:** July 12, 2011, 10:58:39 AM »

Quote from: Kaos on July 12, 2011, 10:55:22 AM

When my garage was broken into and I was watching out the upstairs window as the crackhead tried to get into vehicles would you care to guess what I was told by the Sheriff's deputy both on the phone and later in person?

"If you have any indication that he's trying to get inside your house, take your gun and shoot him. Don't threaten to shoot or tell him you're going to shoot or try to scare him. Shoot him. And don't try to shoot to wound or incapacitate. Aim for the torso. Stop shooting when you are absolutely sure he is not going to move again. How do you know? When you are out of bullets. Don't stop shooting him until you are out of bullets."

He didn't try to get in the house so I didn't have to do that.

But I was ready to do it. And I would have pumped all six into his ass.

Cue AWK.

GarMan · « **Reply #43 on:** July 12, 2011, 11:01:10 AM »

Quote from: Saniflush on July 12, 2011, 10:58:39 AM

Cue AWK.

Now, that is some faggotry up in here!

Snaggletiger · « **Reply #44 on:** July 12, 2011, 11:01:21 AM »

Quote from: Saniflush on July 12, 2011, 10:58:39 AM

Cue AWK.

Extremely nice hustle

DnATL · « **Reply #45 on:** July 12, 2011, 11:40:21 AM »

Quote from: Saniflush on July 12, 2011, 10:58:39 AM

Cue AWK.

AWK wishes he had six - he might have to do 3 twice

JR4AU · « **Reply #46 on:** July 12, 2011, 11:42:27 AM »

Quote from: GarMan on July 12, 2011, 09:57:49 AM

Pot meet kettle? Isn't that exactly what you're doing by criticizing his actions?
Pathetic... Seriously... We don't know how we'd react in that situation, but in the heat of that particular moment, the same rational perspective that you're conveying sitting in front of your computer right now will not likely be on your mind. You're goal is to reduce and potentially eliminate the threat. I'm not suggesting that I'd be a tough guy with my statement above. I did admit that the 5 slugs seem to be a bit overkill, but even with the thug on the ground, he still posed a threat. I'd be inclined to take action, as any reasonable person should be expected. To speculate anything else is nonsense.

The jury spoke. The end.

GarMan · « **Reply #47 on:** July 12, 2011, 11:55:23 AM »

Quote from: JR4AU on July 12, 2011, 11:42:27 AM

The jury spoke. The end.

Not quite... Appeal in process... But, thanks for playing!

JR4AU · « **Reply #48 on:** July 12, 2011, 12:09:11 PM »

Quote from: GarMan on July 12, 2011, 11:55:23 AM

Not quite... Appeal in process... But, thanks for playing!

Your legal knowledge wouldn't fill a thimble.

AWK · « **Reply #49 on:** July 12, 2011, 12:25:09 PM »

Quote from: Saniflush on July 12, 2011, 10:58:39 AM

Cue AWK.

I used to suck dick for coke. Now that's an addiction, man. You ever suck some dick for marijuana?

CCTAU · « **Reply #50 on:** July 12, 2011, 12:31:45 PM »

Quote from: RWS on July 11, 2011, 07:10:09 PM

It's pretty reasonable to assume that when somebody gets shot in the head, they're not going to hop up and overpower somebody or run off. I know (hope) you're probably just playing devil's advocate here, but it's apples and oranges compared to the Anthony trial. This was on video.

It's always pretty reasonable to assume......until it's not.

He should have been charged with mutilating a dead body. $25 dollar fine.

GarMan · « **Reply #51 on:** July 12, 2011, 01:09:27 PM »

Quote from: JR4AU on July 12, 2011, 12:09:11 PM

Your legal knowledge wouldn't fill a thimble.

Oh... So, there's no chance for this verdict to be overturned on appeal? Pardon me, Omnipotent One...

I'm sure the same could be said of your IT prowess, yet you're still able to turn on a computer and play on teh InterWebz. In fact, I bet your medical skillz aren't too thimble-toppling either, yet I bet you can still assist with basic first aide and perform CPR. I never claimed to be a legal expert, but I am not comfortable with the outcome of this case, specifically from the perspective of an individual who may need to defend himself and/or others or protect property in a similar situation. That's it.

RWS · « **Reply #52 on:** July 12, 2011, 01:38:54 PM »

Quote from: GarMan on July 12, 2011, 01:09:27 PM

Oh... So, there's no chance for this verdict to be overturned on appeal? Pardon me, Omnipotent One...

I'm sure the same could be said of your IT prowess, yet you're still able to turn on a computer and play on teh InterWebz. In fact, I bet your medical skillz aren't too thimble-toppling either, yet I bet you can still assist with basic first aide and perform CPR. I never claimed to be a legal expert, but I am not comfortable with the outcome of this case, specifically from the perspective of an individual who may need to defend himself and/or others or protect property in a similar situation. That's it.

I highly doubt he will win his appeal. His conviction was, and his appeal will be based on what the law is. Not what we or the jury think the law SHOULD be.

The pharmacist defended himself from the initial threat, and shot the robber in the head from about 20 feet away. In a separate, premeditated act, he went and got a different, more lethal gun, and put 5 rounds into the robber who was still laying on the ground. The pharmacist probably would have been fine if he put a few rounds into the robber during the first act, i.e., neutralizing the threat. It becomes problematic when he turns his back, walks away, then comes back with a different gun. I'm not going to turn my back on some random dude who is trying to rob me if I shot him and think he is still a threat. I'm not going to step over him. I'm not going to get within reaching distance of him. If he's still that much of a threat, I'm going to get as far away as possible while still remaining in range enough to get a good shot off if he gets up. The first reaction of the average citizen is to stay away from the danger. This pharmacist didn't feel that way, because there was no danger after he shot the robber in the head. It was game over right then and there.

He wasn't a threat after being shot in the head. That's why the pharmacist felt comfortable stepping over him, turning his back on him, getting within reach of him, etc.

JR4AU · « **Reply #53 on:** July 12, 2011, 01:43:54 PM »

Quote from: GarMan on July 12, 2011, 01:09:27 PM

Oh... So, there's no chance for this verdict to be overturned on appeal? Pardon me, Omnipotent One...

I'm sure the same could be said of your IT prowess, yet you're still able to turn on a computer and play on teh InterWebz. In fact, I bet your medical skillz aren't too thimble-toppling either, yet I bet you can still assist with basic first aide and perform CPR. I never claimed to be a legal expert, but I am not comfortable with the outcome of this case, specifically from the perspective of an individual who may need to defend himself and/or others or protect property in a similar situation. That's it.

On what issue could they overturn it?

Vandy Vol · « **Reply #54 on:** July 12, 2011, 01:45:51 PM »

Quote from: GarMan on July 12, 2011, 09:02:19 AM

Yeah... I'm sure that he deals with this sort of thing all of the time. He should have known better to not chase the other person from the store or to turn his back on a potential threat. He should have been just as rational as you in your comfy little chair tippy-typing at the keyboard. If everyone would be as level-headed and intelligent as you guys...

He doesn't have to be levelheaded in order for his actions to still not make sense, and thus not be reasonable. If he was honestly scared shitless of the guy, then he wouldn't have turned away from him. Whether he was as calm as Dirty Harry or as frightened as Ru Paul at a Klan meeting, if he was afraid that the guy was an immediate threat, then he would have shot him with the gun he had instead of taking the time (and walking right by the guy) to get a second gun.

You may have adrenaline running through you and be sweating up a storm, but if you view something as a threat, and this is what is causing you to be so nervous, then you don't turn away from it so that you can slowly hobble your ass to the back to get your preferred weapon of choice. Period. Maybe you over react and kill the guy with the gun you already have, but you don't walk away from the alleged threat to chase his buddy that's fleeing. You don't walk by this supposed immediate threat of which you're shitting your pants over to get a second gun when you already have one. If you're legitimately scared out of your fucking gourd of this guy on the ground, then you act immediately.

His actions don't convey that he was so scared that he thought this guy was a threat to him. You simply don't go get a second gun if you honestly and reasonably believe that the guy on the ground is a threat to you and others.

Snaggletiger · « **Reply #55 on:** July 12, 2011, 01:54:00 PM »

Does anyone know if this guy testified on his own behalf? Curious to know his answer as to why?

GarMan · « **Reply #56 on:** July 12, 2011, 03:43:21 PM »

Quote from: RWS on July 12, 2011, 01:38:54 PM

I highly doubt he will win his appeal. His conviction was, and his appeal will be based on what the law is. Not what we or the jury think the law SHOULD be.

Wow! You've already read and analyzed all of the court transcripts and assessed the case. That's amazing... Truly amazing...

GarMan · « **Reply #57 on:** July 12, 2011, 03:45:33 PM »

Quote from: JR4AU on July 12, 2011, 01:43:54 PM

On what issue could they overturn it?

Wow! Another one!!! You too have analyzed all of the court documents and evidence... You guys are incredible.

GH2001 · « **Reply #58 on:** July 12, 2011, 03:56:17 PM »

Quote from: JR4AU on July 12, 2011, 12:09:11 PM

Your legal knowledge wouldn't fill a thimble.

No offense Jim, but this kind of statement is what gets a lot of people up in arms about lawyers. You might not like but just saying, it is.

GarMan · « **Reply #59 on:** July 12, 2011, 03:58:51 PM »

Quote from: Vandy Vol on July 12, 2011, 01:45:51 PM

He doesn't have to be levelheaded in order for his actions to still not make sense, and thus not be reasonable. If he was honestly scared poopless of the guy, then he wouldn't have turned away from him. Whether he was as calm as Dirty Harry or as frightened as Ru Paul at a Klan meeting, if he was afraid that the guy was an immediate threat, then he would have shot him with the gun he had instead of taking the time (and walking right by the guy) to get a second gun.

You may have adrenaline running through you and be sweating up a storm, but if you view something as a threat, and this is what is causing you to be so nervous, then you don't turn away from it so that you can slowly hobble your ass to the back to get your preferred weapon of choice. Period. Maybe you over react and kill the guy with the gun you already have, but you don't walk away from the alleged threat to chase his buddy that's fleeing. You don't walk by this supposed immediate threat of which you're poopting your pants over to get a second gun when you already have one. If you're legitimately scared out of your effing gourd of this guy on the ground, then you act immediately.

His actions don't convey that he was so scared that he thought this guy was a threat to him. You simply don't go get a second gun if you honestly and reasonably believe that the guy on the ground is a threat to you and others.

You're phucking goofy... Whether it be culture, morals, religion or whatever, not everyone reacts the same way in certain situations. I couldn't disagree more with your assessment.