Safety (07-12-2019)
Common (07-12-2019)
He was charged, tried and acquitted by a jury which heard all the evidence. That's the way it goes.
God Bless America, God Bless our Military and God Bless the Police who defended the country against the insurgents on January 6, 2021
Think 3rd party for 2024 folks. Clean up America.
Once I tell you that we agree to disagree there will be no more discussion between us in the thread so please don't waste your time continuing to argue your points because I will not respond.
gamewell45 (07-12-2019),Peter1469 (07-12-2019)
How do you know what the cop believed? He etched "your f*cked" into his rifle. That demonstrates malice aforethought. He wanted to kill someone and looked for any excuse to satisfy his blood lust. And not only did he get away with his crime, he got rewarded for it.
Power always thinks it has a great soul, and vast views, beyond the comprehension of the weak. And that it is doing God service when it is violating all His laws.
--John Adams
The trial of Philip Brailsford commenced on October 23rd, 2017, with the prosecution and defense interviewing 34 witnesses - including Monique Portillo, the woman that had been with Daniel Shaver just prior to the shooting.
The prosecution faced an uphill battle; not only because of the information being *omitted from the jury, but because Arizona state has some unique laws regarding gun rights. Basically, the state would have to disprove that Brailsford was acting in self-defense; having to prove that the killing was intentional. Hence, the charge of second-degree murder.
Susie Charbel, the Deputy County Attorney of Maricopa County, argued in court:
"The state will show the defendant wasn't acting like a reasonable officer, he was acting like a killer.
"[Brailsford] doesn't get a pass because he was wearing a police uniform that night."
*In the trial itself, the jury would not be able to see all of the footage showing the shooting of Daniel Shaver. Much like Brailsford's engraved rifle dust cover - which again, read "YOU'RE $#@!ED," of which knowledge was withheld from the trial - the jury would only be given an abridged look at the case.
https://unresolved.me/daniel-shaver
Brailsford swore he shot in self-defense and per SCOTUS a 'defense of life' standard applies. Brailsford was acquitted and directly afterward the entire video was released to the public. Thus the jury was not actually allowed to see all of the evidence, since I assume it was deemed prejudicial to Brailsford. Of course Shaver's rights and those of his widow and child were not considered.
In quoting my post, you affirm and agree that you have not been goaded, provoked, emotionally manipulated or otherwise coerced into responding.
"The difference between what we do and what we are capable of doing would suffice to solve most of the world’s problems.”
Mahatma Gandhi
“Conscientiously believing that the proper condition of the negro is slavery, or a complete subjection to the white man, and entertaining the belief that the day is not distant when the old Union will be restored with slavery nationally declared to be the proper condition of all of African descent, and in view of the future harmony and progress of all the States of America, I have been induced to issue this address, so that there may be no misunderstanding in the future”
- Jefferson Davis