- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Daniel Perry Trial - Man who shot Austin protestor. Verdict Guilty. Abbot seeking pardon
Posted on 4/13/23 at 7:41 pm to LegendInMyMind
Posted on 4/13/23 at 7:41 pm to LegendInMyMind
quote:
I don't give a shite what that driver may have said in conversation prior to that event.
The jury sure did though. I’m not saying I agree with them either. That’s why I posted all those questions. It’s rather confusing how and when self defense can and can’t be used.
Let me ask you this. Let’s say hypothetically that Daniel Perry called a friend just before doing what he did and told him that he is going to drive into this protest and see if anyone wants to frick around and find out. Would he still have a self defense claim? I honestly don’t know the answer.
*Update* Texas board is reviewing clemency for Daniel Perry for killing BLM protester
This post was edited on 2/15/24 at 9:11 pm
3
Posted on 4/14/23 at 8:56 am to SUB
quote:
Let me ask you this. Let’s say hypothetically that Daniel Perry called a friend just before doing what he did and told him that he is going to drive into this protest and see if anyone wants to frick around and find out. Would he still have a self defense claim? I honestly don’t know the answer.
If you go into a neighborhood that is known for crime and sit in your parked car at 2am and someone comes up to your car and attempts to carjack/rob you, do you still have the right to defend yourself?
Posted on 4/14/23 at 9:03 am to SUB
Typically the aggressor can't use self-defense unless there is an escalation. If you are in a fistfight you started, and someone pulls a knife on you and then you pull a gun, I believe self defense would be back in play. Not a criminal atty, but that's what I recall.
As for a general FAFO mindset and just availing yourself of a dangerous situation, I think that's much murkier. I think it's unwise, of course. But the frustrating thing here is that the BLM folks were always the aggressors in any reasonable sense. They were the ones riled up and violent and blocking the roadways and engaging in other unlawful activity. I'm not saying that people trying to "take matters into their own hands" were doing so for morally pure reasons, but the circumstances were created by a) unlawful activity by bad actors and b) a lack of will on the part of government to stop it and therefore restore order.
As for a general FAFO mindset and just availing yourself of a dangerous situation, I think that's much murkier. I think it's unwise, of course. But the frustrating thing here is that the BLM folks were always the aggressors in any reasonable sense. They were the ones riled up and violent and blocking the roadways and engaging in other unlawful activity. I'm not saying that people trying to "take matters into their own hands" were doing so for morally pure reasons, but the circumstances were created by a) unlawful activity by bad actors and b) a lack of will on the part of government to stop it and therefore restore order.
Posted on 4/14/23 at 9:37 am to Pettifogger
quote:I don't know the laws, but that sounds sketchy.
Typically the aggressor can't use self-defense unless there is an escalation. If you are in a fistfight you started, and someone pulls a knife on you and then you pull a gun, I believe self defense would be back in play. Not a criminal atty, but that's what I recall.
Suppose the other guy is older, has a medical condition etc? Afraid that being attacked could seriously jeopardize his life or health?
So, someone could attack him, he uses a knife (only means of defense he has on his person) to try to survive, and this suggests the aggressor could then shoot him? That doesn't sound right.
As I said, I don't know the laws, but I would THINK the aggressor forfeits self-defense. Saying "oh, he just wanted to 'kick his arse'" doesn't seem legit. When someone attacks you, you don't know the ultimate intention. You might get your skull kicked in, if you go down.
Posted on 4/14/23 at 10:31 am to Scoob
You’re trying to apply logic to a wokester persecution
Posted on 4/14/23 at 10:51 am to SUB
Question for any with criminal jury trial knowledge:
Could voir dire have been as specific as “do you support or oppose BLM protests?” to exclude potential jurors that opposed? Or something similar?
Could voir dire have been as specific as “do you support or oppose BLM protests?” to exclude potential jurors that opposed? Or something similar?
Posted on 4/14/23 at 10:54 am to biglego
It`s a scary thought when a man is found guilty when he shoots someone pointing a gun at him.
Posted on 4/14/23 at 7:14 pm to Epic Cajun
They just unsealed a bunch of social media posts and other messages. LINK
I can’t seem to find the raw documents, but just articles about it. Anyone find the full 76 page doc that contains dozens of messages? They are now painting him as some huge racist.
I can’t seem to find the raw documents, but just articles about it. Anyone find the full 76 page doc that contains dozens of messages? They are now painting him as some huge racist.
This post was edited on 4/14/23 at 7:15 pm
Posted on 4/14/23 at 7:23 pm to SUB
I think there’s a download link for it further down in that page, about midway.
Posted on 4/14/23 at 7:36 pm to SUB
Damn they grabbed over 250 posts and whatnot, many don’t even seem related to the charges.
Posted on 4/14/23 at 7:48 pm to Havoc
Posted on 4/14/23 at 8:03 pm to SUB
I’m 11 pages in. Most of it is just someone who spends too much time on his phone posting memes. Pretty trivial. But this.
Wtf?
Wtf?
This post was edited on 4/14/23 at 8:37 pm
Posted on 4/14/23 at 8:24 pm to SUB
quote:
They are now painting him as some huge racist.
Going with the familiar Rittenhouse playbook. White supremacist who kills white people.
Posted on 4/14/23 at 8:34 pm to SUB
Any TX crim lawyers around? I know TX allows extraneous offense evidence and extraneous sex crimes against children to be admitted but is it admissible where the crime at bar is not a sex crime (with or without a child victim)? The evidence of grooming pops up I think 4 times in the Intent to Introduce and it just seemed odd to me.
Posted on 4/14/23 at 8:58 pm to SUB
quote:
OUTGOING MESSAGE: ?Look I don?t want to lose you but calling me a mash
potato is where I draw the line.?
Posted on 4/14/23 at 9:03 pm to MetroAtlantaGatorFan
quote:
DA withheld 100+ pages of evidence straight from the lead detective
Could his defense attorney not have obtained this as well? Sounds like this Perry fellow did not have the best lawyer, providing the best defense too good along with all the corrupt DA bs. Not a recipe for a good verdict
Posted on 4/14/23 at 9:06 pm to SUB
Note:
quote:
The document was not used during his trial, but they point to evidence the State intends to introduce during the punishment phase.
Posted on 4/14/23 at 9:51 pm to SUB
quote:
They just unsealed a bunch of social media posts and other messages. LINK
He is guilty of thought crime. Just like most of the Jan. 6 people.
Posted on 2/15/24 at 9:12 pm to SUB
Posted on 2/15/24 at 9:19 pm to SUB
Good ol Liberal Rag AAS spinning that shite like only they can.
Page 8 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News