Favorite team:LSU 
Location:
Biography:
Interests:
Occupation:
Number of Posts:1736
Registered on:6/10/2016
Online Status:Not Online

Recent Posts

Message
Funny how no one is playing his game this time. He burned many bridges with his stunt last time around.

re: LIGHTS ON THE TD LOGO

Posted by tigerbaitlawyer on 11/29/25 at 4:42 pm to
I remember that vividly!

re: LIGHTS ON THE TD LOGO

Posted by tigerbaitlawyer on 11/29/25 at 4:35 pm to
I am not saying anything since Lincoln Riley played us last time.
Your rates are high because of predatory plaintiff attorneys.

BS
In the United States, the judicial system is supposed to be separate and independent from politics. This means that judges and courts make decisions based on the law and the evidence presented in court, rather than being influenced by political pressure or partisan interests.

The reason for this separation is to ensure that the judiciary can provide fair and impartial decisions that are not influenced by political considerations. This helps to uphold the rule of law and maintain the balance of power between the three branches of government - the legislative, executive, and judicial branches.

The separation of powers is a fundamental principle of the U.S. government, enshrined in the Constitution. The legislative branch makes the laws, the executive branch enforces the laws, and the judicial branch interprets the laws. By keeping the judiciary independent from politics, the Constitution ensures that the interpretation of the law is based solely on the facts and the law itself, rather than on political considerations.

In this way, the U.S. judicial system is designed to provide a check and balance on the power of the other branches of government, to prevent abuses of power and to protect the rights of citizens.
If found not guilty by a jury to which Perry was found guilty of murder by a jury!
Y’all are the ones blaming the victim. Sounds like you are referring to yourself.
Where was the violence when the murder occurred? Only showed a group of people walking down the street.
Were they rioting or walking down the street?
quote:

How is pointing out the law “planning” something?


Did you keep reading?

“Holcomb, who was called to the stand Wednesday afternoon, seemed to try to talk Perry down. "Aren't you a CDL holder too?" he asked, referring to the men's licenses to carry concealed handguns. "We went through the same training ... Shooting after creating an event where you have to shoot, is not a good shoot."

The dude did exactly want he told his friend! Seems premeditated.
I don’t give a shite about either party or what happens going further. I care about the extreme partisanship (on both sides) of outcome determinative results.

I am supporting the rule of law. In our society a dispute of facts are determined by a jury. Perry was given a fair jury trial and was convicted.


I would say the same thing regardless of the victim or defendant. The facts are the facts regardless of party.
Seems like Perry was trying to plan this.

“Perry speculated about how he might get away with such a killing – by claiming self-defense, as he is now doing. Prosecutors presented a Facebook Messen­ger chat between Perry and a friend, Michael Holcomb, which occurred two weeks before he shot Foster. In it, Perry argued that shooting protesters was legal if it was in self-defense. Holcomb, who was called to the stand Wednesday afternoon, seemed to try to talk Perry down. "Aren't you a CDL holder too?" he asked, referring to the men's licenses to carry concealed handguns. "We went through the same training ... Shooting after creating an event where you have to shoot, is not a good shoot." “

Seems like he wanted to create a situation and then claim to be a victim.
The testimony confirming Perry's anger toward protesters came on the third day of the trial as prosecutors displayed text messages and social media comments showing that he thought about killing them. "I might have to kill a few people on my way to work, they are rioting outside my apartment complex," Perry wrote to a friend in June of 2020. "I might go to Dallas to shoot looters," he wrote on another occasion. Perry also encouraged violence in a variety of social media posts.

In addition, Perry speculated about how he might get away with such a killing – by claiming self-defense, as he is now doing. Prosecutors presented a Facebook Messen­ger chat between Perry and a friend, Michael Holcomb, which occurred two weeks before he shot Foster. In it, Perry argued that shooting protesters was legal if it was in self-defense. Holcomb, who was called to the stand Wednesday afternoon, seemed to try to talk Perry down. "Aren't you a CDL holder too?" he asked, referring to the men's licenses to carry concealed handguns. "We went through the same training ... Shooting after creating an event where you have to shoot, is not a good shoot."

This claim – that Foster raised the barrel of his AK-47 – is, of course, Perry's principal hope to escape a murder conviction. It was refuted over and over during the first three days of the trial by witnesses who were near Foster that night. All repeated a version of the same story: They heard squealing tires as a car sped into a group of about 20 protesters. The protesters, some of whom had almost been hit by the car, slapped and kicked it. Garrett Foster strode to the car's side and issued an order to the driver. All of the witnesses insisted that Foster did not raise the barrel of his gun. According to the D.A.'s lead prosecutor, Guillermo Gonzalez, his gun was recovered with the safety still on and no bullet in the chamber

quote:

You mean like charging people with murder when they clearly acted in self-defense? We’ve seen the left continuously engage in malicious prosecution of people who exercise their right of self-defense.


The facts of the case were not obvious which is why it went to a jury.

The self defense saying “Rather be Judged by 12 than carried by 6.” Sometimes the 12 that judge you, do not believe you were justified in your actions and you have a consequence. Just because you assert self-defense does not mean it was self defense.

After hearing the entire case, the jury believed he did not act in self defense.

While you do not have a duty to retreat, You cannot claim self defense for a situation you created or you intended to create.
“Foster attended an Austin protest on July 25 while Perry was downtown driving for Uber. According to police, Perry stopped his car and honked at people protesting while they walked through the street, blocks from the state Capitol. Seconds later, he drove his car into the crowd, police said.”

“In June, when President Donald Trump tweeted that “protesters, anarchists, agitators, looters or lowlifes” protesting in Oklahoma would face “a much different scene” than protesters in New York or Minneapolis, Perry responded from a now-deleted account with the username “@knivesfromtrigu.” The tweet read, “Send them to Texas we will show them why we say don’t mess with Texas.” That account was identified as being connected to Perry by Tribune of the People, which bills itself as a “revolutionary news service.”

Other witnesses at the scene disputed that Foster raised his weapon and said Perry seemed to use his car to instigate the violence. Vehicles have been used on numerous occasions throughout the country recently as weapons against those demonstrating against police brutality and racial injustice. And doubts over Perry’s self-defense claim have since been amplified by the discovery of his tweets.

“If he was trying to just get down Congress and get through there ... and just get out of the way of the people, he would have been going a lot slower,” Michael Capochiano, a protester at the scene, told The Texas Tribune.

Foster, 28, was killed in downtown Austin Saturday night during a protest against police brutality. Foster, who was white, was crossing an intersection and visibly carrying an AK-47 rifle — which is legal in Texas — when Perry drove toward the crowd.

Capochiano and other witnesses have said Perry seemed to drive threateningly into the crowd before shots were fired, and his actions seemed intentional. Motorists hitting demonstrators with their cars has not been uncommon during this year’s anti-police brutality protests, and the incidents bear echoes of the 2017 Charlottesville white supremacist rally, during which a counter-protester was killed by a vehicle that rammed into the crowd.


Seems like a lot of disputed facts and a job for a jury!
Only ignorant people on message boards are this naive, a jury trial is the proper way to determine facts in a case.

So the victim that was a vet also doesn’t have a story? The evidence showed that the Defendant was the aggressor. You can’t claim self defense if you are an aggressor. He drove his car into a crowd.