Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Legal and Activism' started by G30USMC, Jun 21, 2014.
One for the good guy is how I feel about it!
If anyone breaks in or even attempt to break into my house I would be shooting at them also! And I am not shooting to just warn them I have a gun either!
+1...... The way it should be
This is a great example of how our court system is so flawed.
You, I, and most on this forum would see it as a no-brainer as to the decision in this case.
However, there is still the possibility of a judge or jury out there to see it in a different light.
If all judges based cases on solely the facts, using COMMON SENSE, without any bias or influences....that would be ideal but being human in a "political" position i know all too well that that is not going to hold true.
That's why I would be scared to death , even if %100 innocent, to leave my fate in the decision of a judge or jury.
Good on Tech Sgt. Pinkerton.
i remembered my secretary/translator mentioned this one. Pinkerton suspected his wife was having an affair. Green was at Pinkerton's home when he came home unexpectedly.
Looks like the prosecutor played the race card on this one:
this is a textbook example of why wisconsin passed castle doctrine into law. under the democrats the homeowner was assumed to have committed murder and had to prove self defense. our law turns it around and the da has to prove it was not. innocent until proven guilty. too many states assume guilt first and the only innocent is the murdering rapist whom libs bend over backwards to protect.
A win for the good guy.
And a D.A. running for governor????
What is moron prosecutor guy going to do, when someone
breaks into his home? Bake him a cake?
i'm glad the guy got off.
but playing Devil's Advocate for a moment and being fair, i now remember reading about this story, and some of the details would make me suspect possible foul play coming into the situation.
he's overseas in Korea and comes home early. his wife has a "friendship" with the guy he shot and killed, she claims she broke off the "friendship" and i the guy just happened to be there when the husband arrived home.
if i were an investigator, looking into the details of this shooting, this would appear very suspect to me as well. now i don't have all the details adn i'm sure some never even made the news, but i can see the possiblity in them charging him. at the very least doing a full head-on investigation. why did they charge him to begin with? because they suspected foul play thatled to the death of Greene? did they believe the guy's wife really did end the "friendship"? did the guy know about his wife's "friendship" with Greene before he arrived home from Korea? was it just a friendship or was she having an affair? did she invite Greene over or did he just happen to show up at their house the day her husband happen to be coming home early from Korea?
maybe the police just charged him and decided to let the DA decide in whether to get a grand jury indictment and take the heat off them and let someone else make a determination in the case.
but the fact it made it to a judge does say something. that the police charged him. the DA took it before a grand jury and got an indictment to take it to trial. so in someone's, or several people's opinion, they weren't just accepting the story at face value.
I have to agree with Axxe on this one. Given that I don't know all of the facts in the case, I am stuck here scratching my head on this one. There is a lot of PC here, especially in light of the fact that it went to the Grand Jury, and in front of a judge.
i agree. there had to be a reason the police charged him in the first place. has to be a reason the DA took it before a grand jury. which the grand jury felt compelled to put in on the court docket for trial.
i agree with what JonM said about Castle Laws and think they are wonderful laws that allow the LAC the freedom to defend themselves, their families and their property.
but they are not a license to kill without proper justification. and anyone thinking that just because you shoot someone within your home, that they are simply going to take your word for the events that occured is delusional or naive. they have a duty to investigate any shooting, and more so when there is fatality from that shooting. now if the evidence supports the statements made, and everything is above board, and the shooting is righteous, you should not have anything to worry about legally.
The sad reality is the DA is the only one presenting a case to the Grand Jury. Most of the time, the defense has no place at that table. The DA spoon feeds the GJ the info they want the GJ to hear. The outcome is 99% of the exactly what the DA wants
i agree. and the DA in this case could have had his own agenda to further.
but the fact remains, the police still charged him. they must have had some reason to do so.
like i said before, they may charged him and handed it off to the DA to deal with.
the judge felt compelled to throw the case out. apparently he saw somethings that made him come to that decision that probably were not made public or reported by the media.
GOOD FOR THE JUDGE!!!!! I love my state. If that had happened to me here in Kentucky the investigatiing cops would have probably patted me on the back and said "Good job".
The police rarely file a murder charge with out first consulting with the DA. There are some charges we NEVER file with out a BUNCH of consultation with the DA. Murder, Injury to a Child, Sexual Assault of a Child to name a few. Anytime there is a killing (like this one) the DA is involved w/in a few hours. The DA calls the shots as to direction the case goes. The DA in this case likely saw it from an office pogue view point and perhaps a politician view point. Not many attorneys with a thimble full of common sense