DaveTN

And I don’t think he’s trying to keep you informed. No, he’s not trying to drum up legal business; he’s trying to get hits on a website and sell a book. I saw that in his first posts; I didn’t report it then and I still haven’t reported it. I assumed the powers that be saw it.

Maybe not. Our Tennessee attorneys have made far more significant contributions and have participated in threads instead of just posting links to take you to their websites. I think to advertise they were required to pay to be vendors. But I could be wrong on that.

No way. A guilty verdict would require 100% approval. You think six people (men or women) would sacrifice a man because they fear riots? If a guilty verdict comes down it’s because they believe he is guilty.

With the libertarian party taking credit for this pre-planned stunt they will be lucky to get someone elected to dog catcher.

http://www.dnj.com/article/20130706/NEWS/307060032/     So much for any civil case.

The Officers appears to be old enough to have too much experience to respond like that. His actions were not professional and the guy has recourse on that.   The Officer should have told the man “yes, you are being detained for suspicion of DUI, turn your vehicle off and step out. “   At that point there would have been no reason for argumentative dialog about answering questions or showing ID; test him and arrest him or let him go.   Maybe I’m mistaken, but was that not the K9 handler that said “It wasn’t a very good alert”? If so, he just brought question to his credibility in all past and future cases. There was no need for them to let that dog scratch the guy’s car up. I suspect as a citizen I will be paying for a new paint job. If he was DUI or arrested for DUI, they would have been in that car; they should have waited.   Rookie mistakes.      

I agree. I think both of their criminal histories and arrest records should have been allowed.

From reading just that story, this should  be a criminal case. At least one Officer wrote in his report that they conspired to commit criminal acts. This was home invasion, false arrest, aggravated battery and conspiracy to commit all of the above. In reading the story I am unclear why they arrested the occupants or why the went to another house and arrested other family members.   If there is any truth to this story it should be investigated by the FBI. I wonder if the Clark County Sheriff or the State Police investigated any of this.

:confused:  Speculation and opinions is all any of us have. You have yours and I have mine. I fully understand that you and many others do not agree with me. But I have not attacked anyone, called them a racist or race baiter, or whined and cried that they are being emotional. let me assure you that my opinion carries no weight. The only impact my opinions have is in what the people on this forum think of me; I'm good with that.

At least when they commit crimes they put them in prison instead of leaving them in office. :) 

I don't know either. This bill was veto proof. But it has 60 days before it can become law without his signature. Maybe during that 60 days he can send it back with changes that they have to answer. I know they have said it is an all or nothing vote on his changes; they can't pick and choose what they want. Since his changes are basically a carry ban a lot of people would have to flip to make the changes.

Discuss the facts or give your opinions and try to ignore those that are baiting you with personal attacks. You haven't been very good at that so far.   ;)

I don't think there is too much she can offer. The defense will have a couple of weeks plus closing arguments to convince the jury. The jury is not being presented with facts they can decide on. This is a liars contest and they have the burden of being the finders of fact.

Anyone that takes that stand in front of the jury is a witness and either side gets to question them. She can testify to what she heard on a tape that has been introduced as evidence. If she says that's her son screaming the jury will have to decide if they believe her or if there is enough there for them to believe that identification is even possible.

?? How is the jury going to hear her if she isn't a witness?

It's all been discussed here in great detail. You are adamant that Zimmerman committed no crime. My experience tells me that is not necessarily the case. Maybe Florida allows someone with absolutely no PC or RAS to chase an kid down and kill him when he tries to defend himself. I will wait to see if a jury puts their stamp of approval on that. I don't think any of us here that believe Zimmerman committed a reckless act that led to the murder of an innocent citizen (manslaughter) will lose any sleep over the verdict one way or the other. It's a shame all the personal attacks that are in this thread instead of discussion.

They didn't let a state witness that said it was Martin screaming testify, but they did allow an expert to testify. He said....   He sat it up for the Mother to testify.

Governor Quinn has sent a amendatory veto with a message to the house. Even though he can't veto this bill they have to vote on his proposed changes. His changes would almost outlaw carry anywhere. Especially the part where businesses would have to post a sign if they want to allow carry. Local legislators think will have the votes to override his changes on Tuesday. But I hope the people of Illinois remember in the next the election that both he and the Illinois Attorney General are fighting feverously to stop the wishes of the people of Illinois and the Illinois legislature. Looks like they are taking their cues from Obama. If you don't agree with the Constitution, the Federal Courts, and the legislature; find a way around them. Here are some of the changes he wants to make: Alcohol: No carry where alcohol is sold or served. Handguns: one gun carry limit with 10 round max mag capacity. Home Rule: Allows local governments to ban assault weapons. (This isn't even an assault weapons bill) Signage: Would not only allow business owners to post against carry; but would require them to post if they wanted to allow carry. Employers rights: Allows employers to ban guns on their property. Concealed: Means completely concealed. Mental Health: Full access to mental health records. Open meeting: Results of the licensing board findings and arrest records or mental health records used in making their decisions would be open to the public.

I have no doubt that records are kept. Even on private sales gun can be traced through owners.

The good: Looks like a good start and good format, should be interesting to see what guests you have. Good Luck The bad: Your brother needs to quit saying "right" and "yeah" while the guests are taking; it is very distracting.

If you meet the requirements, the first thing you should look at is if you can pass the physical agility tests. I have no idea how hard there are for SPD, but they got rid of over half the applicants were I was.   As far as a career in LE for anyone looking farther down the road; I would suggest you talk with people in the department you might want to go to, most departments I know of aren't impressed with a criminal justice degree. Get a degree in something you can use if you later decide you don't want to be a cop .   Do ride alongs if the department you are interested in allows them. Like any other job; a personal recommendation from the right people can go a long way.

 I would say the state pays for the defense in most cases. I would guess most states are like Tennessee in that the accused  has to be represented by a trial lawyer that has death penalty case experience and meets state requirements. Tennessee maintains a list of qualified attorneys; there are very few Public Defenders on it.

I just can't believe a lot of what I see being posted.

We are never organized or in the right place to do anything. Yes, if a bunch of us knew where a drive by was going to occur we could leave a bunch of dead thugs at the scene. I think my skills are pretty good, but I’m not so naive to think I’m going to survive a full on attack from a bunch of gang bangers. I’ve seen to many times the result of a surprise attack.   Everyone is pretty sure George Zimmerman is going to be acquitted. When that happens all across the country there are going to be riots and people are going to die. The New Black Panther Party is calling for people to “Kill everything white in sight”. So what is being done?   Police departments and National guards try to prepare for just this type emergency. Of course when they do the tin foil hat crew jumps in here and say they are getting ready to attack Americans.   So other than a bunch of internet grand standing by both sides what is being done to prepare for an event that is almost certain to happen?

No one is against anything that would work. But open display of groups of people carrying firearms is not seen as education; it’s seen as and portrayed by the media as a threat. It didn’t work as planned for the Black Panthers at the California state capitol in 1967. It gave a big shot in the arm to gun control. Thankfully nut case Adam Kokesh backed down and a bunch of pro-gun people won’t be arrested in DC. I doubt there are many Americans that haven’t developed their opinions on guns. I also doubt open carry rallies will do anything to change anyone’s mind. The stage would be set for one nut case to do something stupid and cause serious repercussions for the rest of us.