The "OJ verdict" Really, Gungeek. You are out of touch with reality.-Mike
The court system worked in the OJ case...Law Enforcement is what failed. So yes, the EVIDENCE did prevail (or in that particular the lack of, or presence of very bad evidence).
I have hard time saying the court system worked in the OJ case. What I do know is that we have a 6 year cop that has never been written up, a dead offender that was not shot in the back as the liars say, and the cop has a broken orbital socket. I think the cop needs a little support. If you don't, that's on you.
Sounds like the cop is getting a lot of support. All I'm saying is, I'll wait until ALL of the evidence is in before I say one side or the other is right or wrong.
I can envision all sorts of scenarios where it could go one way or another. But my opinion doesn't mean squat. There will be a preliminary investigation. Based on that information the cop will either be indicted or he won't. If he is, there will be a more complete investigation and he'll have his day in court.
I think when an unarmed man is shot, there seriously needs to be an investigation; I think that's appropriate. Let the investigation go and let the cards fall where they fall. The evidence will prevail.
Your opinion may not mean squat, but for some of us, its the trash that got shot thats getting funds to sue etc... and the officer has not even close to a fair shake on that.
For that I"m willing to toss some money to the underdog so to speak, to help him show his side and THEN let it fall where it may.
Without funds, he may never have the ability to do the best he can to defend himself. You can bet your azz, the other side will have plenty of drug money etc... tossed out there to try to hang the guy.
So in the meantime, let the system work, and lets hope its better than the OJ case that was a joke, and those that believe that you should not be guilty before innocent, toss the officer, regardless of race, some help. Lord knows that LEO pay won't be nearly enough to cover expenses.
As to the unarmed man, well you don't have any of the evidence so how do you even know thats true? And if true, where did he loose the arms that he may have beaten the officer with?
