It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
originally posted by: LadyJae
30 pages of differing opinions...some well thought through, some knee-jerk, some perilously close to being ad-hominem.
Isn't it ironic that the only "evidence" we have, pro and con, are what we read in the news articles? The same sources I've seen discredited time and again here at ATS.
I respectfully submit that none of us (not one) can say absolutely what they would or would not do in the same scenario. At some point, rational thought takes flight and instinct takes over. We can only hope that our humanity will temper that instinct.
General Patton once said "Prepare for the unknown by studying how others in the past have coped with the unforeseeable and the unpredictable." A sage bit of advice for us all.
We must wait for the outcome of the trial. Our opinions are just that: our personal opinions.
Be blessed
J
originally posted by: jjsdietfitness
They must not have a castle law in MN...here in SC, you can kill 'em if you find them in your home. They'd be dead the moment I got down stairs after I woke up from the window breaking; besides, I need to buy new carpet anyway.
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
The video proves that both intruders were completely incapacitated. Despite what macman says you don't need to be a bloody doctor to see that someone is critically and possibly mortally wounded.
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
macman, you claim to have been in law enforcement yet you feel that Smith's depraved actions are justifiable... I wonder how often you justified an illegal and violent encounter with civilians while you claimed to "serve and protect."
originally posted by: macman
And when the Prosecution asks him if he thought they were "incapacitated", the defense will state "I object, Mr. Smith is neither a Medical Doctor nor has training that would give him insight into what incapacitates one person over the other".
Maybe go and actually sit in on some court cases.
The video shows they weren't moving. The video does not prove that they could not move again.
originally posted by: TDawgRex
Can you provide the video footage proving this statement?
originally posted by: TDawgRex
And if the Defense attorney is such a dunce to state the above, he would be really opening a whole can of worms.
originally posted by: TDawgRex
Of course Mr. Smith is not a Medical Doctor, but as a State Dept security specialist, he more than likely did have rudimentary first aid course under his belt.
originally posted by: TDawgRex
But being a executioner in a State penal system also requires certification. If you were a LEO, you'd know that. Is Mr. Smith a certified executioner? But even executioners can only perform their duties on people who were tried, convicted and sentenced to death.
originally posted by: macman
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
The video proves that both intruders were completely incapacitated. Despite what macman says you don't need to be a bloody doctor to see that someone is critically and possibly mortally wounded.
And when the Prosecution asks him if he thought they were "incapacitated", the defense will state "I object, Mr. Smith is neither a Medical Doctor nor has training that would give him insight into what incapacitates one person over the other".
Maybe go and actually sit in on some court cases.
The video shows they weren't moving. The video does not prove that they could not move again.
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
a reply to: macman
So far you talk a whole bunch but you really haven't backed up a single claim in this thread.
It's very disconcerting that people star you and encourage you when any reasonable person can see right through your claims and the immature and inexperienced way in which you argue your points.
This is exactly the reason we keep voting complete idiots in to office.
"THIS MAN KNOWS HOW TO BREAK DOWN A POST AND WRITE A COMPLETELY INSIGNIFICANT REPLY TO EACH POINT! GIVE THIS MAN A STAR!"
Actually, I do believe I offered to meet in person a year or two back and you refused.
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
I don't at all believe you have any experience whatsoever in law. I do believe the court would allow the defendant to give his opinion on whether or not they were incapacitated.
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Additionally, the defendant already admits that they were in his statement to police where he talked about "putting them out of their misery" which the court has allowed.
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Can you show some legal precedent that would prove that the court wouldn't allow Smith to give an opinion on this? Go ahead, show us.
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
Can you also show some sort of proof that you have more expertise in these matters than the rest of us peons? This is the internet.. I could claim to be the Easter Bunny.
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
I would bet money that if you were ever involved in LE it wasn't in any significant role
originally posted by: TinkerHaus
and that your jury duty sitting in on a DUI case has no bearing on your knowledge of a murder trial.