Originally posted by EMPIRE
reply to post by bigfatfurrytexan
In America a person is also supposed to be considered innocent until proven guilty.
sure. and the eyewitness testimony of the guy hiding in the bushes who saw the shooter exit the building, stalking a victim that was already wounded
and crawling away. Right before he shot that person, the cop started shooting at him. So he charged her. She shot at him, he shot at her. He ended
up laying near death with a shot in the torso. She was shot in the thigh and hand.
I think the account that was provided by that individual is enough, combined the the officer (who i assume will back up what is said by the
witness)...since i am not on the jury, that is all i need to know. Done deal. Let the trial commence.
Now, if there is anything new that is unknown, certainly it could change my opinion. But it seems pretty straight forward, given the eyewitness
accounts being released.
The only things that are likely to be added is culpability for people that allowed him to continue as a soldier. Financially speaking, he was a
valuable asset. Lots of money invested in him. Who blew it? Lost not only him, but 14 other soldiers. Who didn't do their jobs? That is the only
real, lingering question. We will see who is scape goated, i guess.
|