Jared Lee Loughner is INNOCENT!!

page: 2
77
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:04 PM
link   
reply to post by alpha chino
 


The MSM are not even saying the *alleged* shooter. The say it as a definitive.. They already have this man convicted.. I think personally they are messing this whole case up. With him being insane, crazy, not all there, mentally unstable, how in the world could someone send him to the chair and sleep at night?
edit on 12-1-2011 by MisterCrowley because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:06 PM
link   
The OP is not saying that Loughner did not do it. The OP is simply saying that since most of us were not there, and have yet to see any evidence proving it was Loughner, we really can't say with certainty that he was involved. As a matter of fact, we can't even say for certainty that any of the supposed writings and video's attributed to him are actually his. We are basing everything off of what the media has told us. We are working on the assumption that he is guilty of the act before seeing any evidence to support it. That's not what the U.S. is about....the OP is right. It doesn't matter if you believe he did it.....he is still innocent until proven guilty, and yet, we're talking about it like he's already been convicted.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:10 PM
link   
You ARE trolling.
First of all if you think you have rights then you must have alot of money to be able to afford them.
Secondly America is as messed up as this thread.
Please....spare me.

The guy shot people in plain sight with people watching....just because you didn't see it doesn't mean it never happened and he is innocent.
I wonder how many stars and flags you get.......



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:11 PM
link   
reply to post by kismetphayze
 


Yep that's what I am saying. And yes, he basically has been convicted already without even having a trial.

I am very happy about the responses I am getting. This is AWESOME actually.

I am sooo happy there are people out there who understand what guilty vs innocent is all about. Thank you for restoring my faith in our society!



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Yes we need to cross examine the witnesses first.


I don't know about cross examining them, but finding out if they actually exist would be a start. Have the police released a list of the names of witnesses? Have they released any video of this event which must certainly exist? Not only were there surely security cameras on the Safeway, there were also most likely many other cameras in the area pointed that way. Where are these videos? It would be nice if we could get at least one verifiable detail of this incident other than the dead bodies. What about the police video of his arrest? The police have no issues posting up their "funniest cop videos" on television, why not post some videos from some of the police cars that must surely show his arrest on the scene? Are we to just take the word of a bunch of liars with badges just because they say so? I'm not convinced, I've had too much experience with lying cops.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:14 PM
link   
Several years ago I attended a course in the Army for Counterintelligence Agents (Sort of an Investigator) at one point in a lecture a guy walks across the stage and latter at the end of the lecture people are asked if they even saw him and if they did to describe him as a suspect - physically and what actions he took.

First of all it was 50/50 that people even saw him and the ones who did described him very differently and incorrectly in terms of what he was wearing, height, weight, and even race.

The point of the exercise was to point out that eye witnesses are - unreliable sources of information.

Then there is the modern example:

Bet You Didn't Notice 'The Invisible Gorilla'


The phrase, "the invisible gorilla," comes from an experiment created 10 years ago to test selective attention. In it, study participants are asked to watch a video in which two teams, one in black shirts and one in white shirts, are passing a ball. The participants are told to count how many times the players in white shirts pass the ball.

Mid-way through the video, a gorilla walks through the game, stands in the middle, pounds his chest, and then exits.
Then, study participants are asked, "But did you see the gorilla?" More than half the time, subjects miss the gorilla entirely. More than that, even after the participants are told about the gorilla, they're certain they couldn't have missed it.


See how you do: (You know the punch line now so results may be scewed of course!)



I'll wait for the trial to determine his guilt - thanks.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by crazydaisy
And if they were to set bail for Jared right now I suppose you would jump right down there and bail him out. There were numerous witnesses and maybe there is video evidence that hasn't been released (save that for the trail he deserves and will get).


I'm sure there were numerous witnesses. Are we to rely on notoriously unreliable eyewitness testimony to positively identify somebody who appeared for a few seconds while mowing people down with over 30 rounds from a single Glock pistol? I know the whole country isn't on stupid pills, surely other people see that no evidence has been offered of this man's guilt. Are we to assume that just because the police have presented a suspect that they are right? Historically police routinely lock up and punish and sometimes even kill innocent people. Death row in Illinois was full of innocent people several years back, so much so the governor put a moratorium on the death penalty when he found four black me had falsely confessed to murder I because police had tortured them, all four men were later exonerated by DNA evidence. So no, I don't believe anything the police say unless they can prove it, and unless somebody else already proved it before they came along to manufacture evidence.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOMALY502
reply to post by PlautusSatire
 


www.kvoa.com...

www.cbsnews.com...

Those are two out of many eyewitness accounts, YES he is innocent until proven guilty, I differ with the OP's opinion about having to have a confession, or DNA evidence. When the time comes the witnesses will be put under oath in court and asked to identify the shooter.



I notice neither of those eyewitness accounts have witnesses naming the assailant.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by alpha chino
Innocent until proven guilty in a court of law, yes. But you act as if this guy is being railroaded when a whole crowd of people saw him do the shooting.


How big a crowd? I've seen two eyewitness accounts, neither of which positively identified Loughner as the assailant. Where's the rest of this crowd, and did any of them positively identify the assailant from the few hectic seconds he was pumping bullets into 10 people or were they dropping to the ground or running for cover?



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:21 PM
link   
What the heck is this? A provocateur thread?


Innocent Until Proven Guilty!

Just would be, if there wouldn't be any witnesses, such as the parents of that 9 years old girl victim. The guy also was arrested on the crime scene with the smoking gun. Do you believe he is innocent? Think again. The guy is a killer, nothing more.

Americans truly start to lost their mind sometimes. When there is a conspiracy, they're blind as hell, when there is no conspiracy, they're searching for one. Upside down world we're living, that's a guarantee.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:23 PM
link   
reply to post by Golf66
 


Very good point there about witness testimony. I remember the first time I saw that, "gorilla video". I missed the gorilla.

Here's something to think about: People are trying to explain away the inconsistencies on whether he ran away or got tackled by saying that people were confused by the chaos.....and yet, they expect them to accurately identify the shooter? They can't even agree on whether he was tackled or ran away. Heck, I can't even figure out if he's bald or has hair! Creepy photo shows him bald.....court drawings show him with hair.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by eMachine
I think it's good to remember our 'justice process' right now, when alot of people seem to have a 'kill him now' attitude about all of this. IF (hypothetically) there is more to this story that we do not know, like some sort of mind control project, we'll never know if people are too quick to judge based on what the media tells them. How can he get an unbiased jury? Unfortunately, that's very unlikely.


Nothing so exotic as mind control is necessary, it would have been more than enough to simply take him to the scene along with the rest of the assassination team, dump him out after the shooting and tell him to get out of there, then tackle him when he runs. They could even throw a magazine of ammunition to the ground near an old lady and tell her to pick it up just to add a poignant story of Grandma Hero. Where were all the people with cameras during this time? Did none of the representative's staff have one? Were there no press there to record her or the federal judge who'd been receiving death threats? If this was a publicity event staged in front of a Safeway where was the media? They would have shown up before anyone.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Sentinel412
 


I thought the neighbor took the 9 year old to the event? I haven't heard anything about the parents actually being there.

This makes no difference, of course....I'm just pointing it out to show how quickly and easily facts can be distorted.
edit on 1/12/2011 by kismetphayze because: clarification



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
You don't even know he was arrested on the scene with a gun.

Show me the video of that happening, or I am sorry but you are ASSUMING IT based on preconceived notions and the media telling you so.

Look, I am almost certain that Jared will admit defiantly and proudly that he is guilty in court.

But our legal system was designed so that every citizen has a right to voice their defense if they so choose.
Also, he has the right to admit guilt and cut to the chase.

Point is, the trial hasn't even started yet, and most people act like they know for absolute 100% sure that he is guilty and yet they have no proof. This is programmed into us because people take the media as gospel.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:26 PM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 
Hey man, if you can provide even ONE SINGLE WITNESS ACCOUNT suggesting there was a different shooter, bring it.

Until then, it's looking like this guy is guilty as sin, and you are being kind of unsupportedly agnostic about the whole deal.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by MisterCrowley
reply to post by alpha chino
 


The MSM are not even saying the *alleged* shooter. The say it as a definitive.. They already have this man convicted.. I think personally they are messing this whole case up. With him being insane, crazy, not all there, mentally unstable, how in the world could someone send him to the chair and sleep at night?
edit on 12-1-2011 by MisterCrowley because: (no reason given)


Is it your professional diagnosis that he's insane or are you relying on the zero analyses performed by other professional psychologists? Oh, wait, you're not a professional psychologist? Then why are you offering your inept and amateur hobbyist diagnosis? It's too bad you're not the court-appointed attorney for this guy, he wouldn't stand a chance of facing trial with your diagnosis.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Sentinel412
 


You are missing the OPS point ENTIRELY.

This thread isnt about his innocence, it is about his right to a fair trial.

Just because people saw it happen doesnt mean he isnt deserving of the same trial as the next person.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:29 PM
link   
He may be "innocent" in a legal sense.

But he is guilty as hell in my mind until I hear a conflicting report.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Golf66
Several years ago I attended a course in the Army for Counterintelligence Agents (Sort of an Investigator) at one point in a lecture a guy walks across the stage and latter at the end of the lecture people are asked if they even saw him and if they did to describe him as a suspect - physically and what actions he took.


Sounds like you went to a recruitment drive, they were trying to find the tiny handful of people who not only remembered him but described his appearance and actions well.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 08:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Show me the video of that happening, or I am sorry but you are ASSUMING IT based on preconceived notions and the media telling you so.

I'm not believing the media. I'm believing what I feel and after I connected the dots, I believe the guy is not innocent.

And if I would show you a video, what would it prove? That presumably someone is capable to use After Effects or it's a real footage. You can't trust what you see, you can't trust what you hear. But you can trust in your instincts.



Look, I am almost certain that Jared will admit defiantly and proudly that he is guilty in court.

Then, what's your point? If he did, he deserves his punishment. If he not did, and he is fool enough to do that, he also deserves the punishment.


But our legal system was designed so that every citizen has a right to voice their defense if they so choose. Also, he has the right to admit guilt and cut to the chase.

The present legal system of the United States is a joke. It has so many loopholes that every possible criminal is capable to get away, while the innocent is being put behind jails. Is this a fail system? Think again.


Point is, the trial hasn't even started yet, and most people act like they know for absolute 100% sure that he is guilty and yet they have no proof. This is programmed into us because people take the media as gospel.

When someone is shooting down a 9 year old girl, I don't give a damn about the proofs or the distorted legal system of the U.S.
edit on 12-1-2011 by Sentinel412 because: (no reason given)





 
77
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join



atslive.com

hi-def

low-def