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.

 

Jared Lee Loughner is INNOCENT!!

page: 9
77
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:02 AM
link   
The msm stated loughner shot gifford at point blank while pushing forward through the crowd. The surgeons stated the bullet entered giffords temple and exited her forehead. Wouldn't she be looking forward to see the commotion? Any thoughts? Jfk?




posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:08 AM
link   
'Guilty' is a state within law, but 'Law' is'nt human, it is merely an unconscious concept. If pople saw Jared shoot those people then he is guilty (maybe not in 'Law', but in reality he is). The police say they caught the shooter. Yes i know they are looking for someone else, but it's not as if they are saying 'we dont know who did it' If that were the case they would be throwing more resources at the case. Should they be spending just as much time and energy catching the killer as they would be doing if they didnt have anyone in custody ? No, because they caught at least one person who was seen to do the shooting.

Evidence, videos, fingerprints etc, etc can all be lied about in court. Unless i personally take the evidence, study it etc, i will always rely on other peoples testament. 'Guilty' is always me relying on trust. In this case i trust the eyewitnesses and i dont need an unconscious institution to decide for me if someone is guilty. In this case i'm happy to say that Jared is guilty of shooting people.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:10 AM
link   
All I'm going to give you is an example of what the OP is trying illustrate

9/11

plane hits pentagon

no substantial video evidence of it happening

but eyewitness accounts in such an emotional time verify it did indeed happen

so it's proven as fact.

As a rule of thumb I now dismiss anything the Lame Stream Media first report.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:15 AM
link   
I agree with your opinon, i too would like some evidence. I been saying this the past few days. But your title is garbage.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by alpha chino
Actually it's funny you bring this up. Actually just what I'm remembering right now may be worthy of another thread.

I was watching an interview with Joe Zamudio. He is the man who tackled Laughner after the shooting and held him down until police came.

Zamudio said something interesting during the interview.

While he was describing how he saw JLL and tackled him, he mentioned that after he grabbed Laughner, People were yelling out, "No it's not him, it's another guy!"

In other words, people who were there yelled out that Zamudio had tackled the wrong guy, and the shooter was getting away.

This was straight out of Zamudio's mouth. I'm off to find the Youtube video of it. I forget what show I was watching at the time. It was on FNC. though...

-------------------
Was it this one, Alpha?

www.youtube.com...



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:50 AM
link   
Unfortunately that is the way it is supposed to be, but it is not. Today the police state is not worried about you being innocent, you are guilty until prooven innocent. It has been this way for a long time. While it is nice to think that we still have control of the legal system, take a look around. Have you ever been in a court case. You are guilty as sonn as you step foot in the courtroom. Everybody knows it, but the one's who believe that we still have the power, which are the one's that have never been in the legal system. I believe that this is where people say wake up man. I am not trying to be an a hole, but I have been in the system for years now, though I have not been in trouble for a few years. He who holds the money, holds the freedom.
edit on 13-1-2011 by liejunkie01 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 02:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by ANOMALY502
So multiple eyewitness accounts is not good enough?? (under oath) when the time comes??



When the time comes.

OP is absolutely right. We tend to get caught in the tide even when we're all supposedly wary of it.

thanks for this.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 03:23 AM
link   
Interesting.......I see there are quite a few people posting on this thread that only joined here within the last few days


I can see the headlines already......."Jared Loughner's ATS buddies claim he is INNOCENT!!!!"


Wise up people!......you've been fed a line.......and your biting!



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:02 AM
link   
It DOES seem strange to me that there is absolutely NO video detailing the event.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:02 AM
link   
yuppetiyup... blame the stalker; that's not really a new one, is it!

Who really worries about innocent people being put in jail... -eh; in the US, it's probably the majority of the inmates...

Look into a mirror, put one hand over your left eye and wave to your self with the other, and you may experience something called binocular rivalry.

What focus did the shooting distract?
Today 10 percent of USA's federal budget to service debt, and this number is rising...
Politicians disappear, are killed, traumatized, all the time; the question is who are replacing whom?
"she's lobbying for the private sector, i thought she was in marketing..."

Here's a lead...



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:04 AM
link   
i think this is the video alpha chino is talking about.

www.youtube.com...

then listen to this interview:

www.youtube.com...

first video it says someone said "no it's not him, it's another guy"
then on the 2nd video joe said it seemed like the person he tackled wasnt the shooter.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:05 AM
link   
Some of you people are insane. I get the fact of the OP that he is innocent till proven guilty, but those of you out who go out of their way to type in all capital letters that they don't believe Jared did it and it was a set up, your all out of your mind. Who are you kidding? You honestly believe this?



And I thought some people in the middle east were idiots because of the things they believe ('sharks sent to Egypt by Mossad', the spy vulture, etc) and I forget about you folks. You are all awesome. Keep up the good work.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 




This "Innocent until proven guilty" thing is absolute BS.

You're Guilty until proven innocent.


They lock you up (remand) until the trial and you have to prove your innocence.... they lock up innocent people until they prove otherwise.

Were you Innocent until proven guilty, you would be able to go about your life until the trial.


It's an illusion and just words.... It's meaningless.


I don't mean in this case, I'm meaning this generally.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   
well for starters tell that too the parents of christine green, and secondly jll doesent seem too bumed out he is in jail for sumthing he didnt do, i wander why? hmmmmmm he did it , hes proud of it , and i hope he frys.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:31 AM
link   
Yeah, the last I heard "witness testimony" was a valid reason for guilt, even for a jury. The guy was tackled at the scene by some witnesses to the crime. They have a weapon with clips, they will do the fingerprinting for court i'm sure. Several testimonies from witnesses in a crowd attested to his shooting and trying to reload a clip. The smile on his crazy face during his photo shoot lends credence to this guilt. No one would smile while getting booked (over something like multiple murder) unless they were content with what they had done. Most people, when accused of something like that and having not done it, would not be so happy about it. He may have been MK Ultra'd tough. Not guilty by reason of hypnosis, but then you would never see this in court because it's impossible to prove hypnosis.
edit on 13-1-2011 by Phenomium because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:32 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


on another conspiracy site (i dont want to get in trouble for linking) it is stated that ALL CELLPHONES AND CAMERAS WERE CONFISCATED @ 5 minutes after shooting when authorities arrived. for evidenciary procedures. also one of the WOUNDED survivors, while sedated, suposedly clarified that the JUDGE had been INVITED to the event on the 7th. and that he and the judge were discussing CASE OVERLOADS in district or something like that.. this is counter to the "spin??" that he just happened to show up.

also i remember hearing when this was first reported that SECURITY had fired on LOUGHNER.. but that was edited.. maybe because ANOTHER KILLER was the one firing.. and no cops or security showed up for 5 minutes.

LOUGHNER -- INVOLVED YES, patsy maybe.. but still innocent until proven guilty.. BY LAW..



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:37 AM
link   
The title of this thread is offensive. A little 9 year old girl died along with 5 other people.

He's innocent until proven guilty in the eyes of the law but not in the eyes of common sense.

He was seen by witnesses of the event.

He was tackled and had another clip ready to reload so he could shoot more people.

They traced the gun that killed and injured people to where he bought it.

They have writing from his house that point to his plans.

I will stop here because this is enough.

If you kill people with a gun and then you're tackled by eyewitnesses and they trace the gun that killed people to you, it doesn't take a genius to figure it out.

Again, in the eyes of the law he's innocent until proven guilty but not in the eyes of common sense.

At the end of the day this thread makes no sense. There's plenty of evidence that says that he's guilty. His defense will probably plead insanity because only a MORON will call the guy innocent.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:38 AM
link   
reply to post by mistressSOPHIA
 


also NO DETAILED BALLISTICS REPORTS yet..... just that it was a glock 19... and that GIFFORDS wound was back to front (maybe she turned away when she saw the gun).

im sure police and fbi already have ran all the bullets collected at the scene.. but no report on if any of them came from another gun.. MAYBE THEY ALL CAME FROM JAREDS GLOCK.. but id like to know the details



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:45 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


Generally I would agree with you, but in this case didn't the police tackle the man firing the gun into the people? Take that tackled man into custody, then learned his name was Jared Loughner?

You're forgetting that forensics can remove the shells from the victims, match them to the gun, and match the fingerprints on the gun to Mr. Loughner.



posted on Jan, 13 2011 @ 04:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by mistressSOPHIA
reply to post by mistressSOPHIA
 


also NO DETAILED BALLISTICS REPORTS yet..... just that it was a glock 19... and that GIFFORDS wound was back to front (maybe she turned away when she saw the gun).

im sure police and fbi already have ran all the bullets collected at the scene.. but no report on if any of them came from another gun.. MAYBE THEY ALL CAME FROM JAREDS GLOCK.. but id like to know the details


That was the initial thought, but after experts who deal with combat injuries looked at the evidence they have now determined the bullet entered her forehead and exited the back of her head.



new topics

top topics



 
77
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join