No murder charges for Tucson shooter

Looks like this case isn't nearly as cut and dried as they are letting everyone think:


www.kgun9.com...

"Why no murder indictments in mass shooting case?

"....he's only formally indicted for trying to kill Gabrielle Giffords and two of her aides. ...

"There are plenty of witnesses ready to say they saw Jared Loughner empty his gun into the crowd at the Safeway.
[Oh yeah?  Name one.]
       
"Investigators say they have high resolution video showing him killing Federal Judge John Roll.  ...
['Cept no one gets to see it.]

"So far there's no murder charge, Federal or state. ...

"Both Storts and Piccarreta think any trials will be years away.... ."
[By which time Loughner will have been totally 'broken' and will be begging to plead guilty.  So much for the right to a speedy trial.]

Because murder charges would require a possibility for the death penalty, a much more deliberate investigation and procededing has to take place. This is not uncommon practice.


Here is an article that explains the situation pretty clearly.

source

reply to post by starviego


Enemy combatant ? No habius corpus / Possibilitus?

FnStues

Originally posted by starviego
"There are plenty of witnesses ready to say they saw Jared Loughner empty his gun into the crowd at the Safeway.
[Oh yeah?  Name one.]

Just one...ok Melanie Fowler
source

       
"Investigators say they have high resolution video showing him killing Federal Judge John Roll.  ...
['Cept no one gets to see it.]

The video is evidence in a federal trial. Any broadcasting of said video would taint potential jurors in the case. Again this is common practice.

"So far there's no murder charge, Federal or state. ...

"Both Storts and Piccarreta think any trials will be years away.... ."
[By which time Loughner will have been totally 'broken' and will be begging to plead guilty.  So much for the right to a speedy trial.]

See my first post for this one. and also, what kind of speedy trial are you looking for? Remember there is no statute of limitations on murder. They could always drop the murder charge for now, and bring it back up later, as long as they dont try him for it, there will be no double jeopardy.

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
Just one...ok Melanie Fowler
source

Your source says she saw the shooting. She does not identify Loughner as the shooter.
       

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
The video is evidence in a federal trial. Any broadcasting of said video would taint potential jurors in the case. Again this is common practice.

The entire news media has already convicted Loughner. I doubt the pool can become any more tainted. I strongly suspect the video does not allow an ID of Loughner as the shooter anyway.

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
...what kind of speedy trial are you looking for?

Whatever any other murder trial gets. Stretching it out for years is a gross violation of the Constitution.


/

reply to post by starviego


So are you trying to tell us he didn't shoot these people? Are you saying he was a patsy without any evidence yet that he is? Just what is it you are trying to tell us?
Zindo

What exactly is the evidence against the accused?


Can Loughner be recognized in the video? Does it show the shooter being tackled and taken to the ground?

Was gun shot residue(GSR) found on his hands?

Were Loughner's fingerprints found on the gun?

Can the shell cases found on the scene be matched to the weapon owned by Loughner?

Can all the bullets fired be traced back to his Glock via forensic evidence?

What was the motive? Cops say they don't know. Most assassins are quite eager to spread their message, and thus Loughner would have seized every opportunity to explain his motive.


Is lack of forensic evidence the real reason no murder charges have been made?

/

reply to post by starviego


Are you sure the charges listed in the op aren't just the federal charges?

The murder of civilians would fall under state jurisdiction. I know they were going back and forth with the judge, but it seems that he was not there on official business which would make it a civilian murder.

reply to post by starviego


Well as in any other trial, the evidence will come to light as the trial proceeds, not before hand to anyone who wants it. Again that is standard. What we do get is a breakdown of said evidence in an affidavit of probable cause.

You can read the document here:
source

A brief rundown of the evidence:

Based on my review of the video and other investigation, your affiant states that at approximately 10:11 a.m. on January 8, 2011, JARED LEE LOUGHNER shot Member of Congress Gabrielle Giffords (and others)

According to this statement, the video and other evidence points to the accused.

. At the scene, law enforcement recovered the handgun used by LOUGHNER, a Glock semi-automatic pistol. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) has determined that LOUGHNER purchased the Glock pistol, serial number PWL 699, on or about November 30, 2010, from Sportsman's Warehouse in Tucson. In addition to the investigation conducted by ATF, LOUGHNER's purchase of the weapon was corroborated by store receipts and video, among other evidence

According to this statement, the weapon in question was purchased by the accused, complete with receipts and video surveillance at the location he purchased said weapon. The serial numbers are a match as well.

a search warrant was executed at 7741 N. Soledad Avenue in Tucson Arizona, where LOUGHNER resides. Some of the evidence seized from that location included a letter in a safe, addressed to "Mr. Jared Loughney" [sic] at 7741 N. Soledad Avenue, from Congresswoman Giffords, on Congressional stationary, dated August 30, 2007, thanking him for attending a "Congress on your Corner" event at the Foothills Mall in Tucson. Also recovered in the safe was an envelope with handwriting on the envelope stating "I planned ahead" and My assassination" and the name "Giffords," along with what appears to be LOUGHNER's signature.

According to this statement, upon searching the accused's residence, he had previsouly attended another event similar to the one where the shooting occured, along with letters stating that he planned this and even planned on dying himself. This is circumstantial, but still evidence nonetheless.

Yes guys, those were just the federal charges. news.yahoo.com...

Under the Speedy Trial Act, the feds must file an indictment within 10 days of an arrest if a defendant has been denied bail, as Loughner was. So the main reason that the charges were frontloaded to be shy of formal murder proceedings is that prosecutors were running out of time.

Here the answer comes down to jurisdiction rather than filing deadlines. Four of the six victims who died in the shootings are not federal employees, so the federal government has no jurisdiction to charge anyone with their murder. The state of Arizona will do so, but it hasn't filed charges against Loughner yet.

The state charges will be coming, don't fear.

Since Charles Harrelson (father of Woody) shot Federal Judge Wood in Texas, the shooting of a Federal judge even if not conducting government business is a Federal felony offense! Like others have said they had ten days to lay charges or loose jurisdiction. The others are civil state charges and there is no limit to the time frame and we can guess that they do NOT wish to screw up the case. With Dipnutz spouting off like he did that might be a problem anyway with the lawyer he now has.
Zindo

If I am not mistaken, the 10 day rule no longer applies here, as described very well in McCarthy's Nartional Review article that I previously linked to:

what the Justice Department often does when defendants have been detained pending trial is file what I call a “stop the clock” indictment, alleging just one or a few serious crimes that are the easiest to prove. These offenses are pleaded in bare-bones fashion: a minimalist recitation of the offense elements required to be proved. This charging instrument stops the ticking of the speedy-trial clock, provides formal charges weighty enough to justify continued detention, and avoids the possibility of inadvertently saying something that may turn out to be wrong.

Later on, when there has been more time to process and digest the evidence, Justice will seek a superseding indictment — adding additional charges and pleading them in a more expansive, narrative form that will highlight for the eventual trial jury how and why the defendant did what he did. That is, the bare bones indictment is filed early for procedural reasons; the superseder is the later “roadmap to conviction” on which the government will go to trial.

When they have all details i place for the murder charge, they will then seek a superceding indictment, thusly amending the original.

reply to post by youdidntseeme


I'll look around, but the article states that because he was arrested and denied bail they need to indict within 10 days.

Even if he gets the death penalty, I can all but guarantee that 10 years from now he will still be languishing in prison, on "death row" aka "appeals for decades", watching satellite TV, answering fan mail, and earning a college degree, all on the taxpayers dime.

Originally posted by searching4truth
reply to post by youdidntseeme

 

I'll look around, but the article states that because he was arrested and denied bail they need to indict within 10 days.

Yea check out the part that I quoted here, I'm not sure if its saying exactly what I think it is.

reply to post by youdidntseeme


Here is the exact quote from the article, in case I wasn't clear.

Under the Speedy Trial Act, the feds must file an indictment within 10 days of an arrest if a defendant has been denied bail, as Loughner was. So the main reason that the charges were frontloaded to be shy of formal murder proceedings is that prosecutors were running out of time.

I will continue looking for where the 10 days comes from, but don't expect it tonight, it's getting too late. Yawn. I'll try and check back tomorrow.

Loughner supposedly shot those people in a courtroom or something? Shouldn't there be video evidence of this?

Originally posted by quantum_flux
Loughner supposedly shot those people in a courtroom or something? Shouldn't there be video evidence of this?

I suggest you go back and read a news story of the event.
Please.

reply to post by starviego


Please do more homework...

Defending Jared Lee Loughner: Will an insanity plea work?

.....Jared Lee Loughner appeared in federal court on Jan. 9 to be charged with the attempted assassination....

and

On Wednesday a federal grand jury officially indicted Loughner for the attempted assassination of Giffords and two of her aides. Further federal and state charges likely are forthcoming. He has already been charged with the murder of a federal judge, a capital offense.

Jared Loughner to be charged in Arizona shootings targeting Gabrielle Giffords

Jared Loughner Formally Charged by Federal Prosecutors

Heroic Woman Charged Jared Loughner, Averting 'Huge Greater Catastrophe'

Evidence Points to Methodical Planning

Your starting to sound like Ooozyism.. I wonder if he changed accounts?

reply to post by Xcathdra


Thank you for adding this, I think there is a reason that the OP hasnt really returned to this thread.
The points set out in the original post, although well intended, were just off base from the truth.