No murder charges for Tucson shooter

reply to post by youdidntseeme


hey there, I can't seem to locate it in the Speedy Trial Act, as cited by the author. I emailed the author to find the exact source and section, if he replies I'll come back as post it. I'll u2u to let you know.

Peace

reply to post by youdidntseeme


I have seen a few other threads that have been posted in the same manner. I am not sure if its because of a lack of research, ignornace about our Judicial system, or just an ulterior motive done in an effort to paint a picture of something other than the truth.

Either way, there are plenty of witnesses, the murder weapon, video surveilliance, evidence collected from the Parental Units house, etc etc etc.

I dont think the Government, Federal or State, are going to have a problem meeting their burden to prove his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Even if the insane defense is used, its irrelevant. Arizona, in my opinion, has a pretty cool insanity defense law. If you are found guilty, and the insanity defense is allowed, then you go to a mental Hospital until such time oyou are sane enough to go to prison.

Its not one or the other, its both.

Loughner was charged with murder in the original criminal complaint. However, he was not charged with murder in his indictment. I don't think they have enough evidence against him for the killing of federal employee and congressional aide Gabriel Zimmerman, despite all the legal gobbledygook they are spewing to explain this.

I wonder how much evidence points to several 'mystery witnesses' who were on scene but haven't been interviewed or identified:

1 -- The man who picked up the murder weapon and who was shoved against a wall by bystander Joe Zamudio.

2 -- A woman at the scene who allegedly found a spent shell casing in her purse a couple of days after the incident, just in time to account for the new figure of 32 shots(30 of which hit victims, and 2 that missed and were recovered in the Safeway store).

3 -- The first person to come up to Congresswoman Gifford at the start of the event, described as "an Army reservist who had wanted to show Giffords his commendation from Iraq." You might remember the suspect was initially described as a veteran of Afghanistan.
www.washingtonpost.com...



/

reply to post by starviego


Respectfully you are not making any sense. An indictment is issued by a Grand Jury. An indictment that is handed down is saying there is enough evidence present that the person the indicment is against could very well have comiited the crime.

An indictment is a formal charge issued by a Grand Jury

A Charge is issued by the Prosecuting Attonreys office, and is based on a Probable Cause statement that is submitted to them by Law Enforcement as a result of their investigation.

They both do the same thing. A Grand Jury is a group of peers (civilians) hearing the information and deciding if the evidence supports the charge. A Charge issued by the PA's office is based on the PC statement submitted by the investigators. The person charged will go before a judge, where the info will be reviewed, and the judge will determine at that point if there is enough evidence present to support the charges issued by the PA's office.

I am not really sure what you are trying to argue. There are witnesses who have gone on record with the police, as well as media as to what occured that day. There is camera footage available, revidence collected from the suspects house.

The Government will have to prove the guy did this, and I dont think that is going to be a problem at all.

Your insitance of no witnesses is not based in fact. Your argument, and I mean this with all due respect, ignores criminal law and FEderal Law. I am not sure what you are trying to argue here.

As a side note - The Feds are more likely to use a Grand Jury, where as local / state law enforcement will use the PA's office. However, both levels can use either or.

Edit - If you are trying to argue that his indictment does not account for the number of people dead, its because of jurisidction and laws. Federal Law will only apply to the deaths of the Congresswoman, her staff aides and the Judge since they were all FEderally employed.

The remaining charges will be State Charges. The statute of limitations to charge for murder is a few years if not longer at both the State and Federal Level. If the State were to charge him while the Feds are doing their thing, it can cause problems with the prosecution.

If you watch how this unfolds, you will most likely see that in the FEderal prosecution, you will find no reference to other people who were killed. It will be solely based on the FEderal Employees. Any information that comes out in the Federal trial could technically be used in the State trial. This is why you are seeing "discpreanices" in charges, witnesses etc.

Is that what you were trying to get at?

Yep I read just today that they are expecting it to be literally years before his trial date. And like I said even if he is found guilty and given the death penalty, you can bet that he won't actually be executed until he is an old man.

reply to post by Blazer


Gonna depend on who is sticking the Needle in his arm, Arizone or the Federal Prison System. If his lawyer can pull off the mental deficiency issue its gonna be life in prison if found guilty.

As for the years, Feds wil get first crack, then the State so the time frame makes sense.

Arraignment was today.

JLL pled not guilty. His attorney Judy Clark advised the court that there will be no defense of competency 'at this time' thereby reserving the opportunity to do so later if she sees fit.
Pretrial motions are set for March 9th, and the Federal Prosecutor stated that more charges would be added in the next 30 days, if they see fit.

source

reply to post by youdidntseeme


Well all of the FEderal Judges in Arizona recused themselves, and with the media attention good luck on finding jury candidates in that area.. I can already see the change of venue requests...

Originally posted by Xcathdra
reply to post by youdidntseeme

 

Well all of the Federal Judges in Arizona recused themselves, and with the media attention good luck on finding jury candidates in that area.. I can already see the change of venue requests...

That is why this case was heard in Phoenix instead of the Tuscon area if I read the article correctly.

There will be no trial. Either Loughner will be found hung in his cell, or more likely he will be back in a year or so just begging to plead guilty. In the depths of the prison/medical industrial complex, no one can hear you scream.

Originally posted by starviego
There will be no trial. Either Loughner will be found hung in his cell, or more likely he will be back in a year or so just begging to plead guilty. In the depths of the prison/medical industrial complex, no one can hear you scream.

Question....

What exactly is the color of the sky in your world?

Originally posted by youdidntseeme
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.

Bingo. Thanks for injecting some sanity into these Loughner threads.

I really don't get you JLL defenders -- you people scare me, frankly. Don't you realize that you're doing the exact same thing as the "media" you claim has already indicted him? You're running off with conclusions based on nothing real, no hard evidence.

When a bunch of people get shot, and the cops show up, and everyone points to some dude and says "He did it!", the cops arrest that guy. I don't know what kind of world you live in in which this is not how things should operate.

Just chill, and wait for the trial. Answering questions is what they're for.

Originally posted by Blazer
Yep I read just today that they are expecting it to be literally years before his trial date. And like I said even if he is found guilty and given the death penalty, you can bet that he won't actually be executed until he is an old man.

I'd take that bet. Unless you think someone in their mid 30s is an old man...