Man charged with murder for defending his business

[Blackfeather7]

Here is link to a little news article from this morning entitled,"Judge in pharmacist shooting case receives threats"

<broken link removed>

Public opinion in Oklahoma is running 75&#37; in favor of the pharmacist. Oklahoma is 78% lily white. As I said earlier Justice is not color blind, at least not in Okie City. So all you Charlie Bronson wannabes don't have to worry. Unless Al Sharpton gets on his high horse and gets down there to lead a big protest and get the Feds involved (it is kind of a civil rights violation to get shot to death while you are unconscious) your hero, the triple threat druggist (Judge, Jury & Executioner) will skate. Hey, he might even get a medal from the legislature.

 

[Trlsmn]

Here is link to a little news article from this morning entitled,"Judge in pharmacist shooting case receives threats"

<broken link removed>

Public opinion in Oklahoma is running 75% in favor of the pharmacist. Oklahoma is 78% lily white. As I said earlier Justice is not color blind, at least not in Okie City. So all you Charlie Bronson wannabes don't have to worry. Unless Al Sharpton gets on his high horse and gets down there to lead a big protest and get the Feds involved (it is kind of a civil rights violation to get shot to death while you are unconscious) your hero, the triple threat druggist (Judge, Jury & Executioner) will skate. Hey, he might even get a medal from the legislature.

Why not just simplify what you are implying with this post and call the people that are willing to wait for all the facts racists?

 

[Blackfeather7]

Why not just simplify what you are implying with this post and call the people that are willing to wait for all the facts racists?

But they aren't willing to wait. Okie public opinion has already acquitted the guy. No black man charged with killing a white has EVER been granted bail in that state.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Tell me where on the video you see the "perp" laying on his back not moving?

Read the DA's report. If you have any understanding of forensics you will be able to understand how they came to their conclusions. The conclusions which were definitive enough to charge the man with Murder I.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Public opinion in Oklahoma is running 75% in favor of the pharmacist. Oklahoma is 78% lily white. As I said earlier Justice is not color blind, at least not in Okie City.

Which is just another element of the situation which indicates how strong the evidence against the shooter must be for the DA to charge this man with Murder I when it is only going to hurt his chances at remaining in public office.

But they aren't willing to wait. Okie public opinion has already acquitted the guy. No black man charged with killing a white has EVER been granted bail in that state.

Actually, I believe he is implying that people who are so much more willing to give this man the benefit of the doubt when they are so quick to condemn persons of color who are charged with a crime racists...and he would be correct.

 

[Trlsmn]

But they aren't willing to wait. Okie public opinion has already acquitted the guy. No black man charged with killing a white has EVER been granted bail in that state.

Yes but you said

your hero, the triple threat druggist (Judge, Jury & Executioner) will skate

That statement is lumping myself and others here in with "they", "Okie". and the State. I form my own opinions thus my reason for calling you on your statement.

 

[Trlsmn]

Which is just another element of the situation which indicates how strong the evidence against the shooter must be for the DA to charge this man with Murder I when it is only going to hurt his chances at remaining in public office.

Never attribute conspiracy to that which can be explained by stupidity. The DA's political motives for public opinion could work in exactly the opposite situation to your assertion too. Again it means nothing.

Actually, I believe he is implying that people who are so much more willing to give this man the benefit of the doubt when they are so quick to condemn persons of color who are charged with a crime racists...and he would be correct.

I know exactly what he meant, he just shouldn't put everyone in a convenient basket, as I've said to you before you are quick to label people into groups, but people are much more complex than you give them credit for.

You have racism, bigotry and sexism in and among every group of people, whites just tend to be pointed out more because they are an easy target. I grew up in North Portland before it became the fashionable Piedmont so I can speak with experience that blacks are just as racist as whites, I dated a black women years ago and we were constantly the target of slurs by jealous black men. Blacks even discriminate between ligh skinned and dark skinned blacks.

Then there is the gay community that discriminates against "fatties" among other things. The list goes on and on but the point is stop using "isms" as a crutch!

Read the DA's report. If you have any understanding of forensics you will be able to understand how they came to their conclusions. The conclusions which were definitive enough to charge the man with Murder I.

And as for your assertion that the DA report proves anything, get real! Put up your money where your mouth is and break it down for us Perry, you are full of self proclaimed experience but I see nothing but your statement to prove anything you've said.

Back it up, break it down if you can!

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Never attribute conspiracy to that which can be explained by stupidity. The DA's political motives for public opinion could work in exactly the opposite situation to your assertion too. Again it means nothing.

No, it means everything. Public opinion in this case was already becoming very apparent before the shooter was charged. Only a foolhardy or self deluded person could pretend that the relevant circumstances of an event are somehow "unimportant" because they do not support their own opinions.

I know exactly what he meant, he just shouldn't put everyone in a convenient basket, as I've said to you before you are quick to label people into groups, but people are much more complex than you give them credit for.

And so many of these people try to hide their own hatred and fears behind terms such as "complex." Human nature is actually pretty simple. Some people just like to feel that their own inadequacies are somehow justifiable through muddling of the situation.

 

[Blackfeather7]

Yes but you said

That statement is lumping myself and others here in with "they", "Okie". and the State. I form my own opinions thus my reason for calling you on your statement.

Didn't mean to do that. Some of the posts, like yours, have been rational, while others have been of a downright neanderthal 'kill 'em all" mentality which goes right along with a racist outlook.

I agree that the first shot was justified and it looks like he could have stopped there. I do support "innocent until proven guilty," however I am basing my opinion of the racism inherent in Oklahoma's society and its legal system on experience. The pharmacist will get his day in court. The kid he appears to have executed will not.

 

[Trlsmn]

No, it means everything. Public opinion in this case was already becoming very apparent before the shooter was charged. Only a foolhardy or self deluded person could pretend that the relevant circumstances of an event are somehow "unimportant" because they do not support their own opinions.

And so many of these people try to hide their own hatred and fears behind terms such as "complex." Human nature is actually pretty simple. Some people just like to feel that their own inadequacies are somehow justifiable through muddling of the situation.

Again no support of your point, shall I assume that you will duck my challenge to use your self proclaimed expertise in so far as the mentioned DA's report?

All the rest of this exchange is irrelevant fluff, lets get to the heart of the matter. You say he must be guilty in of your learned experience, I say you've shown nothing.

The gauntlet is thrown down, accept it or reject it.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Again no support of your point, shall I assume that you will duck my challenge to use your self proclaimed expertise in so far as the mentioned DA's report?

All the rest of this exchange is irrelevant fluff, lets get to the heart of the matter. You say he must be guilty in of your learned experience, I say you've shown nothing.

The gauntlet is thrown down, accept it or reject it.

What do you mean "no support for my point"? All I did was state facts. The evidence of the case is strong enough that the DA chose to go against public opinion and pursue charges. Are you somehow living in a different world than the rest of us...because that is what is happening in this one. The DA himself has made similar statements in his interviews.

FYI, just because you say no one has offered support for their statements does not make it so. It might not be support you wanted to hear, but I guess that would fall under the same line of thinking that made you state earlier that the facts of the specific situation were somehow irrelevant to the situation.

 

[Trlsmn]

Didn't mean to do that. Some of the posts, like yours, have been rational, while others have been of a downright neanderthal 'kill 'em all" mentality which goes right along with a racist outlook.

I agree that the first shot was justified and it looks like he could have stopped there. I do support "innocent until proven guilty," however I am basing my opinion of the racism inherent in Oklahoma's society and its legal system on experience. The pharmacist will get his day in court. The kid he appears to have executed will not.

Thanks and I agree kill'em all is no solution. And the kid may have been executed, but without seeing the rest of the tape I see room for many contributing factor.

I feel when people (in general) make blank statements that something is a fact they should at a minimum present said facts and be prepared to defend them with provable evidence not Conjecture.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Thanks and I agree kill'em all is no solution. And the kid may have been executed, but without seeing the rest of the tape I see room for many contributing factor.

I feel when people (in general) make blank statements that something is a fact they should at a minimum present said facts and be prepared to defend them with provable evidence not Conjecture.

You should go over to TFL and read the thread there. Many people have weighed in with professional opinions of the video tape. Not many people are making "blanket statements." Analyzing evidence is not "conjecture" by any means.

Just for the record, what "contributing factors" do to attribute to this tape that would counter the evidence put forth by the DA's office and the visible evidence on the tape? Just saying "there has to be another angle" does not have much weight unless you can provide information that would support such a claim.

 

[Trlsmn]

What do you mean "no support for my point"? All I did was state facts. The evidence of the case is strong enough that the DA chose to go against public opinion and pursue charges. Are you somehow living in a different world than the rest of us...because that is what is happening in this one. The DA himself has made similar statements in his interviews.

FYI, just because you say no one has offered support for their statements does not make it so. It might not be support you wanted to hear, but I guess that would fall under the same line of thinking that made you state earlier that the facts of the specific situation were somehow irrelevant to the situation.

Point it out because I see nothing but Conjecture. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjecture

At a minimum I would have posted the DA's report, aka your evidence

I'm not real sure you grasp the difference between Fact and Conjecture.

Conjecture:
To indicate a proposition which is presumed to be real, true, or genuine, mostly based on inconclusive grounds, in contrast with a hypothesis, which is a testable statement based on accepted grounds.

Fact:
A fact is a pragmatic truth, a statement that can, at least in theory, be checked and either confirmed or denied. Facts are often contrasted with opinions and beliefs, statements which are held to be true, but are not amenable to pragmatic confirmation or denial

 

[Trlsmn]

You should go over to TFL and read the thread there. Many people have weighed in with professional opinions of the video tape. Not many people are making "blanket statements." Analyzing evidence is not "conjecture" by any means.

Just for the record, what "contributing factors" do to attribute to this tape that would counter the evidence put forth by the DA's office and the visible evidence on the tape? Just saying "there has to be another angle" does not have much weight unless you can provide information that would support such a claim.

This statement leads me to believe you haven't even seen nor could you produce said DA's report? ( but that is just conjecture on my part )

If I'm wrong so be it, but post the report to prove I'm wrong please.

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Point it out because I see nothing but Conjecture. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conjecture

At a minimum I would have posted the DA's report, aka your evidence

I'm not real sure you grasp the difference between Fact and Conjecture.

Conjecture:
To indicate a proposition which is presumed to be real, true, or genuine, mostly based on inconclusive grounds, in contrast with a hypothesis, which is a testable statement based on accepted grounds.

Fact:
A fact is a pragmatic truth, a statement that can, at least in theory, be checked and either confirmed or denied. Facts are often contrasted with opinions and beliefs, statements which are held to be true, but are not amenable to pragmatic confirmation or denial

Here is the problem. You seem to not be understanding the word conjecture. The DA is the one that both pursued the course of action and explained why he pursued that course. That is not conjecture by any definition of the word. Examining evidence and making conclusions is not conjecture. You are not comprehending the difference.

Maybe you are failing to actually go read his statement or the report...or even watch the tape. Maybe if you do not personally see the evidence you can somehow feel justified in calling it "conjecture."

This statement leads me to believe you haven't even seen nor could you produce said DA's report?

Statements have been made public record. I am not going to spoon feed them to you. I will not play your "it does not exist if you cannot spoon feed it to me and I am keeping my lips pursed tight" game.

I already asked twice what specific information do you have to counter the information put forth so far. Do I need to ask again?

 

[Trlsmn]

Here is the problem. You seem to not be understanding the word conjecture. The DA is the one that both pursued the course of action and explained why he pursued that course. That is not conjecture by any definition of the word. Examining evidence and making conclusions is not conjecture. You are not comprehending the difference.

Quit with the side tracking and post the report that you base your argument on.

 

[Trlsmn]

Here is the problem. You seem to not be understanding the word conjecture. The DA is the one that both pursued the course of action and explained why he pursued that course. That is not conjecture by any definition of the word. Examining evidence and making conclusions is not conjecture. You are not comprehending the difference.

Maybe you are failing to actually go read his statement or the report...or even watch the tape. Maybe if you do not personally see the evidence you can somehow feel justified in calling it "conjecture."

Statements have been made public record. I am not going to spoon feed them to you. I will not play your "it does not exist if you cannot spoon feed it to me and I am keeping my lips pursed tight" game.

Quit changing your posts, make a new post so that this is a linear discussion.

Since when is proving your statement spoon feeding? Who but you would prove your own point?

At minimum link to said public record or is that spoon feeding too

 

[PlayboyPenguin]

Two whole posts to continue the old "if I do not see it it does not exist" game.

How about you actually do some research then post an educated interpretation? As I said before, all the information can be easily found in one spot in the thread running on TFL.

Do I need to ask what the "contributing factors" that you feel could strongly effect the appearance of what is happening on the video tape are again? Should I also ask why the DA would pursue an unpopular case without hard evidence? Should I ask how you feel about the fact that the evidence so far suggests that the shooters story is full of lies? Should I ask why you feel so strongly that there is another side to this story than the one pretty clearly visible on the tape?

 

[Trlsmn]

Statements have been made public record. I am not going to spoon feed them to you. I will not play your "it does not exist if you cannot spoon feed it to me and I am keeping my lips pursed tight" game.

I already asked twice what specific information do you have to counter the information put forth so far. Do I need to ask again?

You put forth no information and your post even makes the statement that you refuse to put forth the information so how would I refute that which does not exist? Are you on medication?