U.S. Army sergeant convicted of murder in protester's shooting death in Texas

From the point in my post that I include the notice to Alwayssa (@Alwa...), I begin addressing my comments to her.

 

agree, said the same in the Kyle case - some people going to be fearful when people like that around or come near them - just like the Uber driver

it's not a smart move

 

Given that its a homicide case, I figured the lead investigator would necessarily be police.

Given that the DA prohibited the evidense from the grand jury in order to push an indictment, I see no reason not to suspect it was also done in the trial.

If the pardon goes through, its likely to be a long time (if ever) before we find out either way.

 

both this protestor and the Uber driver probably thought they were good guys with a gun

my point is this is the risk of carrying a gun in one's hands in public

 

A jury from Austin convicted him - Austin is an island of left-wing insanity in a sea of common sense folks who believe self-defense is a God given right.

 

I was home with covid during this incident. From what I heard, the defendant's car was surrounded by protesters banging on the car and the AR guy approached the driver's window with his AR pointed at the driver's door. AR bullets will go right through a car door. That AR was aimed at him and the guy had a right to defend himself.

 

Like the Sussman trial in D.C.

I listened to an attorney podcast read thru the entire transcript - the guy was straight-up guilty, no doubt about it.

But because it's a D.C. jury - every one a Democrat, and the judge a Democrat, it took 46 seconds of deliberation to acquit.

3 jurors actually said they didn't think they could be impartial because they were Democrats, but the judge let them on the jury anyway, lol!! The Judge was pals with Sussman and their kids were on the same rowing team...

No way around it - Democrats are fundamentally dishonest people.

 

since he's not carrying a fire extinguisher in those images, those are presumably from after he was attacked the first time and while he was trying to get away from the mob that was chasing him

what point are you trying to make?

 

I had not been saying, that the police would not have had a detective on the case. My point had been that "investigator" is not specific enough a term, to substitute for "police investigator," until you have first used the full description.
Doesn't the prosecutor's office, also have "investigators?" I think that is too general a term to use, and assume your reader takes it that you could only possibly be referring to police.

Since that would be a serious crime, at trial, but is no offense whatsoever, in a Grand Jury proceeding, I think qualifies as a good reason to expect this was not done at trial.

I would also not assume that one could not check up on this, if one were motivated to do so. But as I do not expect it to reveal any smoking gun evidence, I am not motivated to devote the time and effort, to this. If you were fairly sure of the opposite, however...



P.S.-- Why do you spell "evidence," with an "s?" You got me to wondering if that was a British spelling-- it's not, btw.

 

taking an ar-15 type gun out in public can cause issues, a risk you have to weigh

the guy in this article would have been alive today if he had not done so

 

Grand jury is always just what the prosecutor wants to show, did they get all the evidence for the trial?

 

It's a sad state of affairs whatever exactly went down. The guy that got killed if I understand correctly was an Air Force vet and the guy that got convicted was an Army vet, or rather I think he was still AD.

Seems like I remember there being some part to the story, whether true or not I don't know, that the Army dude was driving his car into pedestrians.

 

The answer to your question is in my post and the provided links.

 

Inherently and intrinsically unsafe. Love makes us safe. Guns are unsafe and are force multipliers that in some cases provide superior and necessary strength against someone who intends to harm the bearer. It is not a cut and dry issue for some folks. I’m ok with wiping guns off the face of the planet. Any ideas how to do that?

 

Blimey, now it's troops murdering people, I just thought it was only your cops that did that. I wonder if that soldier had cop training?

 

This was when idiots were protesting to defund the police. They were illegally blocking traffic and surrounding cars when this happened.

 

Yep. It was a bad scene. Still, if the Army dude tried to run them over…

 

OK, I live in Austin.
A very good friend of mine was living in an apartment about two blocks away when this happened.
At the time there was a number of videos of the incident and a video of an interview with the guy that was shot on the internet. Not sure what happened with all of that.
The shooter had made social media posts and texts to a friend expressing his desire to shoot and kill the protesters (premeditation). this was presented at the trial.
No fewer than four eyewitnesses testified at the trial contradicting the shooters claim that the victim had pointed his AK47 at him. They said under oath that Foster did not point his gun at the shooter.
Bottom line is the jury did not believe the defendant.
My take is that two idiots with guns crossed paths and trouble ensued.
Abbott has stated that he will issue a pardon when and if the state board of pardons issues a recommendation.
This is my understanding of the situation.
Hope it helps to clear some of the confusion surrounding this story.

 

Garrett Foster interview.

 

It looks like to me one guys gun saved his life against a threat to his own life.

 

The guy who was killed was an US army vet. What's the evidence that he was a terrorist?

 

A "Soros puke DA"? Man you were once a somewhat reasonable poster. Now, you are becoming more and more unhinged. Maybe, you should get yourself off RW sewer media and social media.

 

His own admission.

 

I was waiting for the Rittenhouse comparison. Yes, carrying around a rifle makes one a target, especially during a period of civil unrest.

 

Well, if all accurate, there is some context that would make any jury stop and ponder and would even make their verdict be sensible. 12 peers with a unanimous opinion much more familiar with the actual details than I or any poster in this thread.