Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Terry Thompson Trial

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Effing witch hunt.

    Comment


      #17
      Who’s terry Thompson

      Comment


        #18
        So, from what I understand, the dead guy was legally drunk times 2 or 3, had gotten into a fight inside the restaurant, was outside and peeing , the defendant was there with his wife and children, called out the dead guy for peeing in front of his family.

        Dead guy proceeds to slug the defendant in the face, defendant tackles dead guy and puts him in a choke hold, waiting for the police to arrive.

        Dead guy struggles, eventually dies.

        The DA charges defendant with murder, which it clearly wasn’t.

        Jury hung 11-1 for acquittal on murder charge, 10-2 on manslaughter, 8-4 on negligent homicide.

        Mistrial, and the liberal DA Office is going to prosecute the defendant again.

        Am I forgetting anything?

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by Starman View Post
          So, from what I understand, the dead guy was legally drunk times 2 or 3, had gotten into a fight inside the restaurant, was outside and peeing , the defendant was there with his wife and children, called out the dead guy for peeing in front of his family.



          Dead guy proceeds to slug the defendant in the face, defendant tackles dead guy and puts him in a choke hold, waiting for the police to arrive.



          Dead guy struggles, eventually dies.



          The DA charges defendant with murder, which it clearly wasn’t.



          Jury hung 11-1 for acquittal on murder charge, 10-2 on manslaughter, 8-4 on negligent homicide.



          Mistrial, and the liberal DA Office is going to prosecute the defendant again.



          Am I forgetting anything?


          To be honest walking away is the best answer I have. Drunks are drunks and I have been around a bunch. Calling out people is asking for trouble and he found it.


          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

          Comment


            #20
            Lots of people get drunk and or high and do stupid stuff. It’s one thing if the stupid actions are endangering the lives of others but to urinate in public ... Does that warrant a death penalty for them?? SMH if anyone believes so. Don’t know all the circumstances or facts so take my opinion for what it is: if you take a persons life and charges are appropriate than a trial should follow; just my .02.
            Last edited by Pedernal; 06-26-2018, 12:32 AM.

            Comment


              #21
              Bet he wishes he would have just called the law then turned and walked away. Not murder. Involuntary manslaughter-probably.

              Comment


                #22
                Originally posted by Starman View Post
                So, from what I understand, the dead guy was legally drunk times 2 or 3, had gotten into a fight inside the restaurant, was outside and peeing , the defendant was there with his wife and children, called out the dead guy for peeing in front of his family.

                Dead guy proceeds to slug the defendant in the face, defendant tackles dead guy and puts him in a choke hold, waiting for the police to arrive.

                Dead guy struggles, eventually dies.

                The DA charges defendant with murder, which it clearly wasn’t.

                Jury hung 11-1 for acquittal on murder charge, 10-2 on manslaughter, 8-4 on negligent homicide.

                Mistrial, and the liberal DA Office is going to prosecute the defendant again.

                Am I forgetting anything?
                Terry should have just shot the drunk. Stupid drunk continued to struggle because he stopped breathing from the choke hold Terry had on him. When someone is choking you, just remain calm and go out......should only take less than a minute. DA overcharged this innocent bystander.

                Comment


                  #23
                  it sure as hell wasn't self defense. this terry guy wasn't applying the choke correctly. a blood choke would have made him pass out. this guy air choked him to death. regardless, he took another mans life for be drunk. who elected him judge and jury.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by Pedernal View Post
                    Lots of people get drunk and or high and do stupid stuff. It’s one thing if the stupid actions are endangering the lives of others but to urinate in public ... Does that warrant a death penalty for them?? SMH if anyone believes so. Don’t know all the circumstances or facts so take my opinion for what it is: if you take a persons life and charges are appropriate than a trial should follow; just my .02.
                    I get what you're saying. And no, being drunk and stupid does NOT warrant the death penalty. I just don't believe there was any intent to kill him, or probably to hurt him even.

                    The guy was peeing in front of some women and kids, and got called out on it. I can see anybody getting mad at a drunk for that and saying something especially if their wife or little kids were there. Then the drunk swung at him, and they ended up on the ground with the victim being held down.

                    The reason I say I don't think he even intended to hurt him, is because all he appears to be doing is holding/controlling him. He's not striking or anything else, even though he was in the position where he could have roughed this dude up pretty good. I think he was just a big dude and ended up killing the guy on accident. So criminally negligent homicide at the most...no way it's straight up murder.

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Without attending the trial we only hear what the news media wants us to hear and from some of the comments on here some heard different news than others. Regardless, unless the attorneys agreed to defend him pro bono he is probably financially ruined. A second trial only digs a deeper hole. The lesson for all is it’s better to walk away unless someone is at risk of serious bodily harm.

                      Comment


                        #26
                        Originally posted by Quackerbox View Post
                        Not exactly.

                        The jury had one or two that couldn't get with the program of the rest. I mean at least one juror thinkss he's guilty of murder???!!!
                        Could be the other way around too.

                        Comment


                          #27
                          Originally posted by Black Ice View Post
                          To be honest walking away is the best answer I have. Drunks are drunks and I have been around a bunch. Calling out people is asking for trouble and he found it.


                          Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
                          That's precisely how Spiderman's uncle got killed.

                          Comment


                            #28
                            Originally posted by 6.5 shooter View Post
                            Could be the other way around too.
                            Except it wasnt.....

                            " Courtney, Thompson's attorney, said the jury voted 11-1 not guilty on murder, 10-2 not guilty on manslaughter and 8-4 not guilty on criminally negligent homicide. He said all 12 jurors agreed that self-defense law applied but two jurors could not acquit Thompson"

                            Comment


                              #29
                              Murder has to have intent. Regardless of whether Thompson should or shouldn't have got involved, it wasn't murder IMO. Should he have left it alone? Yes. Do I care about a dead drunk? No. The fact is the prosecution overcharged and got a hung jury, so will just tee it up again until they get the verdict they want. Add in all the media hyperbole and you get justice, the american way.

                              Comment


                                #30
                                Originally posted by CRM_95 View Post
                                I get what you're saying. And no, being drunk and stupid does NOT warrant the death penalty. I just don't believe there was any intent to kill him, or probably to hurt him even.

                                The guy was peeing in front of some women and kids, and got called out on it. I can see anybody getting mad at a drunk for that and saying something especially if their wife or little kids were there. Then the drunk swung at him, and they ended up on the ground with the victim being held down.

                                The reason I say I don't think he even intended to hurt him, is because all he appears to be doing is holding/controlling him. He's not striking or anything else, even though he was in the position where he could have roughed this dude up pretty good. I think he was just a big dude and ended up killing the guy on accident. So criminally negligent homicide at the most...no way it's straight up murder.
                                Yep. Nowhere in the video I have seen does it look like he was trying to kill him. He was trying to subdue him. The way I see it if someone is exposing themselves to children he needs to be stopped. The guy basically brought his own death to himself. I have no sympathy for him.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X