shooting two blocks from where i was working man claimed self defense - Page 4
Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234
Results 31 to 35 of 35

Thread: shooting two blocks from where i was working man claimed self defense

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post



    Those are just a couple of facts one could find if they looked.

    While you have to look pretty hard for it, there is a lot more real information available on the event, including the unedited video up to the same point that the edited version stops at. You're just flat out wrong that "more than half of the altercation occurred off video." I'd post it in reply to this wall of drivel, but the wall proves that you have no interest in the truth.

    Pay no attention to the man behind the wall of conjecture. He doesn't care about the truth, doesn't care if a man using justifiable deadly force gets sent to prison, doesn't care if the law is followed or not, just throw that "dark colored fellow" in prison and fuggettaboudit. Imbelievable!

    There is clear and irrefutable proof that the cops lied to the press about the sequence of events to make Benn appear as the aggressor, absent the video of course.

    Blues

    OK counselor (Bluesstringer); I am supposed to spend hours looking for evidence on the internet that may or may not exist and if it did wouldn't hold water because it would be considered hear say in this court room (forum) today. My opinions were based on the video that was posted on this open forum and that is all the evidence I have viewed.

    Counselor, what whiteness statements are you referring to? If you have the so called whiteness statements (Bluesstringer) counselor could you kindly produce them as exhibits to the court (forum) here today so I could review them? Also it seems you have the entire unedited video in your possession or somehow you have viewed it . This is notice that I ask for this video as part of discovery for this forum arguments and present it as evidence so as I can view it(I doubt you have it).

    Counselor, you stated that you have clear and irrefutable proof that the law enforcement committed perjury. Well if that was true than why were the police officers or detectives not charged and arrested for perjury? So now you are leading this court (forum) to believe that you have in your possession the entire unedited video or have viewed it in its entirety, that you heard or read the transcript of the court hearing of the one whiteness, that you have clear and irrefutable proof that law enforcement officers lied and committed perjury in court and then you still stand by your conclusion that this incident was 100 % a clear case of the use of deadly force. Counselor you have not provided any evidence to prove your arguments and we are all waiting.

    My last post I did not make any judgments or conclusions with the little evidence that I saw on the video that was posted on this forum. I stated what my opinions were and I only spoke about the little portions of the video that I saw on this forum. But you counselor (Bluesstringer), you fabricate evidence, make us believe that you have viewed the unedited video, read the entire court transcripts, have evidence that law enforcement officers committed perjury and lied on reports and then you try to lead us all think your argument stands up. Now I question your candor counselor and I charge you with perjury. Please try again.


    All I want from you at this point is for you to go on the record and state that this case, from the evidence that we have all seen on this forum, that the use of deadly force was not clear or 100%. I can honestly say that the evidence that was seen by us all on this forum does not prove 100% either way and I am man enough to say that. Now it is your turn Mr. Bluesstringer I ask you this, "With the evidence that was presented on this open forum, do you still believe that this was an occasion that the defendant was clearly legally permitted to use deadly force and if you do can you please provide your reasons as why you came to this conclusion and base this with evidence, real evidence."

    If you do have the web site that has the full video, please give it to all of us, I would love to see it in its entirety.


    Did you even read my last post in its entirety Bluesstringer? Do you have an actual intellectual interpretation or feed back on my opinions or are you just going to continue to spill 'poop' from your mouth. Here it is again and try reading it this time.

    Quote Originally Posted by walknotinfear View Post
    Ok, here we go.

    Opinions, we all have them. The video clearly shows the later seconds of the altercation and none of us knows what happens when they are off camera to include the actions of the defendant. No one knows who drew their weapon first or who fired the first round so you can drop that argument because there is no video of that nor is there even a scintilla of evidence of exactly what transpired due to the lack of video of the incident.

    Without audio none of us can come to a conclusion of who began the altercation but it is clear in the video that the ex cop may of been the aggressor by using pepper spray but once again none of us can prove beyond a reasonable doubt what was being said with the lack of audio. A good legal argument if I was legal counsel for the state would be that the defendant made verbal threats, that he stated he had a weapon and was going to kill him. But once again with no audio I could spin this any way I wanted to due to the fact no one knows what was said between the two involved. So with no audio who is to say exactly what was said. Maybe the defendant stated "If you don't get out of line I will pull out my 9 and bust a cap!" But no audio so this argument can go either way.

    The portion of the video that I see that was an issue for me and I am sure the state used it, was the portion of the video when the ex cop was running away from a threat and the defendant was pursuing him while pointing a handgun at him (I did not say shooting). This portion of the video looks like the defendant is the aggressor and was upset because of the earlier pepper spray. But this is all up to the interpretation of each jury member. This portion of the video shows clearly a manslaughter charge (involuntary or voluntary) or assault with a deadly weapon but this is just my opinion and I am not the state prosecutor.
    The state legal counsel has the burden of proof and it is there responsibility to present the case in a way that will prove to the jury that a crime was committed beyond a reasonable doubt and it seems the state failed. But not a single attorney (ESQ) likes to lose a case and I am sure they will retry the case. Just because there was a hung jury means nothing. So the defendant will more than likely be charged again and have to go through another trial.

    So the question that was thrown to me was what was my legal arguments of the limited evidence produced to me by the press. I do not have access to any of the legal briefs, any of the evidence to include the entire video, whiteness statements, etc. and it would be hard for me to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that a murder charge or conviction was warranted. But I do feel the state had probable cause to arrest the defendant and charge him with manslaughter.







    And you believe a defendants story, that he is telling the truth, Really? Any one in the defendants place would say anything to get out of a murder charge. You said it correct, Benn's story, it was a story alright.

    The video is not entirely full nor was there audio. BlueStringer once again states that this was a clear case of justifiable use of deadly force. But there was more than enough evidence and probable cause to charge the defendant, period. Bluestringer is incorrect once again with his legal argument by stating that the limited video shows that the use of deadly force was authorized. Well I am glad you are not a lawyer because any moron can clearly see that more than half of the altercation occurred off video and the lack of audio can not show any of us what transpired that day. We only can see a portion of the altercation and no way shape or form does this video show a 100% clear case of the use of deadly force. So try again Bluesstringer, can you explain to the court how this partial video with no audio clearly shows that the use of deadly force was warranted, and keep in mind that there is not even a scintilla of evidance on the partial video or any audio evidence on who produced a weapon first or who fired first. Your up sir Bluesstringer.




    "Never stop training"

    http://youtu.be/5bBeihH1mZc

  2.   
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by BluesStringer View Post
    I'm sorry, I can't let this Freudian slip go without comment:



    Believe me, all we've heard from you is whiteness statements!
    And all I have read from your replies are lies or your so called assumptions based only on your opinions and than you base all your opinions on facts that you either make up in your head or you fabricate them to make your self feel better. Than you base your conclusions on what you have seen on the news or read on the internet, really? You truly need to take your time before you make a comment like this. I never stated untruths about this subject and what is the above statement actually supposed to mean? If I had to interpret the above statement; you are calling me out again? Please explain any further idiotic comments with your reason before you shot from your mouth because I sure would appreciate it.

  4. #33
    update:
    Charges dropped against man accused in fatal Norfolk Rite-Aid shooting | WTKR.com

    Norfolk, Va. – Charges against Bernell Benn, the man accused of killing another man inside a Norfolk Rite-Aid in 2012, were dropped in court on Wednesday.

    Benn was originally charged with second-degree murder, but that charge was reduced to voluntary manslaughter in 2013. He was also charged with discharging a firearm in a public building.

    The Norfolk Commonwealth’s Attorney’s statement said they decided to drop the charges after two jury trials held in the case ended in mistrials.

    In each trial, the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Both juries indicated that the majority of jurors wanted to convict, but a unanimous decision is required.

    The Commonwealth’s Attorney’s office decided that a third trial would likely not produce a different outcome.

  5. #34
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Republic of Dead Cell Holler, Occupied Territories of AL, former USA
    Posts
    7,819
    Quote Originally Posted by recithree View Post
    update:
    Charges dropped against man accused in fatal Norfolk Rite-Aid shooting | WTKR.com

    Norfolk, Va. – Charges against Bernell Benn, the man accused of killing another man inside a Norfolk Rite-Aid in 2012, were dropped in court on Wednesday.

    Benn was originally charged with second-degree murder, but that charge was reduced to voluntary manslaughter in 2013. He was also charged with discharging a firearm in a public building.

    The Norfolk Commonwealth’s Attorney’s statement said they decided to drop the charges after two jury trials held in the case ended in mistrials.

    In each trial, the jury was unable to reach a unanimous verdict. Both juries indicated that the majority of jurors wanted to convict, but a unanimous decision is required.

    The Commonwealth’s Attorney’s office decided that a third trial would likely not produce a different outcome.
    Well, that's good, but the guy should've never gone through one trial, much less two. It's scary to think that two juries had a majority voting him guilty of something. The full video totally exonerated him as far as I'm concerned. Wonder how much his defense cost him? He's probably ruined for life now anyway, just not put away for life like they wanted to railroad him into.

    Thanks for the update. Not exactly what I'd call "justice," but at least Mr. Benn may be getting close to some semblance of closure.

    Blues
    No one has ever heard me say that I "hate" cops, because I don't. This is why I will never trust one again though: You just never know...

  6. Gezz, people are killing each other over spots in line and it isn't even black friday

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 234

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast