I thought coroners only determined the cause of death, not the legality of the death. Natural causes, accident, suicide maybe only self inflicted, and homicide. Not all homicides are unlawful.
Certainly, the asswipe MAGA father, will turn into a born again fucknut Christian Nationalist. The Texas Oblast continues to shit on itself through the courts.
Should have prosecuted it as an abortion.
Fascism is alive and well in Texass.
Being Pro-life is about having variety of people to kill. Make sense. The fact that they believe in Jesus or Allah tells you a lot about religion, who believe in that nonsense and why.
I’ll never understand the appeal and hold Trump has on the minds of weak men who worship him. This man killed his own daughter is insane.
Decades of lies and crumbling control over their material lives and social status.
Imagine you were abused by most of your adults in your life. They would hit you, demean you, restrict what you ate, who you could love, what you could say, and also expect that you must, at risk of your own life, become “a man” too. You must work your life away to achieve something great, you must provide for your family, you must create a legacy or you actually deserved that abuse you suffered from. Now every year you get poorer no matter how much you work. You see your family less day after day as they get sucked into a life of constant work. You can’t be sad though that’s unmanly. It can’t be someone who is “succesfuls” fault because you are “the man” the master of the universe, just like the rich and powerful or else you are a loser that deserves abuse and ridicule.
So you watch the news, your civic duty, and they tell you that people out there want to make you less then nothing. They want to strip being man of prestige (and with that do you really have anything). They want to strip hard work of its value (and if everyone just got what they needed what was those decades of abuse for?)! But you know you wouldnt just be nothing then, youd be less then that. You would be a loser, a life spent as a joke, and worthless.
Trump, like you, is a strong successful man. You and him can fight together to stop the woke feminazis from destroying your family. Stop the immigrants from invading your home and making you poor and insignificant. He’s not perfect sure, but he’s fighting for you, the only part of you that matters, the only part you know you still have left.
Even better your new allies give you something else, a miracle tonic for the parts of you you ignore and ache. Enemies and the constant reassurance that everything, and I mean everything is their fault. You, like a man ought to, can fight a tangible threat and be a warrior. You just have to tell your self “they are lying to manipulating everyone else”. When your wife threatens your leadership role as the man? Thats the enemies’ lies. When HR threaten your lively hood? The enemy. When you children avoid you? The enemy.
You don’t have to reccon with anything. You’re not abuse. They’re soft. Your parents were harder on you, and look at you. Not just a man. A warrior. Willing to sacrifice everything, for not just your family, or country, but for civilization maybe even part of holy war on the side of supreme good!
It’s thought terminating. Decades of lies and abuse to justify decades of being and commiting abuse. Yes they need therapy. They need to have a space to actually learn to see themselves as humans worthy of love and a part of a great web of connections with people that both can love them and they themselves deserve love as well. They also need real tangible material improvement. You might be able to therapy people out of status demands like big house, boat, big truck, and those are huge costs on the average American household, but so is healthcare, food, and training to stay employable (which we call education in the states).
Sorry for the rant.
Human psychology and propaganda. It works on smart people too.
People keep saying that, but 1) having a degree is not a sign of someone’s general intelligence, not even close, and 2) it absolutely has a greater effect the dumber you are.
Intelligence is curiosity and being able to have a greater degree of nuance in your thinking. It’s being self-aware, and about being able to understand transferable properties. A LOT of people, regardless of education, struggle deeply with those concepts.
Making the case for gun control whilst trying to protect the 2nd amendment, the irony is overwhelming
Literally sharia law honor killings.
We have lost texas
They don’t see sharia law as evil or unjust, they see it as competition to their own authoritarianism. Right idea, wrong religion (barely lol)
You give them way too much credit. Most of them don’t know what Sharia Law actually is.
I don’t think that’s necessarily the case. This is also just as well the end result of doublespeak.
Honor killing is not part of Sharia. It belongs to tribalistic culture and societies.
Literally a drunk and completely incompetent gun owner. He should be punished and made an example of. Your statement makes this sound completely intentional. The court appears to believe the claim that her death was accidental. I don’t doubt that he had no intentions of killing his daughter.
This should be a textbook example for gun licensing and requirements of safe storage. This man’s negligence cost him his daughter and the court decided this was enough. I don’t think the court went far enough and I think this should be the basis for further legislation, but let’s not turn this case into a bogeyman about honor killings.
The court appears to believe the claim that her death was accidental. I don’t doubt that he had no intentions of killing his daughter.
If you don’t have inside knowledge on the case, “not having doubt” on either intentions or no intentions is an incredibly moronic take.
Also, the job of a court of law is to establish innocence or guilt (and the degree thereof). This grand jury failing to indict is that grand jury refusing to do its duty to the people. While Germany is also going to shits, I am kinda glad that for now, our country is civilised enough to not have juries. Although we have the next worst thing, which is laypeople judges, for some cases.
Ya when people say Dems have a chance of winning Texas. Call that person a moron and go on with your day
Like nearly all the US, the cities are heavily blue and the rural parts are heavily red. The only difference between blue states and red states is which side of the halfway line it’s tipped towards. And nearly every state is close to the halfway mark—including Texas.
The only difference between blue states and red states is which side of the halfway line it’s tipped towards.
not for any longer. trump has won the right to throw out any mail-in ballot he wants.
Political scientists estimate there are about 8 million consistently-Democratic voters in Texas and 6 million consistently-Republican voters. Out of a population of 30 million where everyone else flip flops and/or doesn’t vote.
The only reason the Republicans ever win in Texas is due to voter suppression/gerrymandering.
This is consistent with national estimates that there are roughly 1.5x as many Democrats as Republicans in the USA.
The only reason the Republicans ever win anywhere is due to voter suppression/gerrymandering.
That’s a funny way of saying murdered…
I’m here about the title.
The local jury
Grand jury.
He was immediately released
Yes, that’s how this works.
Now, bear in mind, I’m only here about the part of this from the title that I quoted. For anyone outraged by that part, no.
The way this works:
-
A matter is put before a grand jury. Only evidence submitted is by the prosecutor. Nothing from the defense. The standard of evidence is “probable cause”, which is a very very low standard. Basically, unless someone screwed something up massively, there will almost always be sufficient probable cause for a case to go forward.
-
If probable cause is indeed found, the case will proceed. It may eventually have a trial by jury, where both sides present their case and a jury decides - for civil matters the standard is preponderance of the evidence (i.e. majority of evidence seems guilty or not), for criminal it’s beyond a reasonable doubt, meaning it seems pretty clear and any evidence that is against seems unlikely.
So speaking generally, when indictment in front of a grand jury fails, it means one of something like these happened:
- Fundamental evidence failed “probable cause”. For example, say it resulted from a traffic stop, but it was found that the traffic stop had no legal justification. Because of “fruit of the forbidden tree”, it might be entirely thrown out
- Perhaps the prosecutors failed to get their shit together on evidence
- Perhaps, as is theorized by some in this case, the prosecutor felt they had to present the case, but threw it on purpose, sort of like a prosecutorial nullification, if you will
So again, not talking about the case (I’ve discussed/debated in other threads - this is not a new story), just the parts of the title that make it clear OP doesn’t understand the difference between a jury and a grand jury. :)
do also note, that if the prosecution doesn’t like the results of the grand jury he can just keep doing it over until he gets the answer he wants… unless he is actually not trying for a conviction.
Originating in England during the Middle Ages, modern examples include grand juries in the United States, and to a lesser extent, Liberia. wp
Sounds like a modern and reasonable institution.
Would you prefer the case go to trial before it’s established if there’s sufficient probable cause? Or if only the state gets to make that determination?
Given that grand jury indictment rates are like >90%, what’s actually being achieved here?
+/-10% of cases with bullshit evidence aren’t going to trial
Well, look at the article…
That’s probably a pretty good rate considering probable cause is the bar.
Also given there’s no defence, I should hope they could almost always win a completely uncontested review of evidence.
Yes
Ok bootlicker
Almost every other jurisdiction in functional democracies do not have grand juries and don’t plan to implement such a mechanism, nor are they implored to do so, are they all bootlickers?
Yes. Yes they are. Anyone who wants more government control of the justice system, and less accountability to the people, is a bootlicker. People in those countries are expected to trust that the state did it’s due diligence before putting someone on trial, and as the right sweeps these countries they’re going to learn why that’s a mistake.
one of the faces of American exceptionalism
-
honor killings…
I prefer the Japanese style ones, where you know… it’s yourself.
Imo, if it was your gun, unless it was literally stolen from a locked gun safe, anyone who dies by it is automatically your fault.
Doesn’t really matter what the circumstances were. If anyone is even in a position to be injured or killed by your weapon, it usually means you acted negligently in either handling or storing the weapon.
Texas has some insane defend your land laws.
Look them up
while this is true, it has absolutely no bearing on this murder.
Look them up
How?
As I say, the love they have for even their own children is entirely conditional. They will make you the enemy and kill you at a moment’s notice. If you have MAGA in your family, kick them out of what they can come to. Ostracization from family and society is the only nice thing we can do against them.
So there’s just no one in that town who owns a gun and has a sense of justice? Really?
Would be a shame if someone shot him for his political beliefs. A damn shame.
Cue the “somebody should [act of violence] [non- rightwing figure]” stochastic chuds’ immediate screaming about the violent left.
Every accusation from fashoids is a confession.
