Tuesday, November 19, 2013

The tyrannical bastards just won't let it go. Grisham retrial begins.

Soldier At Center Of Gun Rights Debate Tried For Second Time


Anonymous said...

The best I can determine, Belton is in Texas. It is hard to believe that a Texas jury "hung" on the first trial without acquitting Grisham. It is even harder to believe the prosecutor didn't drop the charges after the first trial. I guess Texas isn't as gun-friendly as one might imagine.

- Old Greybeard

Anonymous said...

Overall Texas is pretty gun friendly, but just like anywhere else there are liberals running around who generally just can't leave well enough alone (and mind their own business). You are correct, this should never have gone to trial.

Anonymous said...

I have a beef with the whole "try him again " bovine excrement. Courts say that there is no decision, meaning a hung jury is meaningless. That's garbage. The jury DID decide! They DECIDED that the law is so ambiguous that they had to employ a sister to outright nullification.

A hung jury is a endictment of the legislative malpractice that leaves the law open to hung juries. It is an INSTRUCTION to the legislature to FIX IT because there can be no conviction (at least by that jury) nor a innocent decision.

Think about it. Under that false premise employed here, a person could be tried a hundred times - all ending in hung juries- and they could still claim no double jeopardy. A man is to be tried ONCE. Period.

So why not just let it go at hung jury? Well, that would be 1) admitting the above and 2) in this case admit that he never shoulda been accosted arrested or tried to start with. They would rather roll the dice on another jury hoping for a Ramos and Campeon outcome. (Fellas, some of us haven't forgotten you anymore than we have Brian Terry or Jaime Zapata).

This dude may well be a knucklehead. Heck he might even be a jerk, but that is irrelevant to the germane point. His rights, and I do mean plural, are being trampled maluciously.

I have to ask my fellow countrymen - to how many must this happen out in view for all to see before the FSA understands along with US who already do, that, YOU could be next?

We must put an end to this madness!
I think I finally understand now how settlers felt when they reached the point where they simply could not watch it happen any longer......

Paul X said...

Your tax dollars at work. If the collectivists had to pay for such pointless persecutions out of their own pockets, there would be a lot fewer of such abuses.

jon said...

this trial wasn't about a gun law, or a gun, but about behavior control.

the jury was not fully informed, of course, so they were not aware that they are free to judge not just the facts of the case, but the law itself. had that been done, they could have set a precedent that might have placed 38.15 under review.

but as there would seem to be nothing wrong with 38.15 as written, it is precious, and that alone is threat enough to encourage the prosecution to give up the fight. instead, because there was nothing to lose, the case was not dismissed. and now a man's reflex behavior can be understood as "criminal negligence."

Anonymous said...

Just curious, in Texas the jury decides the punishment for the offense? And it is illegal to walk along the right-of-way with a rifle? Thanks in advance for any informed replies.