Shooting at Austin protest tonight, 1 dead

[Nivek 16946]

 

22 hours ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Anyone open carrying a long gun is a moron.

And yet you generally vote with them....

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

6 minutes ago, Nivek said:

 

And yet you generally vote with them....

I'm not privy to Mr Foster's voting history.

[AUS-97HORN 11809]

I had a long reply to the last 2 days worth of posts and deleted because you have all made the decision in your heads- whichever way you fall.  So saying anything isnt going to contribute.

The short short end to this is Perry is gonna spend a shitload of money he doesnt have and be broke defending himself.  But, in the end, hes either going to be let go from a hung jury, or not guilty on most counts, with maybe guilty charges on  some lessor charge of discharging a firearm in public .    

Perry will get kicked out of the Army, no matter what, even with a complete not guilty on all counts, hes gonna be discharged with some violation of the UCMJ.  So that is a bit of a punishment.

There is no fucking jury in Texas, even one in Travis County that will ever get 12 people to agree that Perry didnt have at least SOME concern for his life when presented with the situation as its been filmed and shown.      

Both sides were idiots.  Its pretty clear that Perry was in no mood to take shit that night, and Foster was on video telling everyone he wasnt gonna take any shit that night. Well they both fucked around and found out.      

as someone else said, both lives are ruined, one instantly and the other one will most likely have a little jailtime, a less than honorable discharge, and a hell of a time finding a job for the rest of his life.

[fattyflattie 4639]

20 minutes ago, Nivek said:

 

And yet you generally vote with them....

It’s almost as if there is more than one issue to base your choice on. 

[Brisketexan 105161]

2 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

Both sides were idiots.  Its pretty clear that Perry was in no mood to take shit that night, and Foster was on video telling everyone he wasnt gonna take any shit that night. Well they both fucked around and found out.      

as someone else said, both lives are ruined, one instantly and the other one will most likely have a little jailtime, a less than honorable discharge, and a hell of a time finding a job for the rest of his life.

This is a pretty fair summation.

When anyone decides to venture out with 1) a firearm and 2) a headstrong "I ain't taking no shit from nobody" attitude (which are both often burdened with the "when you have a hammer, every problem is a nail" mental approach)....the chances of a trigger being pulled go WAY up.  And whenever a trigger is pulled, that is a BAD outcome, which should have been AVOIDED AT ALL REASONABLE COSTS.  The person getting shot fares poorly, and the person pulling the trigger usually does as well (ends up a lot worse off than if he'd kept his powder dry).

Using a gun is never a pure solution.  It's simply a different problem that you've chosen.  Sometimes -- rarely -- it's the better choice, because the gun problem isn't as bad as the alternative.  But so, so often....it's not.

[Wally Pryor 5261]

9 minutes ago, AUS-97HORN said:

I had a long reply to the last 2 days worth of posts and deleted because you have all made the decision in your heads- whichever way you fall.  So saying anything isnt going to contribute.

The short short end to this is Perry is gonna spend a shitload of money he doesnt have and be broke defending himself.  But, in the end, hes either going to be let go from a hung jury, or not guilty on most counts, with maybe guilty charges on  some lessor charge of discharging a firearm in public .    

Perry will get kicked out of the Army, no matter what, even with a complete not guilty on all counts, hes gonna be discharged with some violation of the UCMJ.  So that is a bit of a punishment.

There is no fucking jury in Texas, even one in Travis County that will ever get 12 people to agree that Perry didnt have at least SOME concern for his life when presented with the situation as its been filmed and shown.      

Both sides were idiots.  Its pretty clear that Perry was in no mood to take shit that night, and Foster was on video telling everyone he wasnt gonna take any shit that night. Well they both fucked around and found out.      

as someone else said, both lives are ruined, one instantly and the other one will most likely have a little jailtime, a less than honorable discharge, and a hell of a time finding a job for the rest of his life.

Yes on most all counts, except I doubt Perry will be out-of-pocket on much / any legal fees.    I'm guessing they'll be covered, by someone or some way. 

 

[Homesickhorn 2202]

I have been avoiding this as I think both sides are off.  When he is next to the car he is not directly pointing at the rifle at the driver but has the gun in a ready position which is an aggressive position.  But he is also not pointing at the ground...that is my take.
However, if you think this picture is "the same position he was holding it in the picture next to the vehicle" you need to look again and back off that statement or you have no credibility.  This picture/position and how he approached the vehicle are not remotely similar.

I’ll quote this comment because it’s absolutely true. The posted pic during the incident by the car has him (and his friend, the custom AK-47) in a low-ready position. Absolutely, positively, 100% different than the position in the photo Gourmand posted.
He (probably) walked towards the vehicle in the position in Gourmand’s pic, and when he was able to part the crowd because he was the dude with the firearm, switched to low ready. Again, I will say that I’m not cool with him dying. But a soldier, behind the windshield of a vehicle already being pounded on, sees people moving aside, for a man walking towards him traversing his weapon into low-ready, I’m afraid that all bets are off for AK guy. It’s extremely hard to explain, but there are many on here that know what I’m talking about.
Still shots mean jack shit in this case. Put a go pro on both of their heads and watch it in real time. Then ask yourself what you would’ve done.

[Steel Shank 9428]

8 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

This is a pretty fair summation.

When anyone decides to venture out with 1) a firearm and 2) a headstrong "I ain't taking no shit from nobody" attitude (which are both often burdened with the "when you have a hammer, every problem is a nail" mental approach)....the chances of a trigger being pulled go WAY up.  And whenever a trigger is pulled, that is a BAD outcome, which should have been AVOIDED AT ALL REASONABLE COSTS.  The person getting shot fares poorly, and the person pulling the trigger usually does as well (ends up a lot worse off than if he'd kept his powder dry).

Using a gun is never a pure solution.  It's simply a different problem that you've chosen.  Sometimes -- rarely -- it's the better choice, because the gun problem isn't as bad as the alternative.  But so, so often....it's not.

9.75 on the

proliferation of

punctuation.

[Brisketexan 105161]

12 hours ago, Steel Shank said:

9.75 on the

proliferation of

punctuation.

I love periods more than Tampax does.

[workswithseed 2112]

15 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

I love periods more than Tampax does.

 

[Wally Pryor 5261]

I go Jake Jarmel when it comes to exclamation points. 

[washparkhorn 9939]

Am I misremembering? Wasn't the victim with a friend and helping her to push/control her wheelchair when the criminally accused shot him?  

[Gourmand 7774]

21 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Am I misremembering? Wasn't the victim with a friend and helping her to push/control her wheelchair when the criminally accused shot him?  

Yes, he was with his fiancee who is a paraplegic.

[washparkhorn 9939]

Thanks Gormand. I found this article on her before the shooting. Quad-Amputee due to an infection. 

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/2011/04/01/quadruple-amputee-teen-from-garland-focuses-on-new-life/

[Deej 76842]

11 minutes ago, washparkhorn said:

Thanks Gormand. I found this article on her before the shooting. Quad-Amputee due to an infection. 

https://www.dallasnews.com/news/2011/04/01/quadruple-amputee-teen-from-garland-focuses-on-new-life/

Someone needed to focus on a smoother surface to and from her front door. 

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

Friction between Travis County district attorney, police emerges in Garrett Foster case (msn.com)

from Fugitt Affidavit - alleges "witness tampering"

Prior to the grand jury presentation in this case, I had several conversations with the District Attorney’s Office regarding the presentation of exculpatory evidence related to Daniel Perry. It became clear to me that the District Attorney’s Office did not want to present evidence to the grand jury that would be exculpatory to Daniel Perry and/or to show that witness statements obtained by the family of Garrett Foster and/or their attorneys were inconsistent with prior interviews such “witnesses” gave the police and/or the video of the incident in question. I had also wanted to present previous statements from the Complainant in Count 2 where she never once suggested that Daniel Perry intentionally and knowingly threatened her with imminent bodily injury by driving a motor vehicle in her direction. The District Attorney’s Office also made me remove an animation from Daniel Perry’s driving the night of the incident coordinated with his cell phone records that would have refuted the deadly conduct charge ultimately returned by the grand jury.

On more than one occasion I was directed by the Travis County Attorney’s Office to remove exculpatory information that I had intended to present to the grand jury during my testimony. At that point, I specifically asked if there would be “ramifications” if I did not do so. I was told by Assistant District Attorney Guillermo Gonzalez that he would ask the elected District Attorney, Jose Garza, what would happen if I refused to agree to the limitations I was being ordered to comply with. I was later sent an email simply reaffirming the exculpatory subjects that I was forbidden from mentioning during my testimony. Of my original 158 slide powerpoint presentation, the presentation was reduced to 56 slides with almost all of the exculpatory evidence ordered removed. I felt like I did not have any other options but to comply with their orders.

 

officer 

Austin police detective David Fugitt reaches 50th case | kvue.com

 

 

Edited August 4, 2021 by ChickenSandwich

[Captainant 27682]

4 minutes ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Friction between Travis County district attorney, police emerges in Garrett Foster case (msn.com)

from Fugitt Affidavit - alleges "witness tampering"

Prior to the grand jury presentation in this case, I had several conversations with the District Attorney’s Office regarding the presentation of exculpatory evidence related to Daniel Perry. It became clear to me that the District Attorney’s Office did not want to present evidence to the grand jury that would be exculpatory to Daniel Perry and/or to show that witness statements obtained by the family of Garrett Foster and/or their attorneys were inconsistent with prior interviews such “witnesses” gave the police and/or the video of the incident in question. I had also wanted to present previous statements from the Complainant in Count 2 where she never once suggested that Daniel Perry intentionally and knowingly threatened her with imminent bodily injury by driving a motor vehicle in her direction. The District Attorney’s Office also made me remove an animation from Daniel Perry’s driving the night of the incident coordinated with his cell phone records that would have refuted the deadly conduct charge ultimately returned by the grand jury.

On more than one occasion I was directed by the Travis County Attorney’s Office to remove exculpatory information that I had intended to present to the grand jury during my testimony. At that point, I specifically asked if there would be “ramifications” if I did not do so. I was told by Assistant District Attorney Guillermo Gonzalez that he would ask the elected District Attorney, Jose Garza, what would happen if I refused to agree to the limitations I was being ordered to comply with. I was later sent an email simply reaffirming the exculpatory subjects that I was forbidden from mentioning during my testimony. Of my original 158 slide powerpoint presentation, the presentation was reduced to 56 slides with almost all of the exculpatory evidence ordered removed. I felt like I did not have any other options but to comply with their orders.

 

officer 

Austin police detective David Fugitt reaches 50th case | kvue.com

Whodathunkit that APD may not want a precedent of prosecuting people that endanger and harm protesters. 

Having read the article, you seem to have omitted the other portions explaining that Fugitt's presentation was designed to attack the prosecution and its witnesses, and that the defense is now using the cop's words to play the victim as if they are being unfairly treated. From the article:

Quote

Broden, is seeking an evidence hearing in state District Judge Clifford Brown's courtroom in support of a motion to dismiss Perry's indictment, and prosecutors asked Brown to deny such a hearing. Much of Broden's motion relies on notes from Fugitt's report about what he says prosecutors told him not to say. 

According to the filing, prosecutors asked Fugitt not to share evidence that called statements from several witnesses into question. Those witnesses said Foster did not begin to raise his AK-47 assault rifle toward Perry — a key issue in the case. But, according to Broden's recent filing, the police investigation found they were not in a position to see Foster's actions at the time.

In additional, some of the slides that prosecutors told Fugitt to remove from his PowerPoint presentation pertained to statements that a woman made to police on the aggravated assault charge. According to Fugitt, the woman never suggested that Perry threatened her by driving a vehicle in her direction, as the grand jury concluded. The woman told police that Perry stopped his car so that people would not be run over, the court filing states. 

Fugitt's full report is not publicly available. 

"The system clearly broke down, and that directly led to Sgt. Perry’s indictment," Broden said in a statement.  

In the prosecutors’ response to Broden's filing, they noted that they are not able to counter some of Broden’s allegations because it would cause them to disclose grand jury information. However, Garza said, it is not the job of grand jury witnesses, such as Fugitt, to present all information they think is relevant. 

"Assuming — as defendant has asserted — Det. Fugitt was a witness in the grand jury proceeding, he was called to appear before the grand jury to give testimony and not to present any and all demonstrative exhibits or information that he desired," Garza wrote.

Additionally, Travis County prosecutors have voluntarily authored an order that, if a judge signs it, will grant Perry access to all grand jury transcripts and exhibits.

"The state fully expects the full set of transcripts and exhibits to alleviate any concerns about the fair and balanced nature of the grand jury presentation," Garza said. 

He also said that prosecutors did not coerce Fugitt’s testimony in any way and that Broden has not “presented evidence beyond bare assertions.” 

So IMO - it sounds like the cop is sympathetic to the defendant's charges and wants to stir up waters of grievances of being treated unfairly. Especially considering the ongoing friction between APD and Travis Count DA's office.

[Willfully Horn 8037]

I’m just glad cops go to such lengths to make sure they’re not wrongfully convicting anyone.

[huge 3793]

Dumb it down for me here.  What the hell is going on with the grand jury?

[Hanrahan 1306]

Cop says the DA stacked the deck to get an indictment.  Captain Ant says the cops tried to stack the deck to get a no bill.  The former is knows to happen regularly; never heard of the latter happening.

[ChickenSandwich 9843]

16 minutes ago, Hanrahan said:

Cop says the DA stacked the deck to get an indictment.  Captain Ant says the cops tried to stack the deck to get a no bill.  The former is knows to happen regularly; never heard of the latter happening.

Except for earlier in July when a Jr Prosecutor from his office resigned and filed a complaint saying she was forced to withhold evidence 🤷‍♂️
 

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2021/07/03/travis-county-assistant-prosecutor-quits-over-request-delete-emails/7851593002/
 

Travis County child abuse prosecutor quits over request to delete emails

[Willfully Horn 8037]

1 hour ago, ChickenSandwich said:

Except for earlier in July when a Jr Prosecutor from his office resigned and filed a complaint saying she was forced to withhold evidence 🤷‍♂️
 

https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2021/07/03/travis-county-assistant-prosecutor-quits-over-request-delete-emails/7851593002/
 

Travis County child abuse prosecutor quits over request to delete emails

Remove the word “except” and you have a shining post. Your point doesn’t really contradict Hanrahan’s, but it is still a good point.

[DanRydell 799]

Except for earlier in July when a Jr Prosecutor from his office resigned and filed a complaint saying she was forced to withhold evidence
 
https://www.statesman.com/story/news/2021/07/03/travis-county-assistant-prosecutor-quits-over-request-delete-emails/7851593002/
 

Travis County child abuse prosecutor quits over request to delete emails

And everyone who isn’t a Save Austin Now moron could tell she was some combination of completely full of shit and a complete fucking dumbass.

[TKthunder2 4992]

Trial about to end.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/daniel-perry-murder-trial-almost-over-attorneys-prepare-for-closing-arguments/

[Fondren & Main 6726]

This actually went to trial…wow.  

[Wally Pryor 5261]

Anyone who carries around a long-end assault weapon, in public, is an unbridled buffoon who is opening themselves up to be weeded out of the gene pool.  Doesn’t matter if you're are a MAGA-loving Cro-Magnon or a socialist left leaning pig.  Black, white, green, purple, whatever. Blue, red. Don’t give a shit.  I don’t distinguish when it comes to hatred of radicals of any persuasion and I especially don’t distinguish when it comes to the unbridled idiocy of carrying an AK-47 in public, fucking idiot. Push around a baby stroller, carry around a bag of groceries, hold hands. Do things in public that civil people do. If you feel the need, go ahead and carry your concealed weapon. But not an assault rifle because you’re a machismo-driven Neanderthal that thinks it’s a good way to be to out there and make some sort of wayward statement. It’s fucking dumb. It’s fucking stupid. And it may just get you on a cold slab. 

[Armybrat 40851]

Foster and Rittenhouse - birds of a feather, but on different branches.

[bschoolprof 6265]

So am I reading this correctly (the KXAN article is poorly written) that APD's lead investigator on the case, who now works at the State AG's office, was a key witness called by the  . . . defense?  That seems a bit, um, unusual.  

[Brisketexan 105161]

2 hours ago, Wally Pryor said:

Anyone who carries around a long-end assault weapon, in public, is an unbridled buffoon who is opening themselves up to be weeded out of the gene pool.  Doesn’t matter if you're are a MAGA-loving Cro-Magnon or a socialist left leaning pig.  Black, white, green, purple, whatever. Blue, red. Don’t give a shit.  I don’t distinguish when it comes to hatred of radicals of any persuasion and I especially don’t distinguish when it comes to the unbridled idiocy of carrying an AK-47 in public, fucking idiot. Push around a baby stroller, carry around a bag of groceries, hold hands. Do things in public that civil people do. If you feel the need, go ahead and carry your concealed weapon. But not an assault rifle because you’re a machismo-driven Neanderthal that thinks it’s a good way to be to out there and make some sort of wayward statement. It’s fucking dumb. It’s fucking stupid. And it may just get you on a cold slab. 

 

1 hour ago, Armybrat said:

Foster and Rittenhouse - birds of a feather, but on different branches.

These guys are all prime exhibits in Brisket's case of "if you bring a gun, you just massively increased the chance of any confrontation that occurs will end up in a gunfight."

If dipshit didn't strut around with a gun, he wouldn't have gotten shot.  If the shooter didn't lean on the gun he carries in his car as a crutch, he wouldn't be on trial for murder.  Two guns showed up at this interaction.  Two lives got fucked because of it.

[TKthunder2 4992]

17 minutes ago, bschoolprof said:

So am I reading this correctly (the KXAN article is poorly written) that APD's lead investigator on the case, who now works at the State AG's office, was a key witness called by the  . . . defense?  That seems a bit, um, unusual.  

Correct. The cop recommended against the arrest and said there was very strong evidence of self defense. So he was called by the defense. The exchange on the stand was in KXAN news last night (likely online somewhere).

[bolverk 29694]

15 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

 

These guys are all prime exhibits in Brisket's case of "if you bring a gun, you just massively increased the chance of any confrontation that occurs will end up in a gunfight."

If dipshit didn't strut around with a gun, he wouldn't have gotten shot.  If the shooter didn't lean on the gun he carries in his car as a crutch, he wouldn't be on trial for murder.  Two guns showed up at this interaction.  Two lives got fucked because of it.

Well, yes, but one of them was carrying at "low ready," which should be considered a threat in this situation but not in others. I just can't seem to keep track of the ever-changing rules on what's considered acceptable behavior by those who carry. 

[Brisketexan 105161]

7 minutes ago, bolverk said:

Well, yes, but one of them was carrying at "low ready," which should be considered a threat in this situation but not in others. I just can't seem to keep track of the ever-changing rules on what's considered acceptable behavior by those who carry. 

As someone who has carried a long gun a time or two, you know my take on that.  Dude walking down the street at a low ready is a threat to turn into someone pumping a shitload of lead at me in a split second.  And if he's in a hostile context already?  I can very easily see how the defendant can make a case that he was reasonably in fear.  Personally, I think the defendant was looking for a chance to use his gun to make a point, which gets back to my overall thesis: carrying a gun makes you a metric shitton more likely to end up in a gunfight.  Just like Rittenhouse was hoping and praying he'd get to waste a bad guy.  Even if the shooting is justified, he went looking to do it.

[bolverk 29694]

2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

As someone who has carried a long gun a time or two, you know my take on that.  Dude walking down the street at a low ready is a threat to turn into someone pumping a shitload of lead at me in a split second.  And if he's in a hostile context already?  I can very easily see how the defendant can make a case that he was reasonably in fear.  Personally, I think the defendant was looking for a chance to use his gun to make a point, which gets back to my overall thesis: carrying a gun makes you a metric shitton more likely to end up in a gunfight.  Just like Rittenhouse was hoping and praying he'd get to waste a bad guy.  Even if the shooting is justified, he went looking to do it.

Agreed 100%.

[TKthunder2 4992]

Waiting on jury.

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/daniel-perry-trial-24-hours-into-deliberations-no-verdict-yet-on-murder-trial/

[KaiserSoze 998]

Found guilty of murder

 

https://www.kxan.com/news/local/austin/daniel-perry-found-guilty-of-murder-in-protesters-death/

[fattyflattie 4639]

As soon as the articles about Fosters personal life came out, this one was never in doubt. 

[TKthunder2 4992]

Wow. Didn’t think that was the most likely outcome here.

[washparkhorn 9939]

He came looking for trouble. Dumb and criminally culpable behavior.

[hornian 5219]

On 7/8/2021 at 12:30 PM, AUS-97HORN said:

There is no fucking jury in Texas, even one in Travis County that will ever get 12 people to agree that Perry didnt have at least SOME concern for his life when presented with the situation as its been filmed and shown.      

 

This take aged poorly. 

[bolverk 29694]

“Might Have to Kill a Few People”
And other texts that suggest Daniel Perry intended to commit murder at a Black Lives Matter demonstration

The murder trial of Army Sgt. Daniel Per­ry for the killing of Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster is halfway over. The trial – District Attorney José Garza's most important prosecution to date – began on March 27 and has so far provided little new information about the killing. But prosecutors have developed a fuller picture of Perry's intention and possible premeditation by showing the depth of the hatred he harbored for BLM demonstrators protesting police violence in the summer of 2020.

Two months into those protests, on Sat­ur­day, July 25, 2020, Perry, a sergeant stationed at Fort Hood and working as a rideshare driver in Austin, accelerated his car into a crowd of protesters at the corner of Fourth Street and Congress Avenue. Garrett Foster, a 28-year-old Air Force veteran openly carrying an AK-47 across his chest, approached the car. The driver's side window opened and Perry shot Foster four times in the chest and abdomen. Perry turned himself in to Austin police seconds later, claiming he'd shot in self-defense after Foster raised the barrel of his gun. Austin Police Department officers questioned Perry and let him go. Garza presented the case to a Travis County grand jury shortly after taking office in 2021. The grand jury indicted Perry for murder and assault.

The testimony confirming Perry's anger toward protesters came on the third day of the trial as prosecutors displayed text messages and social media comments showing that he thought about killing them. "I might have to kill a few people on my way to work, they are rioting outside my apartment complex," Perry wrote to a friend in June of 2020. "I might go to Dallas to shoot looters," he wrote on another occasion. Perry also encouraged violence in a variety of social media posts.

In addition, Perry speculated about how he might get away with such a killing – by claiming self-defense, as he is now doing. Prosecutors presented a Facebook Messen­ger chat between Perry and a friend, Michael Holcomb, which occurred two weeks before he shot Foster. In it, Perry argued that shooting protesters was legal if it was in self-defense. Holcomb, who was called to the stand Wednesday afternoon, seemed to try to talk Perry down. "Aren't you a CDL holder too?" he asked, referring to the men's licenses to carry concealed handguns. "We went through the same training ... Shooting after creating an event where you have to shoot, is not a good shoot."

None of this seeming premeditation was on display after Perry turned himself in to APD officers. In his recorded 911 call, played on the fourth day of the trial, Perry claims that he drove into the protesters by mistake after taking a wrong turn. Body-camera video played the next day shows Perry, after being taken into custody, telling officers Foster had pointed his gun at him. "I didn't know he was going to aim it at me," Perry says. "I thought he was going to kill me ... I've never been so scared in my life."

This claim – that Foster raised the barrel of his AK-47 – is, of course, Perry's principal hope to escape a murder conviction. It was refuted over and over during the first three days of the trial by witnesses who were near Foster that night. All repeated a version of the same story: They heard squealing tires as a car sped into a group of about 20 protesters. The protesters, some of whom had almost been hit by the car, slapped and kicked it. Garrett Foster strode to the car's side and issued an order to the driver. All of the witnesses insisted that Foster did not raise the barrel of his gun. According to the D.A.'s lead prosecutor, Guillermo Gonzalez, his gun was recovered with the safety still on and no bullet in the chamber.

The courtroom where the trial is unfolding is less than a mile from where Foster died. It has been packed through the first week with family members and the young people who protested alongside Foster and his fiancée, Whitney Mitchell. Foster's family sits in the front row on the right side of the courtroom. His mother, Sheila, has wept as pictures of her son's dead body are displayed and attorneys reenact his killing. Perry's parents, visibly worried, sit behind him in the front row on the left side of the courtroom. He sits beside his attorneys, Clint Broden and Doug O'Connell, wearing a dark-colored suit, his hair buzzed close, his face dipping down.

On the trial's sixth day, before resting and allowing the defense to begin presenting witnesses, prosecutors played interviews recorded with Perry after his surrender to officers. In these, Perry cries, talks compulsively, and constantly repeats, "I'm sorry." He reacts with something like panic when he learns Foster has died, saying, "Oh my god, oh my god, he's dead, oh my god!" But after being told that he will be released he calms down. By the end of the interviews he's calm enough to attempt a joke, asking, "Do I get to keep the jumpsuit?"

Edited April 7, 2023 by bolverk

[Anastasis 23478]

If that is all accurate, sounds like a piece of shit. Fuck him. 

[Brisketexan 105161]

I’m a bit surprised by the verdict…but then I of course didn’t hear all the testimony that looks to have painted a picture of what many of us suspected - that Perry was actively looking for/planning to show those protesting types the what-for.
He went down there looking to get into a confrontation, and took active steps to create one (driving into a crowd). When he got the confrontation he wanted, and felt he’d established the justification he needed, he did what he wanted to: shot one of those BLM fuckers.
But I still think the victim did himself no favors by strutting around with a rifle. And yes, at a low ready is threatening. That the testimony was all about “he didn’t raise it,” fuck that - the time difference between low ready and raised and shooting is measured in milliseconds. I get the jury’s decision…but had I been on the jury, I may not have gone along with it.
I’m guessing that the evidence about Perry’s clear intentions and goals trumped any such concern. I dunno, I wasn’t a juror.
I’m glad for the verdict, though. Enough with fuckers packing a gun and going around looking for a fight. One guy dead, another guy’s life over. All because they each had to be raging swinging dicks…carrying guns.

[mchookem 16337]

genuinely surprised at the verdict. will an appeal go to an overtly conservative court? if so... will not be surprised if it's overturned. but yeah...the actual evidence presented pretty much confirms what most reasonable people thought - this asshole was looking for trouble and he found it. idiot.

(applies to shooter and victim)

Edited April 8, 2023 by mchookem

[Brisketexan 105161]

genuinely surprised at the verdict. will an appeal go to an overtly conservative court? if so... will not be surprised if it's overturned. but yeah...the actual evidence presented pretty much confirms what most reasonable people thought - this asshole was looking for trouble and he found it. idiot.

(applies to shooter and victim)

It goes to the Third Court of Appeals, which is not a conservative court. Then, to the Court of Criminal Appeals. Which is a statewide GOP court. Which may well rule that shooting a BLM protester is not a crime, because SOROS and antifa etc.

[Gourmand 7774]

This is fantastic news. 
 

FUCK THAT MOTHERFUCKER. 

He knew what he was doing and it wasn't in self defense, in was straight up aggro behavior and he was spoiling for a confrontation. 

[YGIFS 19452]

10 hours ago, Brisketexan said:

It goes to the Third Court of Appeals, which is not a conservative court. Then, to the Court of Criminal Appeals. Which is a statewide GOP court. Which may well rule that shooting a BLM protester is not a crime, because SOROS and antifa etc.

And the Clintons, Kathy Griffin, and a Mister Ronan Sinatra.  

[Brisketexan 105161]

This is fantastic news. 
 
FUCK THAT MOTHERFUCKER. 
He knew what he was doing and it wasn't in self defense, in was straight up aggro behavior and he was spoiling for a confrontation. 

Oh, look….when I saw the clip of him bursting into tears after he heard the jury found him guilty of murder, I had a spontaneous grin. He’s a piece of shit, who convinced himself he was a True American Hero, went out intent on hunting and killing a BLM protester, and did so. The more of these “I’m a hero, I’ll grab my gun and kill these guys myself” types who face a similar fate (their lives are OVER), the better. As a society, we’re worse off having all of these gutless, cowardly fuckers who are only “brave” because they have a gun in their hand strutting around with said gun. And I include the dumbass victim in that group as well. Had he not been carrying, he likely would still be alive…or at least the trial would have been a slam-dunk.
Leave. Your fucking guns. At home. If you have a gun (and follow me here, there’s math involved) you are eleventy billion X more likely to end up shooting someone than if you do NOT have a gun. And as you can see from this trial, shooting someone is not a W. It is, at best, in a perfect and legit self-defense case, a lesser L. That’s it. And it’s not legit self-defense when you’re going out look for shit to get into.

[DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt 12301]

Cowboys and Indians.

Just a bunch of lost little boys.

[Deej 76842]

At least we got two pieces of shit off the street in this instance.

[Gourmand 7774]

1 hour ago, Brisketexan said:

Oh, look….when I saw the clip of him bursting into tears after he heard the jury found him guilty of murder, I had a spontaneous grin. He’s a piece of shit, who convinced himself he was a True American Hero, went out intent on hunting and killing a BLM protester, and did so. The more of these “I’m a hero, I’ll grab my gun and kill these guys myself” types who face a similar fate (their lives are OVER), the better. As a society, we’re worse off having all of these gutless, cowardly fuckers who are only “brave” because they have a gun in their hand strutting around with said gun. And I include the dumbass victim in that group as well. Had he not been carrying, he likely would still be alive…or at least the trial would have been a slam-dunk.
Leave. Your fucking guns. At home. If you have a gun (and follow me here, there’s math involved) you are eleventy billion X more likely to end up shooting someone than if you do NOT have a gun. And as you can see from this trial, shooting someone is not a W. It is, at best, in a perfect and legit self-defense case, a lesser L. That’s it. And it’s not legit self-defense when you’re going out look for shit to get into.

 

All of this.

I always knew in my gut this wasn't a self-defense shooting but cold-blooded murder from the time I first saw the video of his car targeting the protesters, and once those social media posts were first discovered three years ago I knew this was a case of another right-wing incel acting on his violent fantasy to own the libs.

I am ecstatic at this jury verdict and applaud the work of the prosecutors and jury in getting it right. Also, fuck APD for doing everything they could to assist Perry in getting away with murder.