Anchorite
Member
This.
This one is for all the members who think their social media posts won’t get them in trouble
- Thread starter Jeff White
- Start date
- Status
This.
20 minute analysis of the case by Texas self defense attorneys:
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,625
I have one problem with this analysis. He says in a case heard by a grand jury there is no obligation for the prosecutor to include exculpatory evidence. Then later in the article, discussing the possibility of an appeal, he says appeals are basically useless. So when does Perry get due process? If exculpatory evidence was excluded, which according to the sworn testimony of the police investigator was the case, Perry didn't get due process in the grand jury proceeding. Why should he NOT get the right to a normal trial where the exculpatory evidence would be presented for evaluation?
He got due process at trial. All a grand jury does is decide if there is enough evidence to take the case to trial. In some states grand juries are required for certain crimes and in other states it’s completely up to the prosecutor if the case goes to a grand jury or if he files the charges himself.
I don’t understand why you think Perry didn’t have due process. He had a trial where his attorney presented exculpatory evidence. The jury deliberated 17 hours before deciding the case.
Juries are unpredictable. There are many cases where the defendant waives the right to a jury trial and elects to have the judge decide guilt or innocence because the defense attorney feels they will get a judgement more in keeping with the law and with less emotional involvement. If you haven’t yet, watch the video I posted. The 3 Texas attorneys who practice self defense law give a pretty concise explanation of the proceedings and Texas law.
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,625
According to the statement by the police investigator, approximately 100 of the 158 slides he had prepared as his testimony were excluded.
From the grand jury. Not from the trial. A witness does not get to decide what testimony he gives. The attorney decides what testimony is presented. That’s how it works. Like I said several posts back, the defense could have brought those slides up during cross examination.
I don’t understand why you don’t think Perry didn’t receive due process. You seem to be fixated on the fact the slides weren’t presented to the grand jury. There is no due process in the grand jury. The accused doesn’t get to present a defense there.
If his attorney couldn’t get the slides into the trial then he possibly had a poor attorney, but the trial was due process as provided for by law.
We do not have a justice system. We have an adversarial system that is not designed to find the truth and dispense justice. Both sides try to get their best evidence and testimony before the jury and to keep the other side from getting theirs before the jury.
Despite the law saying they have to, prosecutors sometimes refuse to disclose exculpatory evidence to the defense.
Juries are a crap shoot!
Old Dog
Member
It's not over by a long shot. Texas (GOP) Governor Abbott says he's gonna pardon Perry. TX Board of Pardons and Parole is saying, "Not so fast, Gov."
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/09/us/g...is County jury on,regarding the pardon of Sgt.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/04/09/us/g...is County jury on,regarding the pardon of Sgt.
Phaedrus/69
Member
I'm not a big AK guy but if a kid in WI can take an AR to a protest I can't see why you can't take an AK to one. It appears the murder conviction is appropriate. Of course, politics might require a murderer to be freed if it fits the narrative of those in power but that's not something I'd want to count on. If the pardon board is "above board" so to speak this guy is probably cooked.
He did, and it was.
N555
Member
Hardly the deciding factor.
The DA is one of those soft on crime "criminals are the real victims" types and the jury was picked from Austin, the same types of people voted in the DA...
If AK guy would have shot someone they either wouldn't have been able find him or he would have been sentenced so that he would be out of jail mid 2024 just in time to cause trouble for the next election.
The DA is one of those soft on crime "criminals are the real victims" types and the jury was picked from Austin, the same types of people voted in the DA...
If AK guy would have shot someone they either wouldn't have been able find him or he would have been sentenced so that he would be out of jail mid 2024 just in time to cause trouble for the next election.
Elkins45
Member
Indeed. Even though I’m not guilty of online chest-thumping I do sometimes wish I hadn’t made my last name a part of my username. I’m Elkins45 on every online forum I participate in. It wouldn’t be too hard for a prosecutor to figure out my online presence.
I just created my Facebook page a couple of years ago. My posts are 100% travel photos and jokes. 0% political content. In fact, I snooze any of my friends who starts posting politics.
old lady new shooter
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2015
- Messages
- 30,625
The police investigator said it wasn't.
It doesn’t matter legally what the police investigator said. It’s meaningless. The investigator doesn’t get to decide what evidence gets presented to the grand jury. He just gathers the evidence. The prosecutor decides what gets presented in court.
Please stop believing what is said on cable news. It’s not news, it’s opinion.
He spoke of presentations made to the Grand Jury. That is a different subject.
I don't use my last name, but I don't think it matters.
I was on a forum in which a young man asked some questions about how to stop his new Remington from jamming. Several people stepped forward to help him. I think I told him "buy a Mossberg".
This person later attempted a mass shooting. He was shot after his shotgun (fortunately) jammed.
Police found his posts very quickly. I assume from his browser history or from his internet provider.
People smarter than me can find this stuff very quickly.
I was working on a city owned property. A subcontractor's employee snapped a picture on his way to lunch. By the time we sat down to lunch (20-25 minutes) the city contacted us. They had his Instagram post, and deemed it a threat. They had video of him walking to the upper level, taking the picture, and walking to his car. They had all his personal information, and his trespass warrant filled out.
Big brother is real and he is very good at looking out for our safety. Almost anything you do through the internet or in public is being recorded somewhere, so you really shouldn't say or do anything that you wouldn't want broadcasted on the news.
You aren't anonymous online and the choice of a screen name isn't going to protect you. VPNs offer little protection these days.
Good Ol' Boy
Member
So what we're saying here, essentially is that if you've ever posted on a gun forum and someone sticks a gun in your face and you defend yourself you're screwed. Got it.
You folks talking about the justice system like it hasn't been 2 tiered for several years are cute.
You folks talking about the justice system like it hasn't been 2 tiered for several years are cute.
No what we are saying is that if you have ever posted anything online anywhere that could be construed to be a threat or that a prosecutor could use to lead a jury into believing you were looking for the opportunity to shoot someone you might be screwed. In an age where people lose their jobs and are sometimes criminally charged for things they post online you simply can't chance that someone you said online even sarcastically will be used against you. You don't have to like it, you just have to live with it.
Old Dog
Member
I get what Jeff is saying. Most members here are pretty moderate; we have had a few chest-thumpers and a bit of bravado come through, but this forum is light-years ahead of most others in that regard.
Having been involved in a few officer misconduct cases and investigations, I will say that the focus is typically on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, et al, but it's entirely possible that internet gun forums would be looked at.
Having been involved in a few officer misconduct cases and investigations, I will say that the focus is typically on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, et al, but it's entirely possible that internet gun forums would be looked at.
Last edited:
AJC1
Member
I've never lived in Texas and I have lived in a lot of states. In most states one has a duty to break contact, and disengage if possible. I state that position in every social media post. My military training is vastly different to anything anywhere. When dealing with nukes there is no retreat, hostages or collateral damage doesn't matter. Securing the weapons and removing the threat is all that matters. I don't know his full military history, but I find it reasonable that a prosecutor will try and elevate the accountability due to military training. One may react as trained and it's my opinion if you act according to your government training there should be no problem... unfortunately we know it doesn't work that way.
No, no, no, no. Tou have missed the entire point by a mile.
If you are ever accused of any kind of civil or criminal transgression, and you have ever written anything or posted anything anywhere that could be used against you, it just may be so used..
In the discussion at hand, the defendant , who had shot someone and who tried to mount a legal defense of self defense, posted things that apparently helped to cause all of the jurors to believe, beyond any reasonable doubt, that his actions did not constitute lawful self defense.
No, the only person saying anything like that is you.
1. It's not just about what is posted on gun forums. Pretty much any social media is going to be fair game if the prosecution thinks they can use it against you.
2. It's not THAT you have posted, it's WHAT you have posted.
3. What you have posted could actually HELP you.
4. It's not a given that social media will always be a deciding factor in a conviction--the point is that since it certainly can be, it makes sense to be smart.
We leave evidence in the digital world as we go about our business each day. Phone towers record metadata that can track us, traffic cameras, doorbell cameras, video cameras watch our movements and actions. Our activities online, both overt (posting, commenting) and more passive (web surfing, content viewing) are typically accessible to investigators. People who are smart understand that they are leaving permanent records all the time in the digital world and try to be smart about what sort of records they leave.
WTBguns10kOK
member
Yeah, a lot of people haven't quite caught up to the present day.
Old Dog
Member
Yeah, just not sure what some of you are really trying to say. I tend to crack up when I see people say things about a "two-tiered justice system." I see the most criticism from the folks with the least experience with the criminal justice system.
I am one who has actually been in some courtrooms over the past couple decades. Although I have seen some bad prosecutions, some frivolous civil lawsuits and a metric butt-ton of bad lawyering (throw in some sketchy judges), I can report that our system mostly works.
I'll take my chances in our system, but I understand that everything I've ever texted to anyone, every post I've ever made on social media -- including internet forums -- is discoverable and could certainly be used in a courtroom.
Last edited:
Howland937
Member
That would be option 2 at best. First option would be never getting into that position if at all possible. People fail to realize that just because they're the good guy in their own mind, bad decisions by good folks get prosecuted on a daily basis.
Any prosecutor worth their salary is going to use whatever's at their disposal to prove their case. Social media, online forums, off the cuff conversation with the neighbor, ex wife from 20 years ago. It would be hard enough to defend actions without having to defend a history of idiotic comments. This guy's attorney had to defend both, and we see how it went. So how about "Don't make your attorney's job any harder than it already is"
Last edited:
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked