We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Pastimes : Michael Slager, what's the truth?

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: LindyBill12/2/2016 4:24:14 PM
   of 142

Pictured: attacker and victim. But which is which?
Breaking News: Jury in Michael Slager Show Trial is Deadlocked! (Walter Scott)

We don’t know what the numbers are, but I’m sure of at least one juror voting to convict—the black foreman, who just so happens to be the only black juror. (That was black Judge Clifton Newman’s decision.)

CNN personality Brooke Baldwin maintained of Walter Scott, “He was pulled over only for a broken tail light,” as if Officer Slager had improperly stopped Scott. This is Baldwin’s way to insinuate that the stop was a bad stop, that Officer Slager was racially profiling Scott, and that the policeman had bad intent, if not premeditation to murder Scott, when he pulled him over.

This is really pathetic. (I’m tempted to say, even by CNN’s low standards, but that would too charitable. With CNN, there is no bottom.) Brooke Baldwin is trying to convict Michael Slager in the court of public opinion, whatever may happen in criminal court.

More poison: Baldwin cited the testimony of a female crime scene investigator, who allegedly claimed that Slager had made contradictory statements about what happened between him and Walter Scott. However, Baldwin (or her scriptwriter) lied by omission, in not mentioning that Judge Newman permitted all police colleagues hostile to the defense to testify about their opinions, while barring almost testimony by police personnel that might help the defense.

One possible explanation for the deadlock is explanation is that the jury is deadlocked over conflicting or that sympathetic white jurors refuse to be party to a judicial lynching. Another possible ambiguous interpretations of the distinction between “murder” and “manslaughter.”

Judge Newman has ordered the jury to continue deliberations, until it arrives at a conviction, er, verdict.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext