It looks like the jury is giving it thought.

Jarod said:
I think it is funny that you cant see any reason for acquittal other than threats. That indicates a lack of imagination on your part. I never condone rioting or property destruction, but I do understand it. Its an American tradition going back to the Boston Tea Party.
Click to expand...
When were criminal acts ever deemed an "American tradition?"
 
Jarod said:
I think it is funny that you cant see any reason for acquittal other than threats. That indicates a lack of imagination on your part. I never condone rioting or property destruction, but I do understand it. Its an American tradition going back to the Boston Tea Party.
Click to expand...

if the decision is based on the evidence presented at the trial, there can be no verdict except complete acquittal on all counts. If the jury has been scared by the radical leftists, there is no telling what they might do. '

Rioting and property destruction is not an american tradition, to equate the year of destruction in Portland, Seattle, NY, and others to the Boston tea party just shows that you have no idea about either event. To try to equate BLM and antifa to the patriots in Boston is ridiculous and down right stupid.
 
Jarod said:
Go to Google and look up Boston Tea Party. Read about the Boston Massacre.
Click to expand...

your ignorance is amazing. the USA was not even a country at that time, there was no federal body of law, we were technically under British law at that time. Try reading the declaration of independence, then you MIGHT understand why your analogy is so ridiculous. and you got it from CNN, the media liars in chief.
 
redfish said:
if the decision is based on the evidence presented at the trial, there can be no verdict except complete acquittal on all counts. If the jury has been scared by the radical leftists, there is no telling what they might do. '

Rioting and property destruction is not an american tradition, to equate the year of destruction in Portland, Seattle, NY, and others to the Boston tea party just shows that you have no idea about either event. To try to equate BLM and antifa to the patriots in Boston is ridiculous and down right stupid.
Click to expand...

What exactly do you feel differentiates the events?
 
redfish said:
your ignorance is amazing. the USA was not even a country at that time, there was no federal body of law, we were technically under British law at that time. Try reading the declaration of independence, then you MIGHT understand why your analogy is so ridiculous. and you got it from CNN, the media liars in chief.
Click to expand...

So you believe the difference is about the law we were operating under? The colonists were upset at the West India company and the government colluding together to exploit them. They destroyed corporate property and rioted in an attempt to affect change, when that did not work they started a civil war, we call it the Revolutionary war because we won. If we had lost it would be called a civil war. There people were the first Americans, it’s the spirit we were born from.
 
Jarod said:
What exactly do you feel differentiates the events?
Click to expand...

1. that the USA was not a country when the tea party happened
2. the tea party violated no US laws because there weren't any
3. the 2020 riots violated state, city, and federal laws.

Rittinhouse killed two slugs that were trying to kill him. the Boston patriots killed no one in Boston harbor, they drowned some tea to protest British taxes being put on it.
 
redfish said:
1. that the USA was not a country when the tea party happened
2. the tea party violated no US laws because there weren't any
3. the 2020 riots violated state, city, and federal laws.

Rittinhouse killed two slugs that were trying to kill him. the Boston patriots killed no one in Boston harbor, they drowned some tea to protest British taxes being put on it.
Click to expand...

1. Why does that distinction make any difference?
2. It violated the law of the nation the rioters were citizens of.
3. The residents violated the law of their nation, England, their colony, and their city.
 
Jarod said:
1. Why does that distinction make any difference?
2. It violated the law of the nation the rioters were citizens of.
3. The residents violated the law of their nation, England, their colony, and their city.
Click to expand...

the residents of america were not British citizens. damn is your historical knowledge as inept as your legal knowledge? Do you understand what the word "colony" means?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top