International Skeptics Forum

International Skeptics Forum (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumindex.php)
-   USA Politics (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   The Jan. 6 Investigation (http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=353105)

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 11:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 13552490)
I'm pretty sure they started with preliminary charges to get the case rolling and get search warrants.

We're more than 6 months into this. The feds don't need to get the ball rolling at this point. We're well past that, and still not a single attempted murder charge.

Quote:

For a lot of those criminals it really was only criminal trespass and trying to hinder the Congress from certifying the vote. For others there is evidence they planned the attack. And for still others murder charges are warranted. The guy who bashed the window in that Babbitt climbed through before she was shot, for example, is guilty of murder because he was involved in a crime that lead to her death.
Yeah, I understand the doctrine of felony murder. It's still quite distinct from attempted murder or murder (most notably on the matter of intent). But as your source points out, only certain felony crimes can trigger felony murder, not just any felony will suffice. And again, nobody is being charged with felony murder.

Quote:

Not sure where these cases will end up. If you attack someone who shortly after dies from a heart attack or stroke, I'm not sure what the law says about that.
CNN: Two men arrested and charged for assaulting Capitol Police Officer Brian Sicknick
That story is from back before Sicknick's cause of death was released. The fact that it took so long to release is itself rather telling. And in case you haven't been following, he didn't die from any injuries. He died of a stroke.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/brian-s...atural-causes/
"In the interview with the Post, Diaz said the autopsy found no evidence of internal or external injuries, or of an allergic reaction to the chemical substance — but did say "all that transpired played a role in his condition." "

Good luck charging someone for that.

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 11:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wareyin (Post 13552501)
You would probably be a lot less confused if you actually watched any of the testimony talked about in this thread, any news source other than FOX, NesMaxx, or OANN that showed video, or read any unbiased article about Jan 6th.

This testimony has addressed why the DOJ is refusing to prosecute attempted murderers for attempted murder?

Yeah, I don't really think that's a good take.

wareyin 29th July 2021 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552517)
This testimony has addressed why the DOJ is refusing to prosecute attempted murderers for attempted murder?

Yeah, I don't really think that's a good take.

You're correct that this isn't a good take. The testimony has addressed the words and actions of the crowd, their stated intent and what they did to accomplish that. You know, all the stuff you said you were confused by.

Stacyhs 29th July 2021 11:52 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Belz... (Post 13552485)
I guess our resident right-wingers don't like impact statements, either.

The same thought came to my mind. I wonder if these "they were so emotional!" critics say the same thing about victim impact statements in court.

acbytesla 29th July 2021 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shalamar (Post 13552348)
Two More Conservative posters: "They're being emotional!"

Two more points towards my hypothesis: "It's only wrong when a Liberal/Democrat/commie/progressive does it."

It's like a NAZI saying "what are they complaining about?" "It was just a shower."

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 12:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wareyin (Post 13552527)
You're correct that this isn't a good take. The testimony has addressed the words and actions of the crowd, their stated intent and what they did to accomplish that. You know, all the stuff you said you were confused by.

Yeah, no. That isn't what I'm confused by. I'm confused by the mismatch between the claims being made here (attempted murder) and the actions of the prosecutors. The only explanation given so far (only charging easier to prove crimes) doesn't withstand scrutiny. Everything else has basically been avoiding that question or trying to change the subject.

And you claimed that the protesters' own words demonstrated attempted murder. I asked you which words, you haven't responded. Obviously by definition testimony of other people isn't actually "their own words".

Stacyhs 29th July 2021 12:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TragicMonkey (Post 13552218)
It's an old trick: if the witness is emotional, say they're clearly too emotional to be trusted about the facts. If the witness is not emotional, say that they're clearly lying because any normal person would be emotional when recalling such things if they truly happened.

This reminds me of the A. Knox pro-guilt posters. They criticized her and called her 'cold blooded' and 'heartless' for not showing enough emotion and then, when she was emotional, they accused her of 'shedding crocodile tears'.

plague311 29th July 2021 12:12 PM

LoL this red herring of "attempted murder" is so ******* dumb. I can't believe it's been going on for 2 pages now.

Also, if you're only line of defense is to say, "at least they didn't attempt to murder anyone!" I'd say you've already lost the argument. Why feed into it? It's a stupid distraction and certainly not a moral bar of any kind.

wareyin 29th July 2021 12:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552545)
Yeah, no. That isn't what I'm confused by. I'm confused by the mismatch between the claims being made here (attempted murder) and the actions of the prosecutors. The only explanation given so far (only charging easier to prove crimes) doesn't withstand scrutiny. Everything else has basically been avoiding that question or trying to change the subject.

And you claimed that the protesters' own words demonstrated attempted murder. I asked you which words, you haven't responded. Obviously by definition testimony of other people isn't actually "their own words".

See, this is why I told you that you'd be less confused if you had gotten any information from an unbiased source. The testimony included video. The newspapers showed pictures of the signs people made, or the gallows. The television programs showed video of the crowd chanting a desire to kill members of Congress before assaulting the building Congress was in. But to those stuck in their conservative media bubble, none of this has ever occurred.

wareyin 29th July 2021 12:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plague311 (Post 13552550)
LoL this red herring of "attempted murder" is so ******* dumb. I can't believe it's been going on for 2 pages now.

Also, if you're only line of defense is to say, "at least they didn't attempt to murder anyone!" I'd say you've already lost the argument. Why feed into it? It's a stupid distraction and certainly not a moral bar of any kind.

Well, I'm not sure how DC's laws are on felony murder, so I'm not trying to argue that. In plenty of other places, if you commit a felony and someone dies, even if that person was your accomplice, you can be charged with murder. We have a death, we have felonies being committed, but folks like Zig haven't heard about them and anyway me telling him makes it like hearsay so he can throw it out anyway and hey, look, over there, is that a squirrel?

Stacyhs 29th July 2021 12:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552545)
Yeah, no. That isn't what I'm confused by. I'm confused by the mismatch between the claims being made here (attempted murder) and the actions of the prosecutors. The only explanation given so far (only charging easier to prove crimes) doesn't withstand scrutiny. Everything else has basically been avoiding that question or trying to change the subject.

And you claimed that the protesters' own words demonstrated attempted murder. I asked you which words, you haven't responded. Obviously by definition testimony of other people isn't actually "their own words".

The insurrectionists were screaming 'hang Mike Pence' and trying to hunt down Pelosi to kill her.

Quote:

Donald Trump's impeachment trial has been shown never before seen footage of the US Capitol riots as the mob searched for then Vice-President Mike Pence and Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

The trial heard how the pair were the "target" for the insurrectionists, with court documents suggesting rioters planned to kill Mr Pence and put a bullet through the skull of Speaker Pelosi.

ITV News US Correspondent Emma Murphy said: “We had presented to the court today some legally-sworn documents from those in detention who had been part of the riot, they were very chilling.

“One of them said that if they managed to get their hands on Mike Pence, the former vice president, they would have killed him.

“Another said that they were looking for Nancy Pelosi, the leader of the House, in the hope of putting a bullet in her head.”

https://www.itv.com/news/2021-02-10/...-documents-say

Quote:

Newly unsealed court documents show rioters at the US Capitol said they would have killed Vice President Mike Pence and that they were looking for Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi to shoot her.
https://www.news10.com/news/document...peaker-pelosi/

Quote:

Plaskett said Pelosi was rushed to a secure offsite location by Capitol police because some of the rioters publicly declared their intent to harm or kill Pelosi.

“We know from the rioters themselves that if they had found Speaker Pelosi, they would’ve killed her,” Plaskett said.
https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...-from-capitol/

The reason no one has been charged with attempted murder is because the rioters failed to find either of them thanks to the Capitol Police whom you criticize for being too 'emotional'.

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 12:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wareyin (Post 13552551)
See, this is why I told you that you'd be less confused if you had gotten any information from an unbiased source. The testimony included video. The newspapers showed pictures of the signs people made, or the gallows. The television programs showed video of the crowd chanting a desire to kill members of Congress before assaulting the building Congress was in. But to those stuck in their conservative media bubble, none of this has ever occurred.

You've got no idea what media I pay attention to. Nor does this actually address my question.

Paul2 29th July 2021 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jollyroger85 (Post 13552278)
Got it, I still spoke my piece.

I'm glad you did.

plague311 29th July 2021 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wareyin (Post 13552554)
Well, I'm not sure how DC's laws are on felony murder, so I'm not trying to argue that. In plenty of other places, if you commit a felony and someone dies, even if that person was your accomplice, you can be charged with murder. We have a death, we have felonies being committed, but folks like Zig haven't heard about them and anyway me telling him makes it like hearsay so he can throw it out anyway and hey, look, over there, is that a squirrel?

From what I can understand, I don't even see a statute for attempted murder in DC. It's mostly built around just straight up murder.

That being said, they wouldn't charge these idiots with attempted murder anyway, because everything (I assume) would be "heat of the moment". There was no intent previous to kill any one single person.

My guess is that's the reason none of them have been charged. The assault on a police officer will carry as much weight as needed I would guess.

wareyin 29th July 2021 12:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552556)
You've got no idea what media I pay attention to.

:roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll:

riiiiiiiight! suuuuuure! Complete mystery!

:roll::roll::roll::roll::roll::roll:


Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552556)
Nor does this actually address my question.

Which question? The one about how do we know what the crowd was saying?

Belz... 29th July 2021 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552556)
You've got no idea what media I pay attention to.

We have some idea.

SteveAitch 29th July 2021 12:35 PM

This may be a silly question, but can't they just add "Conspiracy to commit (felony?) murder" to all the charges made so far?

Paul2 29th July 2021 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stacyhs (Post 13552555)
The insurrectionists were screaming 'hang Mike Pence' and trying to hunt down Pelosi to kill her.


https://www.itv.com/news/2021-02-10/...-documents-say


https://www.news10.com/news/document...peaker-pelosi/


https://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...-from-capitol/

The reason no one has been charged with attempted murder is because the rioters failed to find either of them thanks to the Capitol Police whom you criticize for being too 'emotional'.

Two (all three?) of those links mention court documents in which the rioters admit to wanting to kill Pence and Pelosi, but none of your links contain links to those court documents, and a quick internet search came up empty for me, too. Do you have any links to those court documents?

The other piece of evidence along those lines, other than a news article saying that the court documents exist, was a tweet from a photographer who overheard several rioters saying they want to kill P & P. That's a first-hand witness, but I'd love to see those court docs.

plague311 29th July 2021 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SteveAitch (Post 13552580)
This may be a silly question, but can't they just add "Conspiracy to commit (felony?) murder" to all the charges made so far?

The evidence to support it would have to show that these individuals beating the cops took time to plan it out, locate a target, and work in unison to try and murder the specific officers.

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 12:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stacyhs (Post 13552555)

I spent a bit of time poking around on this one. So the quote about shooting Pelosi is attributed to one Dawn Bancroft. She is listed on that page I linked to earlier of DOJ prosecutions. You can find two charging documents for her:
one
two
The second is the more useful of the two, and is where the quote comes from.

So what is Dawn Bancroft being charges with?
Entering and Remaining in a Restricted Building or Grounds; Disorderly and Disruptive Conduct in a Restricted Building or Grounds; Disorderly Conduct in a Capitol Building; Parading, Demonstrating, or Picketing in a Capitol Building
Why isn't she being charged with attempted murder, or something more serious?

Well, read the charging documents. There's no evidence she actually did anything more serious than that. There's no evidence she actually looked for anyone. There's no evidence she ever even had a weapon of any kind to carry through on her boast. The FBI determined that she entered the building through a previously broken window, and then shortly after (as in around 1 minute later) left. The FBI does not contend that she had a weapon. The FBI does not contend that she was searching for anyone. The FBI does not contend that she intended to do anyone any harm.

That's it. That's your attempted murderer. An idiot who brags about being an even bigger idiot than she actually was.

So why is her statement about Pelosi included in the charging document, if they didn't think she was serious? Again, let's go to the charging document itself (hilight mine):
Your affiant submits there is also probably cause to believe that BANCROFT and SANTOS-SMITH violated 40 U.S.C. §5104(e)(2)(D) and (G), which makes it a crime to willfully and knowingly (D) utter loud, threatening, or abusive language, or engage in disruptive conduct, at any place in the Grounds or in any of the Capitol Buildings with the intent to impede, disrupt, or disturb the orderly conduct in that building of a hearing...
In other words, that quote is relevant to prove that she said something threatening, which is a crime. SAID something threatening. Not that she actually was a threat, or tried to carry through with it. The FBI doesn't seem to think she actually was. They aren't treating her as if she was. They aren't charging her with anything very serious, and she's out on her own recognizance.

So color me unimpressed.

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paul2 (Post 13552582)
Two (all three?) of those links mention court documents in which the rioters admit to wanting to kill Pence and Pelosi, but none of your links contain links to those court documents, and a quick internet search came up empty for me, too. Do you have any links to those court documents?

I just did a run down, with court documents included, for that first link. It's... not impressive.

You can find court documents on everyone who has been charged at the DOJ website I linked before, but I'll put it here again for easy reference:
Capitol Breach Cases

I might poke around with the other two later.

plague311 29th July 2021 01:14 PM

Imagine investing a ton of time doing research just to be able to say, "You shouldn't lie. No one tried to attempt a murder. They only went in and spread **** on the walls, beat police officers, threatened to kill them, walked out a gallows while screaming 'Hang Pence!', and stole a bunch of ****. You guys are overreacting."

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 01:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plague311 (Post 13552614)
Imagine investing a ton of time doing research just to be able to say, "You shouldn't lie. No one tried to attempt a murder. They only went in and spread **** on the walls, beat police officers, threatened to kill them, walked out a gallows while screaming 'Hang Pence!', and stole a bunch of ****. You guys are overreacting."

Imagine lying, and excusing the lie by saying, "Well, they still acted badly".

Do the facts matter, or do they not matter? And if they matter, why do you object to actually getting them right?

And lastly, the reason I spent time researching this isn't because I wanted to be able to say anything. I spent time researching this because I wanted to know. And apparently, despite multiple people making accusations of me being cocooned in right wing media, I'm the only one here who actually bothered to go to the primary source, unfiltered by media of any kind.

plague311 29th July 2021 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552615)
Imagine lying, and excusing the lie by saying, "Well, they still acted badly".

LoL where did I lie? Be specific.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552615)
Do the facts matter, or do they not matter? And if they matter, why do you object to actually getting them right?

You're asking all the wrong questions. The real question is: Does this fact matter?

The answer: Apparently to some.

In the grand scheme of things it might be important to a few of you but whether they are charged with it or not doesn't mean much for a few reasons. 1) What they're charged with now doesn't mean the charging is done. It means nothing, charges change all the time, usually immediately before trials or during a plea bargain. 2) The root of the issue is still up in the air because it happened in DC, and I don't see a statute for attempted murder in DC. Don't you think it would be kind of crucial to see if the people even COULD be charged with attempted murder? 3) It seems an odd hill to die on when taken within the whole context. You'd have to be blind or stupid not to see that there were people in that crowd intent on causing serious damage to those police. It's clear as day. If saying they didn't want to murder them is important to you, rock on sir. Rock on.

dudalb 29th July 2021 01:28 PM

Right Wing White people GOOD
Black Protestors...BAD.

That is what it comes do for some people here.

Shalamar 29th July 2021 01:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13552625)
Right Wing White people GOOD
Black Protestors...BAD.

That is what it comes do for some people here.

Agreed.

And now we're seeing quibbling over 'Well, these police were so emotional over being beaten within an inch of their lives! And it's not attempted murder! See! No charges!'

How long before they start whining 'it's all the LEFTS fault anyways!'?

kookbreaker 29th July 2021 01:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shalamar (Post 13552640)
Agreed.

And now we're seeing quibbling over 'Well, these police were so emotional over being beaten within an inch of their lives! And it's not attempted murder! See! No charges!'

How long before they start whining 'it's all the LEFTS fault anyways!'?

What do you think the blaming it all on Nancy Pelosi is?

SuburbanTurkey 29th July 2021 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shalamar (Post 13552640)
Agreed.

And now we're seeing quibbling over 'Well, these police were so emotional over being beaten within an inch of their lives! And it's not attempted murder! See! No charges!'

How long before they start whining 'it's all the LEFTS fault anyways!'?

It's probably the left's fault because if BLM type protestors said they were showing up, the cops would have been fully kitted out and ready to crack skulls.

Belz... 29th July 2021 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dudalb (Post 13552625)
Right Wing White people GOOD
Black Protestors...BAD.

That is what it comes do for some people here.

It's really that simple.

Belz... 29th July 2021 01:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shalamar (Post 13552640)
Agreed.

And now we're seeing quibbling over 'Well, these police were so emotional over being beaten within an inch of their lives! And it's not attempted murder! See! No charges!'

How long before they start whining 'it's all the LEFTS fault anyways!'?

Yeah it's one thing to beat someone up and kill a police officer. It's another thing entirely to be all dramatic about it.

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 01:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plague311 (Post 13552621)
LoL where did I lie? Be specific.

I didn't say YOU were the one who lied.

Quote:

In the grand scheme of things it might be important to a few of you but whether they are charged with it or not doesn't mean much for a few reasons. 1) What they're charged with now doesn't mean the charging is done. It means nothing, charges change all the time, usually immediately before trials or during a plea bargain.
True. But charges usually START high, and then get whittled down if you're going to plea. Nobody pleads up. Adding charges as evidence accumulates doesn't generally take this long, especially when there's so much video evidence of everything that went down. It's not like the events here are all that complex. We're more than six months in. Charges seem fairly locked in now, barring any plea bargaining to lesser charges. The absence of any attempted murder charges is pretty damned suggestive that there was no attempted murder.

Quote:

2) The root of the issue is still up in the air because it happened in DC, and I don't see a statute for attempted murder in DC.
You don't need a DC statute. The federal statute will suffice:
18 U.S. Code § 1113 - Attempt to commit murder or manslaughter

Quote:

3) It seems an odd hill to die on when taken within the whole context.
Doesn't that apply to anyone still insisting that "attempted murder" is an accurate characterization? If everything else is so damning, why can't people let go of this? An odd hill to die on indeed.

Skeptic Ginger 29th July 2021 01:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552514)
We're more than 6 months into this. The feds don't need to get the ball rolling at this point. We're well past that, and still not a single attempted murder charge.

I meant with individuals, not with the entire affair. I'm guessing there might still be evidence not on social media and not already collected.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552514)
Yeah, I understand the doctrine of felony murder. It's still quite distinct from attempted murder or murder (most notably on the matter of intent). But as your source points out, only certain felony crimes can trigger felony murder, not just any felony will suffice. And again, nobody is being charged with felony murder.

We have not seen final charges against all of them.

As usual you dodge the actual issues and continue on with your own. I highlighted them for you.

Skeptic Ginger 29th July 2021 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zig
Why isn't [Bancroft] being charged with attempted murder, or something more serious?

Has she been to court yet? And I would think a verbal threat to kill a Congress-person is quite different from an attempt to kill.

Captain_Swoop 29th July 2021 01:54 PM

Obviously the cops deserved it. They are traitors for opposing the Great Leader

plague311 29th July 2021 01:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552651)
True. But charges usually START high, and then get whittled down if you're going to plea. Nobody pleads up. Adding charges as evidence accumulates doesn't generally take this long, especially when there's so much video evidence of everything that went down. It's not like the events here are all that complex. We're more than six months in. Charges seem fairly locked in now, barring any plea bargaining to lesser charges. The absence of any attempted murder charges is pretty damned suggestive that there was no attempted murder.

There is no way that 6 months is a long time when the overall situation involves over 500 defendants. I can't even imagine that being the case. Popehat has repeatedly said that we're going to see this going on for years, and the depths of the multiple cases haven't even seen light yet.

I've seen charges added a bunch of times during an investigation. The issue isn't the amount or clarity of the evidence, it's having the time to analyze it. This is completely out of the norm with regards to sheer amount of people involved. We have murder investigations where there's 1 defendant that take years to get everything sorted out. Sorry, but I think you're wrong here.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552651)
You don't need a DC statute. The federal statute will suffice:
18 U.S. Code § 1113 - Attempt to commit murder or manslaughter

Yes, I saw that but (and I'll apologize for not being clear) that doesn't explain what is required in order to make it an attempted murder. Usually, like in the Kyle Rittenhouse case, there is a large breakdown of what actions are required. Just reading that I'd say that trying to gauge someone's eye out, trying to take their gun, and beating them would absolutely qualify as attempted murder, but I also know that laws are applied differently depending on the circumstances.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552651)
Doesn't that apply to anyone still insisting that "attempted murder" is an accurate characterization? If everything else is so damning, why can't people let go of this? An odd hill to die on indeed.

Yes, all around it's an odd hill to die on because it doesn't change much. There would be probably <10 people that would catch the attempted murder charge. About the only thing I'll agree with is that it's tough to show intent, especially in this case. Crimes of passion, or heat of the moment, are really difficult but it's completely possible.

Ziggurat 29th July 2021 02:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skeptic Ginger (Post 13552658)
Has she been to court yet?

Yes. The DOJ page I linked lists the status of all cases. From hers:
Arrested 1/29/21. Initial appearance 2/8/21.

Charged via criminal information 4/1/21. Arraigned 4/29/21 where she pleaded not guilty to all counts.

Defendant remains on peronal recognizane. Status conference set for 9/28/21 at 3:00 pm.

Shalamar 29th July 2021 02:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kookbreaker (Post 13552643)
What do you think the blaming it all on Nancy Pelosi is?

Oh. I know. I was referring to the conservatives here.

As for the investigation, there will be only one, Conservatives will torpedo it as best they can.

How many Benghazi investigations were there?

Conservatives are dishonest, and hypocritical.

acbytesla 29th July 2021 02:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by plague311 (Post 13552662)

Yes, all around it's an odd hill to die on because it doesn't change much. There would be probably <10 people that would catch the attempted murder charge. About the only thing I'll agree with is that it's tough to show intent, especially in this case. Crimes of passion, or heat of the moment, are really difficult but it's completely possible.

Mens rea is required to prove Attempted Murder. The government must show intent to kill or inflict grievous bodily harm.

There is at least a dozen rioters that could face such a charge. Just that no one has been charged with this crime so far doesn't mean the charge won't be added.

smartcooky 29th July 2021 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ziggurat (Post 13552514)
We're more than 6 months into this. The feds don't need to get the ball rolling at this point. We're well past that, and still not a single attempted murder charge.

- They had an inbox with over 400,000 tips in it and it is still building.

- They have arrested and charged almost 600 people out of the 30,000+ people who were at the riot, about 100 of whom have only been arrested in the last 5 weeks

- They had to review tens of thousand of hours of video, and are still doing it. We have only seen a small part of the total. The FBI are keeping some of that under wraps (no discovery is required until charges are laid)

All this takes time... time and resources, and frankly, with the scale of this investigation (when was the last time almost 600 people have been arrested and charged for participating in a single riot?) I am staggered that they have manage to get so far along on this.

But you are expecting instant results.... ain't gonna happen!

jimbob 29th July 2021 02:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wareyin (Post 13552364)
How do you prove that one man in a crowd of those committing assault was attempting murder? The crowd was certainly attempting to kill, the cumulative effects of the assault were certainly likely to result in a murder, but how do you prove that anyone in that crowd was attempting to commit murder?

Hey, there's felony murder, which even though it didn't involve the police officers being attacked, I would be happy with their attackers being charged with.


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 06:54 AM.

Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2022, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2015-22, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.