I don’t care if she meant to do that or not, given the fact she made the video right before she did it, she should be going away for a long time, decades in fact.
Why should anyone get outraged about cops getting killed? You can’t be serious.
1 Like
I’m not convinced that progressive DAs in NYC will even charge her, given that they dislike charging violent criminals. I won’t be surprised if she gets off with probation and rehab.
1 Like
I’ll take that bet too. You guys honestly don’t think she’s going away for a while? That’s what you want to happen clouding your ability to see what will actually happen.
Well if you wanted to display your ignorance on the Florida subject you get an A+.
You don’t have to take my word for it. This happening with progressive DAs across the nation - just look at what Gascon’s doing to Los Angeles. You guys vote for this, so don’t be surprised.
1 Like
And are you capable of differentiating between low level offenses, and drunk driving-vehicular manslaughter at least(a cop to boot)-fleeing an accident? Do you honestly think a DA anywhere would pass on this because they think it’s low level? Be honest. Just try and be honest and lift the partisan glasses for a second.
Anything you find in common about going soft on protesters, the high % of African Americans in prison, the outrage over police brutality, plea bargains, pardons, etc.? About the criminal justice and law enforcement systems as a whole? Or just through one, specific viewpoint of outrage?
Nah, her backside is in Prison long term. Cop Killers aren’t really treated well in NY state, despite its Liberal leanings.
These progressive DAs would pass on this charge. Perhaps I’m not the one wearing partisan glasses?
1 Like
No you’re wearing glasses. Looks like there are very specific circumstances in the cases. Some cases have very special circumstances. Sometimes certain charges are dropped or added depending on the situation. Third is about some guidelines changes that in no way would affect the New York case. But the idea that this is some kind of proof that a DA would not prosecute this to the fullest is insane.
You can find dozens more examples from Democratic cities exactly the ones above - it’s a pattern. Progressive DAs simply don’t believe in the criminal justice system and won’t prosecute because of it, damn the repercussions for their victims. As a consequence, violent crime is spiking in their cities. This type of case is exactly the type that they’d push for rehabilitation, rather than sentencing, especially considering that the “Defund” and “Abolish Prisons” movement is now taking over the Democratic Party. All that being said, I’ll admit I’m wrong if this goes the way you predict.
I’ll bet right now she does prison time. And a lot of prison time. What do you want to bet. You are just hoping she won’t because it fits your narrative that Democratic DAs don’t believe in the justice system. Yet they’re oddly convicting people every day.
How is it a “narrative” when you can actually see violent crime statistics blowing through the rooftop in those jurisdictions? Democrats are soft on crime and “Defund the Police” theology is increasing the victim count.
There can be a thorough review of crime statistics and causes for increases. The implications of the pandemic alone are hard to analyze. So yes, it is a narrative at this point. We’re still at pretty damn good crime rates compared to previous decades, but that’s more for a different thread. In this thread, this lady is going away for a long time and I’ll take all bets on that
Define a long time.
2 Likes
I hope you’re right. In this political climate, it’s more likely that she’ll end up in drug and alcohol treatment with probation.
Amazing…
What do you want to bet?
Justice is served in all 3 cases.
In your first case the defendant was acquitted by a jury of the manslaughter charge so he would not have been convicted of a murder charge if one had been filed.
In the 2nd the defendant was convicted in LA Superior Court and sentenced to life without parole.
Not surprisingly, the NY Post distorts the 3rd situation. The guidelines merely provided considerations as to whether to charge someone with burglary or looting. They did not say that someone could be set free if they stole something they “needed”.
