Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
A grand jury witness said the bystanders begged the man to get off the guy. He was turning get purple. The cops' husband refused to get off. He and the wife were indicted for murder.
Very good. Let's hope the guy gets prison time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crone
The witnesses said it took 43 minutes for the cops to get there. Wonder if the deputy's husband sat on him all that time?
I hope not. I read that once the jerkface and his wife noticed he wasn't breathing, then he decided to move his fat arse off of him and the wife performed cpr.
Come on DD, now they have the cop and the hubby up on murder charges.
It's called due process and waiting for the facts.
We even got a video of them doing it.
Was that really such a tough request?
I've seen these encounters go completely the other way too as facts have come out, especially when the family runs in front of the news camera and starts lying and the news article (like this one) is heavily anchored in their depiction of events.
People read those stories, pick a side and then stubbornly refuse to change their minds despite additional information.
I picked a side because I had enough information to do so.
I didn't even need the video to figure this one out.
If you did, then that's on you. I didn't. And I'm gonna steadfastly hold to my opinion. The original link I posted gave enough information to figure this one out.
And if it hadn't been for lots of media attention, the sheriffs dept was more than ready to cover it up.
Quote:
Originally Posted by WiseManOnceSaid
They took the cellphones for evidence. They said the case is under investigation. Nothing else to see here, move along.
I only seen the short video, is this the only one?
He has him in a choke hold, which from the story occurred because the now deceased person attacked him because of a confrontation about urinating in public.
I seriously doubt there is any intent to kill the person, it looked more to me like a restraint than anything else. Issue is does the guy know about the potential issues with this type of restraint? Choking him and putting weight on his chest is suppose to be a brief restraint technique in order to transition to a better technique, not a minutes long ordeal, especially given the situation (it is not like he attacked with a weapon or tried to trigger a bomb).
I think a murder charge is a bit too much, after all, the guy did attack and this person took on self defense. I do not think there was any intent on killing him, but not sure what to charge him with because if the guy did not die, or even have an injury, would there be any charges at all? If I punch someone in self defense, I would not be charged, but should that change if the punch killed the person? Though that was not the intent?
For being a cop, she sure is ****-poor at it. She clearly should know restraint techniques and apply them, there is no excuse for her actions.
What you are missing is that the cop and her hubby were being given input that the guy was having a hard time breathing yet they continued at it until he actually stopped breathing and needed CPR. She as a cop should have understood the consequences of what her husband was doing. If they didn't intend for the guy to die, they shouldn't have choked him until he stopped breathing.
What you are missing is that the cop and her hubby were being given input that the guy was having a hard time breathing yet they continued at it until he actually stopped breathing and needed CPR. She as a cop should have understood the consequences of what her husband was doing. If they didn't intend for the guy to die, they shouldn't have choked him until he stopped breathing.
After looking at more articles and such, I agree it was excessive, aside from the law, it broke the whole street code thing about fighting.
I am not familiar with Texas laws on the charges, because I am thinking murder may be a bit high of a bar to get a conviction on, versus a lesser charge. I do not think they intended to kill him, but I do believe they clearly went beyond the legal self defense, to illegal offense.
I am still wondering about the events before, how true they were. On a sided note; bothered by urinating? Really? Rule of conflict resolution is to avoid it in the first place. Urinating is hardly an issue to confront someone over (because the high likelihood of it escalating), versus calling the police and/or notifying the restaurant manager.
when trying to be superman goes wrong and you end up killing a guy for taking a **** instead of just minding your business. I have no sympathy for these people. I hope they both end up in prison for a long time.
This incident showed how effed up society has become. Not only the perps, but the idiot video taping instead of interfering and the Denny's worker who stated she wanted to act but company policy prevented her. A whole lot of beyond stupid here.
I am not familiar with Texas laws on the charges, because I am thinking murder may be a bit high of a bar to get a conviction on, versus a lesser charge.
The way I understand it, because a Grand Jury brought back the charge of homicide, and that will seemingly be the indictment for both Thompsons, it is pretty much where they have to start.
It does allow room for plea-bargaining down to aggravated manslaughter or some such.
It will be interesting to follow this case.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.