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.
Trust me, there isn't a jury in New York City that's going to convict Diallo, especially considering the perp's prior criminal history -- Nash had 19 prior arrests. From the New York Daily News:
"His previous arrests included drugs, arson, unlawful imprisonment, robbery and assault. In one particularly heinous 2003 case, he pleaded guilty to unlawful imprisonment for holding a 17-year-old girl captive for two days.
Authorities said the teen was sexually abused, stabbed and beaten — suffering a black eye, lacerations and a dislocated shoulder."
I think Diallo should get a medal for improving the human gene pool.
Trust me, there isn't a jury in New York City that's going to convict Diallo, especially considering the perp's prior criminal history -- Nash had 19 prior arrests. From the New York Daily News:
"His previous arrests included drugs, arson, unlawful imprisonment, robbery and assault. In one particularly heinous 2003 case, he pleaded guilty to unlawful imprisonment for holding a 17-year-old girl captive for two days.
Authorities said the teen was sexually abused, stabbed and beaten — suffering a black eye, lacerations and a dislocated shoulder."
I think Diallo should get a medal for improving the human gene pool.
Except in most liberal jurisdictions, the perps past criminal history is not admissible in court, as the defendant was not aware of these facts at the time of the incident.
The guy did the entire world a favor in self defense, and the liberal idiots will now prosecute him, drain his life savings defending himself again, then send him to prison. They preferred it when this thug was running free, because it gave them job security. Liberal morons will vote them into office again and again to "protect them" from criminals like these, but they are literally sooo stupid, they don't realize that what they are doing, isn't working. Why was this moron out on the streets after so many criminal incidents?
You are always fighting the thugs and the law, and sometimes it's hard to tell them apart.
RLM Rapists Lives Matter. Errr. No they don't.
I have a friend who was raped. She carries the mental scars with her for life. There is absolutely no justification for such a crime. Society as a whole has been done a favor by this dirtbag being beaten 'til dead.
Let me start by saying I too am glad this POS is dead. And yeah, had that been my wife I could see myself doing the same thing.
But you guys questioning the law have to understand these laws are there for a reason. Another poster said what I was thinking. What if she was mistaken? In a civilized society you can not let citizens take the law into their own hands. Sure in this case it may have been justified but what about the next one that inches even closer to the gray area? That can of worms is best left closed for obvious reasons.
I do agree that he won't face much punishment, I sure hope that is the case. But again as posted before he most certainly should go through the process.
Last edited by DaveinMtAiry; 06-02-2016 at 03:04 PM..
If he had not stopped this guy would have gotten away social liberals have made self defense illegal in city's like NYC.
Don't turn it into a political argument by using words like "liberals". The problem is caused by stupidity, not political leanings. There is no shortage of stupidity in any kind of political leanings. Unless you consider a noisy bombastic bloward to be your idea of a genius.
It's the liberal justice system. You can't be trusted with a gun, knife or a whistle. If you are attacked and your wife is almost raped, you must allow the rape and pay the man on his way out instead of protecting your family, lest you be arrested for it. 'Merica, where we have 5% of the worlds population, and 25% of the worlds inmates....
You misspelled "incompetent" as "liberal" thereby attempting to turn this into a political argument. No matter how incompetent you think anything is now, wait till a bombastic blowhard takes over, and you will start to get an inkling of what real incompetence really is.
Except in most liberal jurisdictions, the perps past criminal history is not admissible in court, as the defendant was not aware of these facts at the time of the incident.
That's complete and utter nonsense.
First, most states simply follow federal rules of evidence governing this issue. These rules were signed into law in 1975 by a Republican President. There have been ample opportunities for Republicans to alter them. If they're not to your liking, you can't logically blame that on your 'scary liberals' boogeyman.
Second, there is no state - period - that simply bars the criminal history of a suspect from trial. Every state allows such evidence to some degree and in certain circumstances and prohibits such evidence to some degree and in certain situations. Your assertion that 'in most liberal jurisdictions, the perps past criminal history is not admissible in court' is false. It is simply not true. And your weird use of the term 'liberal jurisdiction' suggests that you in fact do not know what you're talking about. Why didn't you just say 'state'? It's not like law in this regard differs between, say, New York (city) and upstate - it's New York law governing both places, and as previously noted, whether it's New York or Texas, California or Utah, the law is closely patterned on the aforementioned federal rules.
Finally, I'll just add that the idea that admission of prior crimes significantly changes the likely outcome of a trial is wrong, as surveys of trials and their outcomes have shown. http://scholarlycommons.law.northwes...5&context=jclc
The guy had to be arrested and charged, there's no way around it. If charges are later dismissed or he is found not guilty or not guilty for reasons of insanity, or if he is found guilty and given probation, justice will have been served. Considering what he did he has to go through the process though.
This.
If police come onto a seen where one man is mortally wounded or dead and the other admits to harming him, of course they have to put the perpetrator in handcuffs and take him to the station until they can figure out what happened. They can't just take the guy's word that it was a rapist attacking his wife, they have to see if his story checks out.
After the fact are gathered he will be charged/not charged accordingly. All this outrage is premature, just let the process work itself out first
the criminal was caught in the hallway not on top of his wife, so it was after the act, his word against the wife word. but no way I would convice him either
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.
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.
