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.
There is a process to due process. He was wanted whether he was guilty or innocent. If he was unwilling to participate in that process, what rights was he denied? How did the police violate his right to due process?
Under the constitution he was entitled to due process- explain which which were denied by the police...
entitled to confront his accusers
to no excessive bail
to legal council
to a speedy trial
judged by a peers
right to apeal the verdict
Guilt and innocence is an ajudicated outcome.
explain where i'm misinformed, so that I too can be enlighted.
I am not saying I am enlightened. I am saying that there is obviously more to this story than what we are being told. I won't apologize for questioning what's happened. Before I even read in depth anything about this case, I already felt something wasn't right. Red flag. He was wanted, yes. And he did shot the cops that were chasing him. Kill or be killed mentallity. I don't believe he shot that couple. If he was a cold blooded killer, he would have killed the two women he tied up. What would have to lose from it? Nothing. He was already dead in the eyes of the law. Killing two more people wouldn't have made him much difference. That doesn't send a red flag up for you??? Seriously??
He is no different from any other nut who's upset with an employer and shoots up the workplace with the exception of the fact that he carried it out over time and in a calculated way that included targeting innocent family members which makes him worse than most workplace shooters. He gets support because of the fact that he targeted police which is evidence of a disgusting segment of our society.
As for the calls for due process, he had the chance. Where is the "due process" for the people he shot that some seem to think deserved it? The same people would argue against the death penalty but sympathize with him for carrying it out against people he knew were innocent.
Look, dude... When you lose your job, whether you like it or not, you do not have a right to go and start murdering people, including people completely unrelated to your job. You can seek legal recourse and that's it. It's as simple as that.
First, not a dude. Second, we DO NOT know his side. Read about him going to testify against the LAPD and his partner. Read about his solid history of being a good citizen. IF testifying against his own isn't call for SHTF and them go after, I don't know what does. He was dead the moment he agreed to testify. He didn't back down, he didn't change his story with their threats. He was marked for a reason. He was setup to some extinct. You seriously think Lanza, a goofy kid could be the most accurate killer in recent history? Hell no. SO open you eyes and see things clearly.
Because it looks like some guy was probably wronged by the LAPD, and retaliated by going on a killing spree. Now he's being hailed as some sort of hero by crazies who think gunning down innocent people is something to be celebrated. Maybe they're doing it for attention. Maybe they genuinely support him, in which case I hope someone intervenes and gets them help before they also go on a shooting spree, because they're clearly f**ked in the head.
In court, yes. This is not court. People are allowed to judge him based on the available evidence, which indicates overwhelmingly that he did in fact murder some people.
What was the excuse for killing the young coach from Fullerton or her boyfriend?
Did the corruption run that deep that it drove him to a reality version of "Death Wish" ?
The real question is "why" did he do that. We now know WHAT he did but we don't know WHY he did it.
1. Why did he tie up the 2 maids and not harm them? Think about it. He could have used a silencer and killed them without anyone knowing about them for a much longer time.
2. When he car jacked the 2nd truck (he took the maid's purple truck). If Dorner was being pursued already which he was. He could have just shot the owner of the truck point blank and taken the truck by force. Dorner even let the owner take his dog out of the truck before taking off.
The general public was never in danger.
Dorner has a gripe with the cops (and by 2nd hand, killing their family to harm the cop emotionally).
While I think Dorner went overboard, he did have some sense of courtesy not to harm civilian not associated with the police.
And the LAPD's response? They "reopened" up the investigation for his firing but didn't hire an outside 3rd party reviewer. Think about that.
i swear if i was some sort of cia spy I would be all over websites like these to find people we need to look into.
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.
