Friday, June 07, 2024
Murder charges against suspected baby killer dropped over prosecutor’s disparaging remarks about him on TV
First-degree murder charges were dropped against a man in Colorado accused of fatally shaking a 10-month-old boy after a judge ruled that the beleaguered prosecutor disparaged the 22-year-old defendant in a TV news report.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
O-o-o-o Said a bad word about a murderer. Best let him off, he was offended
ReplyDeleteThat judge needs a good shaking.
ReplyDeleteWas the baby disparaged too?
ReplyDeleteThe baby couldn't have cared less.
DeleteHe was dead.
And so should be the murderer.
I was implying, was the baby of little worth.
DeleteThe baby-killer is lucky he didn’t say he voted for Trump.
ReplyDeleteWas he a viet nam vet?
DeleteHeltau
Heltau, you want to explain that question? Quickly, to a Viet Nam vet, motherfucker.
DeleteWay to piss off the crowd, Felt. Most of us are vets.
DeleteSomeone in that area knows where this POS lives, maybe this person could give the POS a real good shaking
ReplyDeleteJD
A change of venue maybe but charges dropped? Disgusting.
ReplyDeleteEd
Prosecutors are the adversaries of the accused....it is expected that they have already formed a judgement of the defendant and can express it. It is the job of the -jury- to be impartial. Man we've lost our marbles as a society.
ReplyDeletePhucking women. They have nooooo problem killing them in the womb, when they might interfere with potential mommy's agenda. Why should they care about them after birth?
ReplyDeleteKinder, gentler, my left nut.
EVERYONE is entitled to a fair trial. Maybe even especially if the suspect looks like a scumbag. I note that the Manhattan jury pool for Trump's trial generally thought he was a scumbag, in advance.
ReplyDeleteAnd basing this just on this one article:
1. The alleged scenario doesn't appear to support a first degree -- premeditated, planned -- murder charge. Negligent manslaughter seems more likely.
2. The DA apparently thought her own case was so weak that she needed to pre-bias the jury pool -- and comments here show it worked. And she KNEW she was over the legal line:
Stanley said she thought her comments were “off-the-record” even though she was miked and the camera was on"
A piss poor after-the-fact excuse.
3. You might look up the legal history of "shaken baby syndrome" cases, before jumping to DA-approved conclusions.
Maybe this guy should rot in jail or burn in hell. I'd have preferred a fair trial to establish that.
But right now, some of you sound like Lefties cheering the J6 granny convictions and prison sentences.
EVERYONE is entitled to a fair trial......
ReplyDeleteWell that's debatable seeing how our federal system railroads anyone who disagrees with their agenda...... We as once free citizens of the United States still have some freedom of speech and that's what we are doing here..
But right now, some of you sound like Lefties cheering the J6 granny convictions and prison sentences...
See my statement above...
So Karen, Carl fuck off
JD
Reply