Skip to main content

View Diary: Darren Wilson's odds, according to St. Louis Public Radio (53 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  So the jury convicted (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    CenPhx, Sandino, gffish

    because of the dog?

    No dog in this case.

    "Fighting for us, good. Winning, better. Talking about fighting? Not so good."--Atrios

    by andrewj54 on Sun Aug 17, 2014 at 07:37:01 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  Nah, the jury hung on the animal cruelty count too (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      andrewj54, psnyder

      I think Chrisman was claiming the man and the dog, a pitbull, posed a threat. His partner said they didn't. So either you believed one or the other, either convicting of both murder and animal cruelty or neither. Not that juries don't come out with inconsistent verdicts all the time, because they definitely do, I just think this case the dog was actually being argued part of the danger/a weapon.

      They didn't go to trial a second time - he took a plea deal instead.

      •  But if what defused the situation, (0+ / 0-)

        according to the partner, was the shooting of Rodriguez, then the point, it seems to me, would be that the shooting of Rodriguez was legitimate.  Did Chrisman only wound Rodriguez initially?

        "Fighting for us, good. Winning, better. Talking about fighting? Not so good."--Atrios

        by andrewj54 on Sun Aug 17, 2014 at 07:52:49 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site