Gunned Down Cold In A Raw Deal
- Thread starter fdd2blk
- Start date
Was thinking the same..he'll get convicted of some kind of murder, and everyone will be pacified.
i had to go back a few pages to find the post, ......"the DA feels it was "an unlawful killing done by intentional act". this is considered "murder"."
so if you have a record your life is worth less?
exactly what do you consider "quite the record"?
he had a 4 year old son as well. tell the kid his dad deserved it?
i'm almost offended.
ToastedFox
Well-Known Member
i had to go back a few pages to find the post, ......"the DA feels it was "an unlawful killing done by intentional act". this is considered "murder"."
so if you have a record your life is worth less?
exactly what do you consider "quite the record"?
he had a 4 year old son as well. tell the kid his dad deserved it?
i'm almost offended.
Record or not he still is entitled to the same rights as the rest of us unless otherwise stated by law. People think I'm being nutty when I talk about police, but this kinda thing isn't too uncommon it just happens to be this time it was nabbed on film thankfully.
Plenty of raids have ended even worse then this, just barney fife with his one bullet again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZLsg0EvZozI
NewGrowth
Well-Known Member
Could not find much but I did find this. http://www.blackvoices.com/boards/entertainment/entertainmnt/entertainment/oscar-grants-criminal-record/258909/1
He served prison time but the guy was working two jobs trying to support his family criminals don't work two jobs. On the news I heard them say it was a marijuana related criminal history.
In all honesty why does it matter if he has a criminal record? He was lying on his stomach and he was shot point blank. He was a human being that certainly did not deserve to die.
He served prison time but the guy was working two jobs trying to support his family criminals don't work two jobs. On the news I heard them say it was a marijuana related criminal history.
In all honesty why does it matter if he has a criminal record? He was lying on his stomach and he was shot point blank. He was a human being that certainly did not deserve to die.
ToastedFox
Well-Known Member
NewGrowth
Well-Known Member
Gotta find any excuse you can for that cop
SocataSmoker
Well-Known Member
I love people that don't read, don't you?
I said it is possible they had prior run ins due to him having a record, I dont care about his record. As for the DA saying it was an unlawful killing that is true, but whether it was intentional or not will not be known until trial. And whats with the kid thing, it matters not if he was a father or not, death has no prejudices...
GreenLeaf420
Well-Known Member
I'm betting the jury will disagree with you on this one. And I'm also betting that kid would trade any amount of money to get his dad back.
SocataSmoker
Well-Known Member
I doubt it, it happens all the time and if anything, it's just used to create anger among the people by pulling at their delicate little heart strings... and I'm sure he would too, most people who've lost their fathers would give anything to have them back, but this reminds me of the "think about the children" mentality of the government, and I hate it, precious little snowflakes they are...
"Grant had a criminal record; according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Grant served several months in state prison in 2007 and 2008. The Department of Corrections didn't disclose the offenses for which Grant was sentenced.i must have read it wrong.
Records at the main Alameda County Courthouse in Oakland indicate that Grant had 12 separate cases between April 12, 2004, and May 8, 2008. But the records for all of those cases are at the Hayward Hall of Justice and weren't immediately available."
12 cases in 4 years, to me... is quite a record, anyone disagree?
And you're right fdd, you STILL didn't read, not even after I pointed it out that you didn't read... but that's okay, I'll work with ya through this, together we can solve our problems! So here it is again fdd, this time read... and notice that I don't care about his record in this statement, I'm only saying it is possible they had run-ins because he had an EXTENSIVE record...
"unless there is MUCH more we don't see and know, such as him having prior run ins with the deceased, as the deceased wasn't an angel at all... had quite a record."
There it is again, got it?
NewGrowth
Well-Known Member
I have probably had 12 cases in one year. Does not mean much when the police arrest you they charge you with lots of things. You have hearings for prior crimes if you were already on probation too. Its a messed up system, they are respectfully not disclosing much about Oscar Grant. The information is vague and its hard to say "he had quite a record". I pretty sure that it was drug related charges nothing violent because I heard something about marijuana from one of the protester interviews. Oh well I guess when the cops shoot me in the back they will claim I have "quite a record" as well.
SocataSmoker
Well-Known Member
SocataSmoker
Well-Known Member
I doubt it, it happens all the time and if anything, it's just used to create anger among the people by pulling at their delicate little heart strings... and I'm sure he would too, most people who've lost their fathers would give anything to have them back, but this reminds me of the "think about the children" mentality of the government, and I hate it, precious little snowflakes they are...
"Grant had a criminal record; according to the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Grant served several months in state prison in 2007 and 2008. The Department of Corrections didn't disclose the offenses for which Grant was sentenced.
Records at the main Alameda County Courthouse in Oakland indicate that Grant had 12 separate cases between April 12, 2004, and May 8, 2008. But the records for all of those cases are at the Hayward Hall of Justice and weren't immediately available."
12 cases in 4 years, to me... is quite a record, anyone disagree?
And you're right fdd, you STILL didn't read, not even after I pointed it out that you didn't read... but that's okay, I'll work with ya through this, together we can solve our problems! So here it is again fdd, this time read... and notice that I don't care about his record in this statement, I'm only saying it is possible they had run-ins because he had an EXTENSIVE record...
"unless there is MUCH more we don't see and know, such as him having prior run ins with the deceased, as the deceased wasn't an angel at all... had quite a record."
There it is again, got it?
all i see is you defending a murderous cop. sorry.
and belittling the life of a dead man as you do it.
