tvc184

The intent of seizing drug money is use it in law enforcement including community youth support programs. The money does have to be turned in to the government (state/federal) but it mostly (or all depending on the state) has to go back to law enforcement. So a city chief as an example, cannot put it in his pocket. Like all funding it has to go through the city council but earmarked for the police. Much or all of it goes to the federal government who divides it up between the police agencies involved in the seizure.

First, by Texas law if you are committing a crime act, you generally don’t get self defense. As an example… A guy goes in to rob a store with a gun. He has no intention of using it but as he makes his demand for the money and then grabs it and runs. The clerk pulls his own gun as the robber tries to get away and is running out of the store. The clerk shots the robber who is clearly trying to get away. The robber turns and shoots at the store clerk in “self defense” because the store clerk is shooting at him while he is just trying to get away. The store clerk dies. Self defense? No, it’s Capital Murder and death penalty eligible. The robber trying to flee was still in the act of committing a robbery by trying to escape with the money and the store clerk acted lawfully, whereas the robber did not. There is no self-defense in such a case. In this situation the accused went into a felony drug deal and brought a firearm. Was he an innocent and unwilling bystander or a person willingly participating in a felony (for which he was convicted) where he brought a gun anticipating possible violence? So even if he was defending himself, is it “clearly self defense” while participating in a potential violent felony? Let’s look at the actual law on self defense. Here is the quoted applicable Texas Penal Code law on if self defense is lawful while committing a crime. A person person is justified in using self defense IF; (C) was committing or attempting to commit aggravated kidnapping, murder, sexual assault, aggravated sexual assault, robbery, or aggravated robbery; (2) did not provoke the person against whom the force was used; AND (3) was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used. Notice that it says “was not otherwise engaged in criminal activity, other than a Class C misdemeanor that is a violation of a law or ordinance regulating traffic at the time the force was used”. He was most definitely engaged in criminal activity other that a traffic citation. Obviously the DA didn’t think it was clearly self defense. Read the quote from the law and tell me if self defense is available in Texas while voluntarily committing a felony. With that being the law, I said that the it would be a tough case possibly by the defense attorney doing his/her job of trying to convince the jury to not go by the law that I posted. Oh well, the other guy was a bad guy so let my client go. It worked. That is the system. Notice that the same jury who was almost certainly given the law that I posted above and apparently found that he was “not engaged in a criminal activity” (other than a traffic citation), found that he was engaged in 4 felonies and gave him the maximum sentence. The accused is guaranteed the right to a public trial and a unanimous decision of proof beyond a reasonable doubt before conviction. A jury can be 90% sure that the crime was committed yet that is reasonable doubt. That doesn’t mean innocent. It means the jury didn’t feel that the DA proved the case. That again is the system. So again, read the law that I quoted on self defense. It can be lawful IF stopping certain crimes against the person AND was not committing another crime… which the jury coincidentally found him guilty of 4 felonies. I have no clue what was testified to in court, but I can reasonably believe that DA was looking at the same law that I posted. The jury said that he is not guilty so by law he is not guilty, hard stop. Clearly self defense??

Was it clearly self defense? I thought from the outset that it would be an almost impossible case to prove but if it was so clear, why was he even charged? The law was certainly on the side of the guy charged.

It certainly brings into question such a strong opposition. NO!! We cannot allow people to identify themselves when they vote! Of course the same person has to have a photo ID for almost anything in life.

Where are these saints that are running for office? A felon is not allowed to be a police officer. It is a ridiculous analogy. I am not looking for a clergyman when voting. If I was looking for a librarian, I wouldn’t be looking at people who are illiterate either. I have given my opinion on the Minneapolis shootings including the nurse. Maybe you were too busy thinking up your next nonsensical comparison. The bringing up of Trump in a police use of force incident is ridiculous although not surprising when decisions are based on emotions. Seriously, is there any thought process from the left side of the aisle other than Trump?

🤣🤣🤣 A candidate has some personal life issues and that equates to being “okay with” whatever it is? If you want to start throwing stones, okay. Do you want to start with Clinton having an affair in the Oval Office while the Secret Service plays lookout? Is the DNC okay with that? Your premise is silly. If I was moral guidance I will seek out a church, not a political candidate.

Now people will be complaining that they are pushing sugar and obesity on children…..

…. of course you probably realize that from your former life.

The year after Hurricane Ike, Port Arthur had 4 or 5 murders in January. I was the on scene supervisor on 3 of them. At that pace we were on schedule for about 100 per 100,000 people which is almost 20 times the national average. I think we had 3 or 4 the rest of the year. They come in spurts.

Back to the actual topic of the thread, listed below is an Emerson College poll from three weeks ago, Pacton and Cornyn are at 27% and 26% respectively. Hunt is at 17% and the rest undecided. That generally follows the trend of the last few months with a dead heat within the margin of error and a likely runoff. An interesting part of the poll however shows Cornyn beating Talarico by 3% and Crockett by 5%. Paxton shows a tie with both. That seems to address the negativity toward Paxton who carries baggage. Where Cornyn is seen as the RINO who doesn’t work an play well with others, he doesn’t have the corruption factor attached to him like Paxton. That could possibly win Paxton the primary but the more likely possibility of losing in the general election. [Hidden Content]

None of which addresses the topic of the thread or my comment. The thread is about Paxton v. Cornyn and my comment was about RINOs. All of the claimed RINOs almost always end up voting in lockstep with the party. Your response is, Orange Man Bad!! Stunning! I never saw that coming. 🤣

That’s a lot to unpack…… 🤔 The students have no right to walk out of class as free speech. If the students are at least 15 years old, they are not children under assault laws in Texas. At 15 years old, they lose their protection as children.

Not guilty of murder, but 10 years for the marijuana. Not knowing exactly what evidence they had at the trial, it looks like if you’re going to claim this was a drug deal gone bad and it was self-defense, you’ve pretty much got to admit to the drug deal.

Not guilty for Murder. [Hidden Content]

I agree completely of the Supreme Court will allow executive orders to do so If Trump can strip the states and cities from federal funding, that would be awesome. Let them put their money where their mouth is.