tvc184

Easily…..

On a side note, am I angry that the guy defended his girlfriend from a slap with deadly force? No. Am I angry that he brought a 6” knife with him? No. In Texas there is no such restriction but like always, different states have different laws. This guy was likely committing a crime of carrying a deadly weapon onto a subway, but I don’t blame him.

Here is an interesting take on this case. We all should know that no matter the facts of a case, it sometimes depends on the laws in that particular state and in that particular jurisdiction. I often see arguments in various forums, including this one, where an incident in Oklahoma will be compared to a similar one in New Jersey. It usually can’t be done because it is different laws prosecuted by a different jurisdictions. This video is about a self defense case on a train where an unarmed person was killed. In this case the deceased made no threats to kill anyone like in the Penny case. The man who claimed self defense in this case, killed an unarmed guy who not making any death threats. He did so by stabbing with an illegal knife. Yep, the killer brought maybe a 6” blade knife onto a train where city ordinance only allowed a 4” knife. Why was the guy stabbed to death? Because he slapped a woman. Even in Texas where self defense is a bit more open, a deadly force self defense requires a “reasonable belief” that it is to stop deadly force. Imagine if school kids could lawfully kill each other if one slapped the other at school. You gave me a bloody nose so I can lawfully kill you? Both the Penny case and the case in this video were 6 weeks apart and…. both in New York City. That’s right folks, both were on a subway in NYC in the summer of 2023 The guy who brought the illegal knife onto the train, stabbed a guy to death for a slap. The DA investigated and presented a case to the grand jury which resulted in no charges filed. This was 6 weeks AFTER the Penny case where Penny used no deadly weapon to subdue a guy who threatened to kill people and the man making threats said that he didn’t care if he spent life in prison. Seems like a credible threat? So what if the difference between a guy killing an unarmed guy with a deadly weapon for a slap and a guy that used only physical force to stop a person making death threats…. in the same city and only 6 weeks difference? The guy who brought the illegal knife onto the train and killed the unarmed guy for a slap, was Black. So in the same city at almost the same time where an “unarmed person” was killed on a subway in both cases, one was killed with an illegal weapon for a slap and the other was killed only with physical force of holding on after the deceased threatening to kill several people. Who would seem more likely to be prosecuted? Oh, the unarmed White guy. Any questions about political prosecutions in NYC?

The difference between the two cases is political, jury mindset and also the difference between self defense and using force to take a person into custody. Obviously the officer who was holding down George Floyd was not doing so in self-defense so there is a different part of the law. I know that you are trying for an analogy. Saying that stomping out the brains of an unconscious man and holding onto a person are the same is beyond a stretch. If a person is unconscious and out of the fight, it is clearly not the same of a person who may still be struggling and who, if let up, may again by a threat. I love what if scenarios but in this case let’s stick to what we know for the moment. A guy came in and threatened people, apparently with at least implied death threats. Those people were trapped on a train. Penny tackled the guy and held onto him Remember in self defense the defendant has to prove NOTHING. Again, self defense does not have to be proven. The prosecution has to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that there was no way this was self defense. This isn’t even a tie goes to the runner in baseball but proving that the ball got to first base when the batter was still 5 feet away making it no doubt. If a juror believes that there is an 85% chance that this was not a case of lawful self defense but rather a homicide, the juror should be voting not guilty. That is a huge burden to overcome for the prosecution to prove that the death was not accidental in a case of self defense. I agree with many people that this probably should never have even been brought to trial. In many jurisdictions it would not have been. I was the supervisor on scene of a fatal shooting. Two guys got into an argument and one pulled a gun. Self defense? I have no clue, but he didn’t shoot. He just pulled to get the other guy to leave. The other guy left. The other guy went and got his gun however and came back to the scene, maybe like a shootout in an old western. Remember that he had successfully left the scene and the threat. He was no longer in danger. He voluntarily came back to confront the guy. Is it stand your ground when you go get a gun and come back looking for a fight? So the guy that left and came back with a gun, shot and killed the guy who had possibly pulled the first gun in his own self-defense. The DA did not prosecute the case. Self defense…. That is far different than the case we are discussing. In this case, Daniel Penny was thrown into a situation that he did not create and he was charged with a homicide. In the case I worked, obviously in a very different jurisdiction, a guy left the scene and voluntarily came back to the fight with a gun and was not charged. Can you at least see the rationale that the jury may have had? Was there beyond a reasonable doubt that this was nothing more than a killing?

This is what the Constitution says about presidential pardons in Article II. ”…, and he shall have Power to grant Reprieves and Pardons for Offences against the United States, except in Cases of Impeachment”. That’s it. The only restriction is that he cannot pardon in an impeachment. that would come down to the separation of powers. When the Constitution says that House has the authority to impeach and the Senate has the authority to convict and remove, that’s the end of thediscussion. The president cannot overturn an impeachment and removal from office. That was affirmed by the Supreme Court in Ex Parte Garland with the only exception being future crimes.

The only jurisdiction that the president has over a city is in Washington DC. If a murder happened outside of that city, the president has no jurisdiction or authority to pardon because he has no authority over state law. By the same reasoning (even more so) a presidential pardon has no bearing outside of the US. An extradition request from another country could be denied though, I believe by a federal court on appeal. Like we have a treaty to extradite with Mexico however they will not send someone to this country if the person is facing the death penalty. That is because Mexico does not have the death penalty and will not send a person to another country to be executed.

Absolutely nothing but it makes for another great straw man.

If you trust me to say, in Ex Parte Garland the Supreme Court ruled that the authority to pardon by the president for a federal crime is almost unlimited. They specifically stated that this authority includes before an investigation, while a criminal charge is pending (such as an indictment) or after conviction. The limiting factor is that the president cannot pardon a crime that has not already occurred. For example that the president said that you are pardoned for any crime committed between January 1, 2000 and today, 12-9-24, then you are not criminally responsible for any crimes, including those, not yet even discovered. If you commit a crime tomorrow on 12-10-24, the pardon has no effect. So Biden cannot say, I pardon Hunter until the year 2035. Any crime that he “may have committed” after January 1, 2014 and the day he was pardoned, he cannot be charged. On an interesting note, I believe that Hunter Biden was named to the board of Burisma and the oil kickback scandal, with 10% for the big guy, not long after January 1, 2014. I don’t think the date that the pardon started was chosen at random.

No.

The Constitution and the Supreme Court decision in Ex Parte Garland. Do you want the explanation, particularly in Ex Parte Garland?

The Constitution doesn’t allow it. Trump would be the president, not the governor. The president has the constitutional authority to pardon anyone for a federal crime. A president has absolutely no authority over a state crime. This was the state homicide. It is dual sovereignty. Each state is a separate country within the federal authority of the United States. The president has no authority over state politics, which was pretty much the entire intent of the Constitution.

Trump could not have pardoned him.

Maybe my criminal justice learning from 35 years ago aren’t so dated…..

🤣 I just read on X that this guy admired Ted Kaczynski. EDIT: Auto correct

It makes you wonder. It has been many years since I went to serial killer school but there may be similarities. Certainly theories and/or circumstances change with time so this may be nonsense or it simply doesn’t apply to this person. Back then I was taught that some of the killers thought of themselves superior to law enforcement and couldn’t be caught. They might leave cryptic messages or clues or just be brazen. Kind of like, I will leave these buffoons some clues but they still won’t catch me. Did this guy want to be caught? From the tidbits of information given by NYPD, he had his own political motivation or hatred toward a situation. He had writing on him maybe like a Ted Kaczynski/Unabomber manifesto but not nearly as extensive. I think the UnaBomber who managed to avoid detection for almost 20 years. I believe it was his brother. who turned him in when the FBI released his manifesto to the public. His brother either recognized his writings or his writing style. Did this guy think that he was clever or as you suggest, he wanted to get caught and it might turn out to be just that simple.

Straw Man, yet again. Who has said that the speaker is “so powerless”? Out of the 254 counties in Texas, most are ignored if they have the speaker? Your predictions haven’t been very accurate lately but who knows, maybe your prognosticating has improved.

Yep, that’s what I was thinking about. This seemingly big plan… and he still has the gun?

Guy might have still had the gun?

What do you mean? There is no way Trump can beat her. Y’all will see!!

A CB endorsement is like the kiss of death…..

WRONG!! Democrats riot when they protest. If Republicans protest, it’s an insurrection. 🤣

Cue the riots….

George Zimmerman Kyle Rittenhouse Daniel Perry Daniel Penny All political prosecutions…..

How many times?? Democrats apparently hate self defense.

Not guilty!!