Encountered my first "Truther" today

[The Big Dog]

Oops. As suspected, the victim has no right to control the outcome of the case, nor is the victim's agreement necessary.

From the DOJ:

Red, you might be the single worst researcher on this Board. from today's chicago tribune (talking about Donte Stallworth's arrest in Florida):

"The local prosecutor rejects the charge that she let him off easy. She notes that Stallworth had a clean record and cooperated with authorities.

Another big reason for the light sentence, said Katherine Fernandez Rundle, was the preference of the victim's family. "Had the family been out for blood and wanted [Stallworth] to go to prison for 15 years, the state would have given that great weight," said a local defense lawyer."

Red, read the bolded part if you are too lazy to do anything else.

 

[RedIbis]

Because TruthersLie already said it, I'm just going to quote him


What you posted from the DOJ, is that in regards to plea bargains as well?
How do you interpret what's happened here?

If you rely on TruthersLie's analysis than you're both wrong since he starts off his expert legal opinion by getting the charges wrong.

the defendant was charged with several crimes, including a felony.

Tri claims,

These are both misdemeanors, as I urged them to reduce his charges to that level.

The perp must be very thankful that he harassed such a forgiving person and that the courts were willing to consult with the victim when deciding on not only what charges should be filed but what the sentence would be.

And let's not forget this was someone Tri claimed the judge deemed a threat to the community.

 

[RedIbis]

Red, you might be the single worst researcher on this Board. from today's chicago tribune (talking about Donte Stallworth's arrest in Florida):

"The local prosecutor rejects the charge that she let him off easy. She notes that Stallworth had a clean record and cooperated with authorities.

Another big reason for the light sentence, said Katherine Fernandez Rundle, was the preference of the victim's family. "Had the family been out for blood and wanted [Stallworth] to go to prison for 15 years, the state would have given that great weight," said a local defense lawyer."

Red, read the bolded part if you are too lazy to do anything else.

Please tell me you're not comparing Tri's "case" to manslaughter.

 

[Justin39640]

Please tell me you're not comparing Tri's "case" to manslaughter.

please tell me that you dont think that youve been "exposed as a liar"
cause you have been

 

[TruthersLie]

<snip>

The reason the guy got arrested was for two reasons. First, blocking me from leaving, in the state of Florida, is false inprisonment. A felony. The second, harassing a public servant. Not a felony, but just a simple misdemeanor.

If you rely on TruthersLie's analysis than you're both wrong since he starts off his expert legal opinion by getting the charges wrong.


Tri claims,

Oops... what was he arrested for again? Oh a felony.
again

Now, he is being charged with a felony, and a misdemeanor. He is still in jail under no bail, as the judge deamed him a threat to the community. So, they gave him no bond. Yay!! The guy needs to be off the street.

oops... my bad... what was he charged with?

Red, here is the Fl Statue for false imprisonment.

787.02 False imprisonment; false imprisonment of child under age 13, aggravating circumstances.--

(1)(a) The term "false imprisonment" means forcibly, by threat, or secretly confining, abducting, imprisoning, or restraining another person without lawful authority and against her or his will.

(2) A person who commits the offense of false imprisonment is guilty of a felony of the third degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084.

Can you even bother to do some basic research before you are shown that you are full of crap? I mean I have fun OWNING you like I have... but it really makes you look like a complete idiot.

They then REDUCED the charges to

They will be filing charges for the following charges, due to my opinion on the case.

Obstructing the flow of traffic
Harassment of a LEO/Firefighter/EMT

These are both misdemeanors, as I urged them to reduce his charges to that level

They then appear to have worked out a plea bargain. But the ORIGINAL charges were a FELONY and a MISDEMENOR. Which the prosecutor could recharge the individual with at their discression.
is that too hard for you to understand?

 

[The Big Dog]

Please tell me you're not comparing Tri's "case" to manslaughter.

That is the thinking we celebrate Red for!!!!! Stallworth's crime was much more serious and involved serious threats of harm not only to the victim, but the public in general.

Even in that serious of a case: THE PROSECUTION GIVES GREAT DEFERENCE TO THE VICTIM'S FAMILY.

Can you imagine how much more willing they would be able to defer in a case like the one we are discussing?

Can a brother get a god damn laughing dog here?

Red you hit bottom, you broke in to the sewer line, and now you are smearing yourself with the feces. Do us all a favor and kindly shut the heck up.

 

[EnJaySee]

If you rely on TruthersLie's analysis than you're both wrong since he starts off his expert legal opinion by getting the charges wrong.

TruthersLie hasn't given me any reason to disbelieve the information he brings forth. Neither does Tri for that matter. I can actually see your original viewpoint in that this could be some simple lie to make people from the Truth Movement look bad, but you know what? Just by going on how people who believe in this conspiracy behave online, Tri's experience sounds very believable. Also, what does Tri gain by posting a lie like this? It's not like he's trying to sell DVD's or something.

These are the things I considered when reading through this thread and I have no reason to think he's a liar. Even going through his post history, he's always been forthright and straightforward. No ducking questions, no verifiable lies. Unlike other people who post here.

Tri claims,



The perp must be very thankful that he harassed such a forgiving person and that the courts were willing to consult with the victim when deciding on not only what charges should be filed but what the sentence would be.

And let's not forget this was someone Tri claimed the judge deemed a threat to the community.

He better be thankful. As has been stated, many other people would've kicked him in the teeth. Myself included. Even if I'd shown the same restraint, I probably would've asked the prosecuters to throw the book at him. But I can be vindictive like that.

 

[TruthersLie]

bump for red ibis to offer tri his apology

 

[WUBRINY63]

Nice play Red. This is perfect. This thread shows just how much proof debunkers don't need to believe a story. Good job.

 

[TexasJack]

Nice play Red. This is perfect. This thread shows just how much proof debunkers don't need to believe a story. Good job.

Nice job misinterpreting the responses in this thread. Just shows how truthers completely misrepresent and cherry-pick evidence. Good Job.

 

[WUBRINY63]

Nice job misinterpreting the responses in this thread. Just shows how truthers completely misrepresent and cherry-pick evidence. Good Job.

In this thread and every other thread in this sub forum you have a belief in a story. Nothing else.

 

[dtugg]

Still way too obvious, troll.

 

[TexasJack]

In this thread and every other thread in this sub forum you have a belief in a story. Nothing else.

No HI, it's called evidence, and if you bothered to read the responses in this thread you would understand that nobody is taking his story at face value, but when Red says his story has been exposed as a fabrication without any evidence of that, and refuses to retract that, it's called denial. And when Red can't understand the plea bargain process, it's called ignorance. Ignorance and denial are what you thrive on. And when ignorance and denial persist, it leads to stupidity.

 

[triforcharity]

And what does this sound like:

Its an informality, but not a requirement of law. Its more of a courtesy thing really. Now, if they had asked if I thought that 5 hrs of community service was appropriate, I would have disagreed, and they would have come up with something else. Not because they are REQUIRED to, but they do it anyway.

 

[triforcharity]

If you rely on TruthersLie's analysis than you're both wrong since he starts off his expert legal opinion by getting the charges wrong.


Tri claims,



The perp must be very thankful that he harassed such a forgiving person and that the courts were willing to consult with the victim when deciding on not only what charges should be filed but what the sentence would be.

And let's not forget this was someone Tri claimed the judge deemed a threat to the community.

I am a very forgiving person, when that person demonstrates that he is truly sorry, and has apologized for what he has done, I am a very forgiving person. Its also called compassion. That is why I am in the public service sector. Lord knows its not for the money.

Now, origionally he WAS charged with a felony, yes. But, you will notice that I did not want them to prosecute for a felony, and the SAO gave that GREAT WEIGHT. If I had pushed for it, they would have also given thata GREAT WEIGHT. Is English NOT your first language??

 

[Mr. Skinny]

Its an informality, but not a requirement of law. Its more of a courtesy thing really. Now, if they had asked if I thought that 5 hrs of community service was appropriate, I would have disagreed, and they would have come up with something else. Not because they are REQUIRED to, but they do it anyway.

It sounds pretty similar to what used to happen back in my days as a LEO.

There would be times when I'd arrest someone for DUI and in addition would charge him with let's say, wreckless operation and driving at night without his lights on.

Now when his trial date would come around and I'd show up in court, the prosecutor would call me into his office before the trial started and say "Look, this defendant has agreed to plead guilty to the DUI if we agree to drop the wreckless op and the lights charges." I'd could agree to that if I wanted to, but sometimes, particularly if the defendant was a particularly uncooperative a-hole, I'd tell the prosecutor to stick with the original charges.

Now the prosecutor wasn't required to consult me, but they most certainly did. Seems similar to tri's claim.

 

[RedIbis]

Nice play Red. This is perfect. This thread shows just how much proof debunkers don't need to believe a story. Good job.

It depends on who's telling the story. If it's Tommy McTwoof, they'll scrutinize every detail. If it's Archie D. Bunker, they eat up every word.

 

[The Big Dog]

It depends on who's telling the story. If it's Tommy McTwoof, they'll scrutinize every detail. If it's Archie D. Bunker, they eat up every word.

Hey, hero, I still would like your reaction to getting your pants taken down with the proof that prosecuters usually take into account the position of the victim.

Or you can suck up to a well known troll.

Your decision, RED.

 

[beachnut]

In this thread and every other thread in this sub forum you have a belief in a story. Nothing else.

You believe in lies. You post nonsense. Your posts are indicative of your gullibility, your falling for the dirt dumb ideas spread by liars, your failed moronic delusions on 911. This tread is about another gullible person who believes in lies spread by liars on 911 issues. And you have as much to offer in this thread as you have to support your failed ideas on 911; nothing. Now you will offer more proof of this...

Got some proof of your veiled support for RedIbis who can’t support your failed 911 ideas let alone his weak veiled proclamation of liar in this thread.

 

[EnJaySee]

It depends on who's telling the story. If it's Tommy McTwoof, they'll scrutinize every detail. If it's Archie D. Bunker, they eat up every word.

As I posted before, previous posting history can be taken into account when believing any given story. In Tri's case, his posting history gives me no reason to disbelieve this story. That being said (typed?), there's no reason to believe the story as well due to lack of posted evidence.

Generally, people who believe the 911 conspiracy make claims that they either cannot or do not wish to provide evidence for. The perfect example in this very thread was when Red said this story has been "exposed as a fabrication". However, Red didn't provide a single shred of evidence to back up this very strong claim. Does it surprise you that everyone jumped on you to provide this evidence?