• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

US Justice Department to review BART shooting (1 Viewer)

Renae

Banned
Suspended
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 26, 2007
Messages
50,241
Reaction score
19,243
Location
San Antonio Texas
Gender
Female
Political Leaning
Conservative
LOS ANGELES -- The U.S. Department of Justice will conduct an independent review of the Johannes Mehserle case in order to determine whether or not the shooting merits federal prosecution, according the department.
"The Justice Department has been closely monitoring the state's investigation and prosecution," the department said in a statement.

"The Civil Rights Division, the U.S. Attorney's Office, and the FBI have an open investigation into the fatal shooting and, at the conclusion of the state's prosecution, will conduct an independent review of the facts and circumstances to determine whether the evidence warrants federal prosecution."
Department of Justice to conduct independent review Mehserle case, may prosecute | abc7news.com

So, because the State didn't find the man guilty as the Obama Admin wanted, they are going to try to make this a Federal Crime now?

I'd say this proves that race trumps all in the Obama Dept. of Justice.
 
Last edited:
Yet the Black Panther case will not be reviewed?
 
So let me get this straight


People are trying to compare a few people standing outside a polling booth with a night stick to the shooting and killing of an unarmed man as being anywhere near the same level of importance
 
So let me get this straight


People are trying to compare a few people standing outside a polling booth with a night stick to the shooting and killing of an unarmed man as being anywhere near the same level of importance


Both cases the issue is race.

Black Panthers engaging in blatent voter intimidation? Oh, we'll let that pass.
Cali failed to convict the white guy of MURDER? We will investigate!
 
Both cases the issue is race.

Black Panthers engaging in blatent voter intimidation? Oh, we'll let that pass.
Cali failed to convict the white guy of MURDER? We will investigate!

In one case somebody was killed

The other case somebody held a night stick in a meanacing manner

I know which one I would want the government to spend resources on
 
In one case somebody was killed

The other case somebody held a night stick in a meanacing manner

I know which one I would want the government to spend resources on

If it were the Klan standing outside those polling booths, it'd be different, don't you think?

Holder is a racist.
 
what's the harm in investigating?


Oh I don't know... maybe they should have investigated BEFORE the state trial. They don't like the verdict so they do this.
 
Oh I don't know... maybe they should have investigated BEFORE the state trial. They don't like the verdict so they do this.

if you could provide some proof that would be great. is that what typically happens, the feds bring charges first?
 
In one case somebody was killed

The other case somebody held a night stick in a meanacing manner

I know which one I would want the government to spend resources on

I didn't realize it was an either-or situation with those two cases.

Besides, the murder was already investigated, the state made its case and the jury decided the guilt in the matter. Unless there is some evidence of jury tampering, or witness tampering, the feds really have no reason to be involved since there isn't even a suspicion of wrongdoing from what I've read, just a dislike of the outcome. Seems more of a case where they want to try the defendant until they get the verdict they like.
 
Department of Justice to conduct independent review Mehserle case, may prosecute | abc7news.com

So, because the State didn't find the man guilty as the Obama Admin wanted, they are going to try to make this a Federal Crime now?

I'd say this proves that race trumps all in the Obama Dept. of Justice.

Although the result of this trial seem puzzling on the surface, I was not privy to the evidence and testimony at the trial. There's no way the Feds should get involved and stick their nose where it doesn't belong. This reeks of Terry Schiavo, where the same unnecessary intervention happened.
 
So much for being judged by a jury of your peers.
 
In one case somebody was killed

The other case somebody held a night stick in a meanacing manner

I know which one I would want the government to spend resources on

The right to vote is fundamental, did these black panthers intimidate some people to not vote? Very likely. Yes, I would say it is very important to uphold the guilty verdict that was already obtained.
 
The right to vote is fundamental, did these black panthers intimidate some people to not vote? Very likely. Yes, I would say it is very important to uphold the guilty verdict that was already obtained.


Your right, the right to vote is fundamental. As it was in 2006 in Pima Arizona, where the DOJ declined to bring any charges for voter intimidation when minutemen, one of whom carried a gun were intimidating Latino voters at a polling place while also filming them. :2wave:
 
I didn't realize it was an either-or situation with those two cases.

Besides, the murder was already investigated, the state made its case and the jury decided the guilt in the matter. Unless there is some evidence of jury tampering, or witness tampering, the feds really have no reason to be involved since there isn't even a suspicion of wrongdoing from what I've read, just a dislike of the outcome. Seems more of a case where they want to try the defendant until they get the verdict they like.

This :yt, people should read it.
 
Your right, the right to vote is fundamental. As it was in 2006 in Pima Arizona, where the DOJ declined to bring any charges for voter intimidation when minutemen, one of whom carried a gun were intimidating Latino voters at a polling place while also filming them. :2wave:

So, are you saying that two wrongs make a right, or? I'm not quite getting your point.

Don't you think that, if true, the minutemen that brought guns to intimidate potential voters should have been prosecuted?
 
So the racist Justice Department is going to violate double jeopardy and give the cops a second trial, just like they did in the Rodney King case.

Boy, no surprises there.
 
So let me get this straight


People are trying to compare a few people standing outside a polling booth with a night stick to the shooting and killing of an unarmed man as being anywhere near the same level of importance

Yes, they are of the same level of importance.

Unless you like tolerating racism, that is. Then I could see how you might not see the dangers.
 
In one case somebody was killed

The other case somebody held a night stick in a meanacing manner

I know which one I would want the government to spend resources on

In the Oakland case the government took the accused to trial and a verdict was reached. Sentencing to follow.

In the New Ku Klux Klan case, aka New Black Panther case, a verdict was reached, the racist Justice Department dismissed the case.

The government should investigate why the Justice Department dismissed a case on racial grounds.

There's no reason to investigate why a jury made what would seem to be a bad decision. Juries make bad decisions all the time.

There should be an investitation into why the convicted cop from Oakland is now going to face double jeopardy.
 
what's the harm in investigating?

Amendment 5 - Trial and Punishment, Compensation for Takings. Ratified 12/15/1791.

nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb;

That's what's wrong with having a second trial for the same offense.

It's unconstitutional.

And, no, the act of shooting the prisoner was one act. It a violation of the Constitution to put someone on trial for murder, and then, failing to get the desired conviction, to put him on trial for not liking black people.

That's not only unconstitutional, but morally reprehensible.
 
Last edited:
Your right, the right to vote is fundamental. As it was in 2006 in Pima Arizona, where the DOJ declined to bring any charges for voter intimidation when minutemen, one of whom carried a gun were intimidating Latino voters at a polling place while also filming them. :2wave:

Oh.

So you're simply happy that if some apparent injustice happens it must be balanced with some injustice happening to someone completely unconnected to the original incident, so long as the races are different?

You've no problem with injustice itself, so long as your party can get away with it, too?

BTW, did the US DOJ have a conviction already in hand when it decided against pursuing the matter further? The only thing left for the New Black Panther case was sentencing recommendation, the guilty as charged default judgement had already been obtained.
 
Last edited:
Shouldn't the Justice Department have investigated and prosecuted OJ Simpson for civil rights violations of Ronald Simpson, a Jewish American, and thus a minority?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom