BREAKING: Judicial Watch Files $30 Million Wrongful Death Lawsuit against U.S. Government on Behalf of Ashli Babbitt’s Husband and Estate

[Marener]

Laws are not based on perceptions. You fucking idiot.

Of course they are. People’s perception is frequently brought up in law.

 

[Marener]

You are opining on it, not proving anything.

You don't know shit, cum bucket.

The officers in the Diallo shooting were acquitted.

The legal standard is not actual threat but the perception of it.

These are facts, not opinions. You pretend like they’re not facts because you dont know what you’re talking about and refuse to ever admit that I’m right.

 

[martybegan]

The officers in the Diallo shooting were acquitted.

The legal standard is not actual threat but the perception of it.

These are facts, not opinions. You pretend like they’re not facts because you dont know what you’re talking about and refuse to ever admit that I’m right.

At least they were brought to trial. Your shooter idiot got a full pass.

There was no perception of a threat from an unarmed woman hanging through a window.

 

[Marener]

At least they were brought to trial. Your shooter idiot got a full pass.

There was no perception of a threat from an unarmed woman hanging through a window.

The people on the other side of that door who were present that day disagree with you. They were all interviewed by the DoJ before deciding not to take him to trial.

The comparison with Diallo is pretty absurd. Diallo was just standing there. Not breaking any laws.

Babbitt was part of a massive violent mob that had been causing widespread destruction and injury.

 

[Lastamender]

Of course they are. People’s perception is frequently brought up in law.

How?

 

[Marener]

How?

Well, self defense obviously. If someone perceived they are in imminent danger, they are allowed to defend themselves.

Other things like what constitutes a threat, depends on whether a reasonable person would feel actually threatened by the rhetoric.

 

[martybegan]

The people on the other side of that door who were present that day disagree with you. They were all interviewed by the DoJ before deciding not to take him to trial.

The comparison with Diallo is pretty absurd. Diallo was just standing there. Not breaking any laws.

Babbitt was part of a massive violent mob that had been causing widespread destruction and injury.

All the cops said protect the cop. All the government drones said protect the cop.

You were the one bringing up a wallet dipshit.

it delayed a vote by a few hours and caused repairable damage.

Meanwhile...

Portland Antifa Mob Tries to Burn Police Station Down, Run Cops Over - WATCH

 

[Marener]

All the cops said protect the cop. All the government drones said protect the cop.

You were the one bringing up a wallet dipshit.

it delayed a vote by a few hours and caused repairable damage.

Meanwhile...

Portland Antifa Mob Tries to Burn Police Station Down, Run Cops Over - WATCH

I was merely pointing out what the legal standard is and using an illustrative example. You don’t seem to do well with abstract thinking because you immediately wanted to compare the two.

If you think the government protects cops too much, welcome to the side of BLM. As it stands, you are demanding separate standards for conservatives.

 

[martybegan]

I was merely pointing out what the legal standard is and using an illustrative example. You don’t seem to do well with abstract thinking because you immediately wanted to compare the two.

If you think the government protects cops too much, welcome to the side of BLM. As it stands, you are demanding separate standards for conservatives.

You know you brought up the comparison, and now you forgot they were actually tried.

I think the federal government protects bad cops, like the shooter in this case.

The Diallo guys went to trial, and to me even if acquitted they should have been fired on the spot.

 

[Marener]

You know you brought up the comparison, and now you forgot they were actually tried.

I think the federal government protects bad cops, like the shooter in this case.

The Diallo guys went to trial, and to me even if acquitted they should have been fired on the spot.

It doesn’t matter if they were tried or not, they were acquitted BECAUSE THE LEGAL STANDARD IS PERCEIVED THREAT AND NOT ACTUAL THREAT.

Everything else about the case is irrelevant to what I was saying but you can’t focus on the point because you’re too stupid to stay on topic and formulate a grown up rational point.

 

[martybegan]

It doesn’t matter if they were tried or not, they were acquitted BECAUSE THE LEGAL STANDARD IS PERCEIVED THREAT AND NOT ACTUAL THREAT.

Everything else about the case is irrelevant to what I was saying but you can’t focus on the point because you’re too stupid to stay on topic and formulate a grown up rational point.

TYPING IN CAPS DOESNT MAKE YOU NOT A FUCKING RETARD.

It sure as hell matters, because with a trial at least the information would be out in the open, not just "he wasn't wrong" and then the matter was swept under the rug.

That's why this lawsuit is necessary, and why the government is going to try to squash it for reasons other than the merits.

 

[Lastamender]

Well, self defense obviously. If someone perceived they are in imminent danger, they are allowed to defend themselves.

Other things like what constitutes a threat, depends on whether a reasonable person would feel actually threatened by the rhetoric.

Does a 5 foot two unarmed woman constitute a deadly threat? Not in my book.

 

[Marener]

TYPING IN CAPS DOESNT MAKE YOU NOT A FUCKING RETARD.

It sure as hell matters, because with a trial at least the information would be out in the open, not just "he wasn't wrong" and then the matter was swept under the rug.

That's why this lawsuit is necessary, and why the government is going to try to squash it for reasons other than the merits.

Im typing in caps because you are too stupid to focus on the point.

The point is not whether the crowd was an actual threat but whether a rational person would perceive the threat of imminent bodily harm.

It’s going to be pretty difficult to prove to anyone let alone a jury that the cops in the Capitol wouldn’t rationally see a mob breaking through barricaded windows as an imminent threat.

 

[Marener]

Does a 5 foot two unarmed woman constitute a deadly threat? Not in my book.

If she were alone, probably not.

But she wasn’t alone, was she.

 

[eagle1462010]

Im typing in caps because you are too stupid to focus on the point.

The point is not whether the crowd was an actual threat but whether a rational person would perceive the threat of imminent bodily harm.

It’s going to be pretty difficult to prove to anyone let alone a jury that the cops in the Capitol wouldn’t rationally see a mob breaking through barricaded windows as an imminent threat.

A jury gonna decide that now. And that was an unnecessary shot. They will pay out for this.

 

[martybegan]

Im typing in caps because you are too stupid to focus on the point.

The point is not whether the crowd was an actual threat but whether a rational person would perceive the threat of imminent bodily harm.

It’s going to be pretty difficult to prove to anyone let alone a jury that the cops in the Capitol wouldn’t rationally see a mob breaking through barricaded windows as an imminent threat.

No, it's because you are a self absorbed fucktard.

By shooting someone hanging halfway through a broken window?

Then why did they avoid a trial?

 

[Marener]

A jury gonna decide that now. And that was an unnecessary shot. They will pay out for this.

Unlikely. Being part of a violent mob breaking into the Capitol might carry some consequences, for any rational person. She’s unlikely to get much sympathy from anyone who isn’t part of Trump’s MAGA cult.

 

[Marener]

No, it's because you are a self absorbed fucktard.

By shooting someone hanging halfway through a broken window?

Then why did they avoid a trial?

There’s no point to a trial. It’s obviously justified based on applicable legal standards.

 

[jbrownson0831]

She was a TERRORIST!!!!! She only deserves condemnation - not compensation!

View attachment 883871

La
kook
ta

 

[martybegan]

There’s no point to a trial. It’s obviously justified based on applicable legal standards.

There was a reason for a trial, and the fact it didn't happen just shows they wanted this swept under the rug.

He's a murderer, no matter what your proto-fascist mind thinks otherwise.