[Heisenberg]

No it isn’t. It may have been accepted so by this jury, but no lawyer would honestly claim that is all that is needed.

Under Virginia law, premeditation can take "a matter of seconds". So yes, backing up and then making the decision to plow into a crowd at high speed would be sufficient to prove premeditation and intent to kill.

Of course, it was not the only evidence presented in the trial. The prosecution also presented his texts to his mother about how "we're not the ones who need to be careful" coupled with a photo of Hitler (sent a month before the rally).

Why wasn’t he already up to speed if that was his intent? It actually demonstrates lack of intent if he had to back up first. I would just step on the gas as I don’t believe a car needs a running start against a human body.

It's a good job you didn't become a defence lawyer, with "arguments" like this. You'd somehow manage to get a shoplifter sent to the chair.

[SpecialOlympian]

Is it murder when you intentionally drive a car into a crowd of people?

Stay tuned as PoFo's right wing wrestles with the greatest question of our time.

[One Degree]

Under Virginia law, premeditation can take "a matter of seconds". So yes, backing up and then making the decision to plow into a crowd at high speed would be sufficient to prove premeditation and intent to kill.

Thanks for wasting my time with a case that has nothing to do with this one. This case leaves no alternative reasons for his actions. They are not comparable.

Of course, it was not the only evidence presented in the trial. The prosecution also presented his texts to his mother about how "we're not the ones who need to be careful" coupled with a photo of Hitler (sent a month before the rally).

A photo of Hitler is proof you plan to kill someone? Lol. His comment to his mother is nothing any other protestor wouldn’t say. You don’t go to a confrontation expecting to lose.

It's a good job you didn't become a defence lawyer, with "arguments" like this. You'd somehow manage to get a shoplifter sent to the chair. :lol

This comment is meaningless other than the irony with the lame evidence you gave for premeditated murder. It is very telling you, the prosecutor, and the jury thought a picture of Hitler was evidence. It should never been allowed in as evidence. This points to a witch hunt based upon his political beliefs.

[SpecialOlympian]

I mean it's obvious that 1° will never condemn right wing violence. But it's also hilarious that this is the first time he has disagreed with President Trump.

Also I am in awe of his powerful rhetoric of: "You can't prove anything to me if I refuse to understand it."

[skinster]

That's not what led up to this. There were some protests against taking down a statute of confederate general Robert E. Lee. It was mostly white guys carrying torches. There was no violence, and absolutely nobody showed up to counter protest.

Yes, many torch-carrying douchebags from all over the country descended to Charlottesville to show the community what for, for taking down a statue. There was violence and intimidation all day (with all the open carrying of guns, rifles and more). University grounds were attacked. Churches were attacked. Guys were jumped and beaten bloody. A scumbag drove his car into a group of people, killing one.

Cornel West shares his experience on that day in Charlottesville.

So the mayor of Charlottesville got involved to get left wing counter protesters. As per usual, that's when violence started. The leftist counter protesters attacked the police and 22 of them were arrested.

Going to need a citation for this shit.

None of the right wingers were arrested.

What's this OP about?

That's when the violence began--initiated by the left. This was all intentional.

Citation needed.

James Fields backed his car up to where some FBI vehicles were parked (why was the FBI there?). We have not been allowed to see the surveillance videos of that area.

Citation needed.

To put it succinctly, there was no violence until the left showed up, and the left showed up because the mayor of Charlottesville and the governor of Virginia had their political operators organize the counter demonstration, and got the FBI involved too.

Citation needed.

No. Both sides had actors from the deep state, and the purpose of the op was to try to discredit "populists" supporting Donald Trump.

You keep saying dumb shit like this but are yet to prove any of it. Citation needed.

I haven't heard anybody defending James Fields other than noting that he probably didn't have a mens rea intent to kill Heather Heyer, and that he was obviously mentally ill, so he was not playing with a full deck. I have heard nobody call him a hero.

"obviously mentally ill" for white terrorists is nonsense. Please stop. It's 2018.

Again... right-wingers defending the indefensible.

Indeed. And for pages and pages once more. What kind of moron thinks defending Fields is a good hill to die on?

That totally proves that Fields went to Charlottesville to intentionally drive over people standing in the middle of the street. Open and shut case.

He might not have gone there for that purpose but the end result remains that he's a murderer. Not to mention a violent piece of shit who beat his ill mother. But please, do go ahead and defend this poor guy.

[One Degree]

I love it. No need to argue whether the evidence was sufficient, he was a Nazi is all that matters. Sadly, they don’t realize how this makes them real Nazis.

[skinster]

Sadly, they don’t realize how this makes them real Nazis.

Did nazi that coming again ITT.

[One Degree]

Did nazi that coming again ITT.

You need to edit that sentence for it to make sense to me.

[skinster]

Sometimes the news is good:

[Heisenberg]

Thanks for wasting my time with a case that has nothing to do with this one. This case leaves no alternative reasons for his actions. They are not comparable.

It is clear you don't understand how legal precedent works. The case I cited discusses how the concept of "premeditation" is defined in Virginia law, specifically saying that planning does not have to have taken place for a long time before the murder.

A photo of Hitler is proof you plan to kill someone? Lol. His comment to his mother is nothing any other protestor wouldn’t say. You don’t go to a confrontation expecting to lose.

This comment is meaningless other than the irony with the lame evidence you gave for premeditated murder.

"Lame evidence" which includes video footage of a guy deliberately driving a car at high speed into a crowd of people, having sought them out, backed up to give himself more room to accelerate, and having already told his mother in advance that counterprotesters would need to "be careful". Oh, and of course, the phone call to his mother while in prison about how Heather Heyer was an "anti-white communist" and "the enemy".

All of this clearly paints the picture of an innocent, lost young man who was just trying to get home after accidentally taking a wrong turn.

[One Degree]

It is clear you don't understand how legal precedent works. The case I cited discusses how the concept of "premeditation" is defined in Virginia law, specifically saying that planning does not have to have taken place for a long time before the murder.

I never said it didn’t. The precedent must have something in common with the current case to be considered a precedent. Your case does not say all circumstances meet this definition. Cocking the trigger on a gun is not the equivalent of putting a car in reverse. Cocking a gun doesn’t leave much doubt of your intent. Putting a car in reverse does not demonstrate this obvious intent.

"Lame evidence" which includes video footage of a guy deliberately driving a car at high speed into a crowd of people, having sought them out, backed up to give himself more room to accelerate, and having already told his mother in advance that counterprotesters would need to "be careful". Oh, and of course, the phone call to his mother while in prison about how Heather Heyer was an "anti-white communist" and "the enemy".

28 mph is high speed? Why do you need to back up? Why not just accelerate? Nothing you mentioned shows he intended to kill anyone. He may have, but these facts by themselves do not show it. Maybe the attorney put them together in a way that made sense. I don’t know, but I do know they do not show murder one as presented in this thread.

All of this clearly paints the picture of an innocent, lost young man who was just trying to get home after accidentally taking a wrong turn.

Do you think that never happens? It has to me and I almost hit someone getting out of it.
Fields sounds like a loser but that is not proof of murder one deserving life plus 417 years. That sentence was a message to the right.

[skinster]

lol these people are so pathetic, defending obvious murder. I don't think there's much point in debating them, they will argue even though the convicted murderer was filmed attacking (and killing) people and fleeing the crime.

I'm experiencing fremdschamen again why me no more empathy for dickheads help why meeeee noooooooot agaaaain. SOS.

[Pants-of-dog]

Did nazi that coming again ITT.

You need to edit that sentence for it to make sense to me.

—————————————

@One Degree:

The conviction of this killer has nothing to do with his abhorrent political ideology.

The remaining 30 hate crimes with which he has been charged are, on the other hand, related to said ideology.

[SpecialOlympian]

What is the opposite of the holistic because whatever that is it's basically 1°'s incredibly boring and nonsensical defense of the murderer.

"You can't prove intent simply because the car and Heather Heyer attempted to occupy the same space at the same time!"

"Reversing a car proves nothing!"

"It was not James Fields the person who accelerated the vehicle, but rather his foot! And we can't blame his foot, when the real culprit is the exploding gasoline within the engine!"

An extremely powerful rhetorical style based on a complete inability to conceive the whole or understand any of its individual parts.

[maz]

Report reviewing protest-related events in Charlottesville

I remember this independent report coming out last year but I don't remember anyone posting it when it came out.

It is a pretty damning incitement and I wonder if it was even admitted as evidence during this trial.

The chief of police even had to resign over the report's findings.

One the key findings is that the police intentionally let the event spiral out of control by forcing the two groups to confront each other.

The report clearly shows that the leftist groups initiated much of the violence that happened that day and that the police stood by and either let it happen or made it happen.

People are trying to say that Field's vehicle wasn't being attacked by counter-protestors, but the report documents several eye witnesses that counter-protestors were indeed attacking vehicles.

The report clearly spells it out in black and white that the "peaceful counter-protestors" were chasing Unite The Right demonstrators down individually as well as individuals in their vehicles and attempting to attack their vehicles with weapons.

One such example of peaceful counter-protestors attacking cars with weapons is on page 142.

The militia got in their cars and prepared to leave the area. Aerial footage shows that one of their cars accelerated to flee the counter-protesters, nearly running one of them over. The crowd of counter-protesters reacted angrily, kicking and swinging objects at the car. The car sped around South Street, then 2nd Street, then west on Water Street, with counter-protesters chasing on foot.

In addition to that, the report outlines that Charlottesville Police failed to protect public safety during August rally as well as the following:

•Charlottesville Police did not seek input from law enforcement personnel experienced in handling similar events
•Charlottesville Police did not provide adequate training or information to officers in advance of the event
•The city waited too long to request the specialized assistance of the Virginia Department of Emergency Management
•Charlottesville City Council unduly interfered with operation planning by directing that the event be moved to McIntire Park just days in advance
•Charlottesville did not provide adequate information to the public about plans for the event
•City planners mistakenly believed that they could not limit the possession of certain items used as weapons at the Unite the Right event
•The owners of private property adjacent to Emancipation Park refused access to their facilities, which hampered law enforcement response during the event
•The University of Virginia Police Department refused multiple offers of mutual aid assistance from the Charlottesville Police Department, resulting in violent encounters that emboldened protesters at the Unite the Right rally
•Charlottesville Police implemented a flawed operational plan that failed to protect public safety on Aug. 12

According to Heaphy, the actions of the Charlottesville Police Department were a disaster.

The report shows it took 40 minutes to declare an unlawful assembly to disperse the crowds.

"The chief actually said no let them fight. Let them fight it will be easier to declare an unlawful assembly," Heaphy said.

[skinster]

[One Degree]

No need to debate further. The normal suspects have resorted to their typical nonsense when they can’t come up with a rebuttal. Insults, sarcasm, exaggeration, and holding hands.
I am still waiting for someone to deny it is normal to be frightened when surrounded by adversaries?

[skinster]

James Alex Fields Jr. Sentenced To Life In Prison For Murder Of Heather Heyer

[Godstud]

28 mph is high speed?

Facts:
If someone is hit by a car at 30 mph they are 50% likely to be killed. If someone is hit by a car at 20 mph they are 10% likely to be killed.
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/killspeed.html

The video evidence, alone, should be sufficient to show how dangerous a motor vehicle is, even at 28 mph.

Why do you need to back up?

To get up to a higher speed. Physics.

He may have, but these facts by themselves do not show it.

As you are not a Jurist or involved in the case, you are likely not privy to every bit of information that they were. That's just something you'll have to mull over, and live with.

Fact is, Fields is guilty of the crime that he committed: Murder. There was no indication that he tried to avoid the people by turning his steering wheel, or braking long before he actually hit anyone. The "defense" you put up, isn't a defense, but merely making up excuses for a piece of shit who killed a person and injured 40 others.

No need to debate further. The normal suspects have resorted to their typical nonsense when they can’t come up with a rebuttal. Insults, sarcasm, exaggeration, and holding hands.
I am still waiting for someone to deny it is normal to be frightened when surrounded by adversaries? He was not surrounded by adversaries.

That's evidenced by the video footage, which disputes your simplistic argument, and is still not justification for murder. You are simply WRONG and will not admit it.

[One Degree]

Facts:
If someone is hit by a car at 30 mph they are 50% likely to be killed. If someone is hit by a car at 20 mph they are 10% likely to be killed.
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/killspeed.html

The video evidence, alone, should be sufficient to show how dangerous a motor vehicle is, even at 28 mph.

To get up to a higher speed. Physics.

As you are not a Jurist or involved in the case, you are likely not privy to every bit of information that they were. That's just something you'll have to mull over, and live with.

Fact is, Fields is guilty of the crime that he committed: Murder. There was no indication that he tried to avoid the people by turning his steering wheel, or braking long before he actually hit anyone. The "defense" you put up, isn't a defense, but merely making up excuses for a piece of shit who killed a person and injured 40 others.

That's evidenced by the video footage, which disputes your simplistic argument, and is still not justification for murder. You are simply WRONG and will not admit it.

Substituting ‘murder’ for ‘1st degree murder’ is a type of deception I have come to expect from many here. I am not arguing there is no connection between her death and his actions.