Actually i have. there are a lot of them in India. just didnt think you would know what that is. i underestimated you edit: i know more about the Indian culture than you ever will....that doesnt take away from the fact that you're a racist.
Depends on the case, the grand jury, and the prosecutor. In typical (non high publicity cases) an ADA just tells the grand jury the facts they know about. Either by reading parts of the offense report to them or just reciting a brief synopsis of the facts to them. In more involved cases, like in Joe Horn, witnesses are brought to the grand jury. The DA will question them and then typically open up questioning to the grand jury so that they can ask any questions they may have for them. Additionally, if the grand jury wants more info or witnesses, they can reset their case and ask that the DA bring them the info they want to hear about. Moreover, in the event the Defense wants to present evidence to the grand jury (either documents or witnesses) they let the prosecutor know who then passes the info on to the grand jury. With documents, that information is traditionally handed out to the grand jury. With witnesses, the grand jury is made aware of the defense witnesses and they decide if they want to hear from them or not (they make that same determination for prosecution witnesses - just because either side has them present, doesn't mean the grand jury will hear from them. It's the grand jury's decision)
I wouldn't be so quick to rule them out as there was a Sikh nationalist groups that did use terrorism against India.
Next time you see a hippy in a VW microbus with an owl on his shoulder, do us all a favor and take him downtown
We deserve every damn stereotypical comment that people make about Texans after that grand jury's decision to no-bill Joe Horn. They had the guy on tape saying he was going to kill the burglars and then he went out and did just that.
It looks just like the gear from my daughter's Ken doll. Pardon me, but I'll attempt to cling to the idea that our various law enforcement people look at the value of human life a bit differently than you do. It's a comforting thought that's better than believing that you might represent the norm. You remain whatever you are, and I'll continue to think you are wrong. Impeach Bush/Cheney.
Like I said: I don't approve of Joe's actions. By definition, it was illegal. It was dangerous. It was dumb do take the law into his own hands. He should have gotten their license plate number. He should have listened to the dispatcher. Hindsight: Those were two career criminals. They played with fire and got burned. They're dead. So. They were a drag on society. They, like Joe, knew that what they were doing was illegal. They took their chances. Don't confuse me with not putting any value on human life. I value it. I just don't feel any sympathy for them or their family. And another thing: You hardcore liberals' views are quite entertaining.
The impression Joe Horn wants us to believe (from his video taped interviews over at Chron.com) is he was he was so scared in the scenario and for his life...that he then wanted to go outside and see if he could get a license plate number or something (not knowing where the thieves are mind you). So, that part of his story doesn't really add up. I think he was kind of Rambo-ish going in (judging by his tone on the 911 phone call) and then he got an itchy trigger finger when he came face-to-face with them. So, as soon as they supposedly jumped, he wailed 3 shots on them. That spin kind of bothers me as well. He shot 3 times. So, he's sort of asking us to believe he was so scared he just blasted off 3 times...and he had to reload in between (at least once according to his statement but he doesn't really remember reloading). But, he may still not have intended to kill them...although he pretty much said he was going to kill them on the 911 phone call. I also think he was trying to mislead a little about how close they actually were. I think they were farther away than he claims. Shooting these guys in the back means they weren't facing him to present much of a threat. Just because you yell "Freeze or your dead!"...does that mean you then empower yourself to shoot them like a cop or something. No. But, he was able to spin his own version of the events and, with no other witnesses or evidence contradicting his story, there is no real case. In the end, I think he was just sort of consumed by his fear so much...that any movement meant he was firing no matter what direction these guys were going. You can still legit this if he was fearing for his life...which according to him he was (but tell that to the other Rambo guy on the phone who said he was going to kill them). One thing for sure...I wouldn't want to be a black Joe Horn having killed two white boys with that 911 recording. Somehow, I think we get a different ending.
Shouldn't the sign read: Need any more proof Deckard? Anymore doesn't seem to fit....in there..... Which may indeed prove his is a cop. DD
How big is that piece of paper? If it is truly lying next to the belt, and it is a typical size of 8 1/2 x 11, then it appears that belt is around 16 inches long (unless it extends beyond the buckle on the far right).
It looks to me like the belt is on the floor and he is standing with the camera in one hand while holding the paper in front of the camera with the other. So in other words, the paper and the belt may not be equidistant from the camera.
No, I don't think so. The paper doesn't appear to be lying on the ground -- looks like the paper is being held higher than the ground.
