I find it an odd coincidence 10 22 2022

 

That we have the conclusion of a trial of a black man accused of running over people in a parade and killing them at the same time we have a black man opposing a white man on the ballot for Senator of Wisconsin.

I am just saying an odd coincidence.  And I don't believe there is the ability to control the timing of trials to coincide with elections?

But you have video footage of the likeness of this man in the car that did it.  And he represented himself, and was basically all over the board, if that is the way to say it, with his behavior in the court room.

I asked myself, If that was indeed him in the car, who did he think he was then?  Who does he think he is now?

But off topic.  Lets you had a lawyer defending him instead of him.  That lawyer then would take on what could be a completely lying personality and it would be alright?  But when it is the defendent who fills that role it is viewed a lot differently.

So lets assume he is guilty.  Just per the footage of the likeness of him in the car in the photo.  And therefore all that time in court he was asking the witnesses questions in that manner.

And he was accused of badgering the witnesses by the judge.  Because it was extremely emotional for them because they knew he did it and there he is pretending and badgering and bullying them to say something else.  Off topic, ever work with someone exactly that odd and find it a horrible quality of life issue to be around them?

Now in the above paragraph I am in no way advocating that a witness not be able to defend himself.  For what it really amounts to is he is putting whatever fate that is in his own hands and judgement, whether faulted or not.  Do you see the fine distinction there?

I can see how people would not want a highly intelligent person wrongly accussed of wrongdoing to not be able to defend themselves.  And I can see how cases could be propagandized so that it could be legislated that way.

We know that the death penalty was defeated in Chicago because organized crime got involved in it?  And found someone guilty who wasn't just so that they could advocate not having the death penalty because you can never be 1oo percent sure of a conviction?  And who does that benefit?  Organized crime!  For you can't have pawns lining up to be members of organized crime or gangs if they know they could get the death penalty for crimes.

*******'

And what about religion and church in the matter?  "You mean to say that I can be a member of organized crime and still go to heaven or be saved as long as I declare that Jesus Christ is my savior?  Because we are all flawed?  And all I have to do is share a little of my loot with you every Sunday to show I am faithful in that?"  How wrong is that?  I mean how can you argue that actually benefits a democracy?

© 2022 Thomas Murphy