And So It Begins…

As anyone with the slightest bit of Cassandra-talent would have predicted… there has recently developed a lack of patience and good sportsmanship upon being robbed and looted by a violently inclined and repeater criminal class punk, let off by an increasingly social-justice addled judiciary, and allowing said punk to go forth and do … well, more of what we have tiresomely become accustomed to expect of that demographic. Over the last decade or so, it has been suggested in various threads and blogposts that such a reaction is almost inevitable. So – not a real surprise to me that a punk that decided to rob patrons of a taco restaurant in Houston got a fatal caliber response.

It looks as if charges are going to be brought against the taco restaurant patron who decided that a proper response was to take out the robber, fatally. We’ll see how far that goes. Andrew Branca at Legal Insurrection lays out the bones of the case, here.
Because ordinary people have gotten tired of this. In sort-of-red areas – it seems that they are beginning to shoot back. Regular, tax-paying, law-abiding citizens have gotten tired of being victimized, robbed, and generally abused by a criminal sub-class who doesn’t appear to grasp how very, very, tired their usual victims are of being robbed and threatened by the local scum of the earth … especially as said scum being swiftly freed by the local Sorosbot DA or activist judge to go right back out and offend again … if said criminal were even inconvenienced by being arrested and charged to begin with. Talk about adding insult to the original injury.

The preyed-upon are fleeing blue-dominated jurisdictions with all dispatch, or at least beginning to be very worried, as crime starts to hit close to home – not just the gated, upper-caste suburbs, but the places where ordinary, law-abiding citizens and taxpayers live. San Antonio is blue-ish (not as bad as Austin) at the core but tending reddish on the outer fringes where I live. On Next Door in the last week alone, there have been two posts about a fatal beating and a drug-involved murder – both happening in locations that I am familiar with and pass by frequently. Just this week, a neighbor of ours heading out to work at 5 AM surprised a guy in a black balaclava, who appeared to be taking a burglarious interest in his truck – a truck parked in his own driveway. Expensive parts stolen from late-model trucks, break-ins and thefts from vehicles, a neighbor making a large cash withdrawal from an ATM followed and robbed – all this and more. It makes for depressing reading.

My local NextDoor used to feature complaints about barking dogs, missing and found dogs, inconveniently parked vehicles, and complaints about neighbors with disintegrating fences and overhanging tree limbs. Now it’s concerns about unexplained strangers apparently canvassing houses, inquiries regarding ‘what happened at such-and-such a location, the police-fire-ambulance was seen there and what was going on’ added to pleas for any neighbor with doorbell camera footage on such and such a street showing evidence of some kind of criminal activity. To recoin and slightly paraphrase a cliché – “Stuff is getting real”, out here in Flyoverlandia.
The trouble with letting repeat criminals go free, again and again and again … is that eventually, the good citizens will become tired of being preyed upon, and of law enforcement bodies and the courts allowing (or even encouraging) such predation to continue, untrammeled. Eventually it might come to pass that a repeat perpetuator will encounter a citizen or citizens who have universally concluded that the technical rule of law is about as much good as a sheet of wet tissue paper in a hurricane. Say what the minions of the law will say or do – those people who have seen rough extra-legal justice administered will blandly testify that they hadn’t seen anything. And those impaneled for a jury will refuse to convict and reject any statements from “law enforcement”, no matter how much the prosecutor may fume and lecture.
Discuss as you will, as we still can.

50 thoughts on “And So It Begins…”

  1. The purpose of law enforcement and due process is NOT to protect the law abiding from crime and criminals. It is to give the law abiding enough faith in the enforcement of the Social Contract so that the law abiding do not vent their wrath at being victimized on the accused criminals. And after they are convicted, society takes over [in theory] the process of punishment, once again to prevent the law abiding from exacting their own vengeance.

    Actually, there is a dual purpose. First is to try to keep the innocent from being punished. Second is to keep the governed who may be for whatever reason mickle-pissed, from taking it out on those who govern.

    As belief in the reality of the “rule of law” and “equal justice” declines, the perceived legitimacy of those in power declines. Which leads to self-defense measures. Something to think about in these possibly soon to be interesting times.

    Subotai Bahadur

  2. Blue politicians can’t be stupid enough to think any of this is gong to work or make for happiness, fulfillment, peace, etc.? I can’t imagine a good motive, other than an expression of the nihilism David mentions above or, well, evil. You describe an inevitable end.to available drugs, to slavers and pimps at our border, to demeaning the chief purpose of our society/government – to protect its citizens from violence and their property from damage with sufficient police and justices following laws agreed to by a representative government. And all of these have been affected by the aggrievement industry and faux “equality” critics..

    Its not that we haven’t seen cycles before (gin in the 18th century, prohibition in the early 20th, the Chinese remember the Opium War). And its not that we haven’t had answers before. The founders would say all was built on virtue and that’s probably it. But virtues aren’t always recognized as such. Personal responsibility, duty, honesty, respect for others let alone hard work, an honest day’s labor for an honest day’s pay – these are not as integral to our culture as they were. I’m not even sure people see objectivity a virtue nor pride a vice.

    Maybe all these choices are accidental but they don’t seem so. To return to an analogy I hear more often: if America had an enemy bent on its ruin, what better policies could it promote than those in terms of justice, the border, the school, medicine today? Let alone, the economic ruin of green policies.

    Is this paranoid?
    Is the current administrative state and the current executive branch creating chaos (from fast and furious on) so we might welcome a national police force? Was one step the enlargement and arming of the IRS? Bribing police and schools with federal money has brought both into more dependency than is probably good for them/us.

  3. Recently in North Georgia, a robber tried to rob a convenience store . A customer pulled out his gun and threatened the robber. A second customer ran to his car and got his gun. A third customer filling his car with gas , got his gun and held the robber.
    That is how civilization is maintained . When the people enforce laws

  4. Ginny, whatever happens blue politicians are pretty sure they’ll be insulated from the consequences. No Soros D.A. is worried about being robbed; no matter how defunded, the police work for THEM. And as the current trend towards encouraging preteen genital mutilation and child molestation shows, a big percentage of Left voters frankly wouldn’t convert if something horrible did happen to them or their families: it’s justifiable rage against the overclass, after all. In fact I can see it becoming a sign if virtue to have your wife or daughter assaulted or your husband robbed and attacked.

  5. As a subscriber to Andrew Branca’s site, I agree with his legal analysis. At the same time I have no sympathy for the robber. The robber established by his actions that “he needed killing” and that’s what he got.

  6. “Is this paranoid?
    Is the current administrative state and the current executive branch creating chaos (from fast and furious on) so we might welcome a national police force? Was one step the enlargement and arming of the IRS? Bribing police and schools with federal money has brought both into more dependency than is probably good for them/us.”

    No, I think this is the plan. Make the USA a chaotic and ungovenable mess, so the people will cry out for a “savior” to come in and fix it. Unfortunately the “savior” will have to implement some “temporary” restrictions on our rights to accomplish this grand task. And like the continually renewed state of emergency for COVID (Wuhan Flu), these “temporary” restrictions will never go away.

  7. “As a subscriber to Andrew Branca’s site, I agree with his legal analysis. At the same time I have no sympathy for the robber. The robber established by his actions that “he needed killing” and that’s what he got.”

    Despite what ever the instruction given to the jury (please correct me if I am wrong), the jury can still vote to acquit (OJ Simpson trial).

  8. There was a story years ago of a bully who suddenly turned up dead. No one saw or heard anything, even though there were plenty of people around when he died. He needed killing and the townspeople knew to keep their mouths shut.

  9. Gertie: That was in Skidmore, Missouri. Townsfolk had complained loud and long about McElroy. Indicted 21 times but convicted only once. He was accused of child molestation, arson, statutory rape, cattle rustling, burglary and shooting two people. He got away with nearly all of it. Inside Edition.

  10. This is happening mostly because for a very long time, an elected class in many municipalities think being elected as having arrived. Adequately managing a water department, trash collection or law enforcement seemed abstractions that just manage themselves. Except, none of it does. as much of this broke down, the elected have impugned law enforcement as an argumentative theory and have sought shiny object initiatives not related to running a gov’t as solutions and a welcome distraction from neglect of the core elected officials duties. See Detroit Schools, or Chicago Mayoralty, Gov Newsome, DeBalsio’s NYC, anything Seattle and SanFrancisco.

    Entities of basic governance aren’t automatic nor self-correcting. Humans rarely are. Politicians; Hollywood for the ugly, still clamor for positive/glowing press and the shiny object pursuit give lazy reporters crib-note press releases that also relieve them of the drudgery of local street-level reporting. Both get the payoff; the lazy butt-kiss press get access, the politicians get the attention (money, pop exposure, free-promotion) they crave.

    Their message to the populace; “PAY YOUR TAXES, AND SHUT THE HELL UP!”

  11. “Adequately managing a water department, trash collection or law enforcement seemed abstractions that just manage themselves.”

    What’s more, maintenance is not glamorous. You can proudly cut the ribbon on a new bridge, but not on the annual work that keeps the bridge in good condition. Even more so for sewers, water mains, and other things which are more or less invisible.

  12. In the words of Fred Blasie, (pro wrestler before it became Glamourous), talking about pencil-neck geeks,
    “These guys are a dime a dozen. I’m looking for the guy who’s supplying the dimes.”

  13. Captain Obvious asks the musical question, “If Sorosbots, et. al. were, in reality, secretly implementing a plan to ensure the return of “necktie parties” and frontier justice…what would they be doing differently than what they’re doing now?”

  14. No offense to Andrew Branca, but I can’t help but find a legal analysis of this case a fatuous exercise in futility.

    By now everyone- including Andrew Branca- should realize that the treatment of this case will have essentially nothing to do with the law.

    The demonrat party loves criminals of all varieties- and this random taco restaurant patron just put one of their beloved in a grave.

    If he had fired exactly one perfectly legally justifiable shot with the same result, the Soros DA would still have found some way to charge him with something ruinously expensive to defend against.

    Just ask George Zimmerman.

  15. “No offense to Andrew Branca, but I can’t help but find a legal analysis of this case a fatuous exercise in futility.”

    No. Not fatuous. Branca states more than once that he is doing a legal analysis, not a political or emotional analysis.
    …although Branca does write (in part) at the end of his analysis:

    A prosecutor’s office will typically be asking two distinct questions in evaluating how to handle such a case.
    First: What can we do, based on legal merit.
    Second: What do we want to do, based on political considerations.

  16. “By now everyone- including Andrew Branca- should realize that the treatment of this case will have essentially nothing to do with the law.”

    That he will be *charged* and run through the (very expensive) wringer over this? You are absolutely right. Law is not even part of teh equation.

    But as to the likelihood of a guilty/not guilty verdict? There is still at least *some* bearing.

  17. I honestly think that there will be a lot of repeats, large and small, of the Ken McElroy situation – ordinary people will get so fed up with being victimized, over and over again, while the police and the Sorosbots DA’s sit on their hands that the repeat criminals will be dealt with by ordinary citizens … and no one afterwards will admit to having seen a thing.

    Sorry, I heard the shots, and the perp fell down dead, but I didn’t see who fired … oh, and sorry, the security camera wasn’t working, tape got recorded over. Too bad, so sad.

    And as hard as the investigators try, they won’t be able to get anyone to crack. Persistent and documented thieves, such as the Arbury character was thought to be, will just mysteriously turn up in a deceased condition, and no one will have seen anything.

  18. “no one will have seen anything” Isn’t that already a major problem in a lot of jurisdictions? There’s a shooting in a club, and nobody saw anything. (OK, given how crowded clubs can be, I can almost believe that one.) The strangulation victim calls the police, and then changes her mind and says it was an accident. Nobody has any idea who did the drive-by that accidentally wounded the baby.

  19. I’ll admit that that ninth shot gives me pause. As an unqualified guess, I’d say the chance of an indictment is fairly good considering the politics in Houston. However, if I was on the jury, I’d be inclined to entertain the argument that if he was legitimately in fear of his life when he fired the first four, he was likely in the same state of mind six seconds later.

    I note with some admiration that he appeared to connect with all of his shots. A far better average than I remember from the average police shootout.

  20. May I conclude from this that the citizens of San Antonio would rather have “frontier justice” and shoot people than vote differently?

  21. It may very well come to that, Annoying – but San Antonio is kind of a special case. The local ruling caste is bluish … but a large group of voting citizens are military, veteran and veteran retirees and vote reddish.

  22. I’ll predict a trend, and the recent Houston tacqueria event will, probably, be one of the very early data points: life for the Bad Guys will become more difficult, which will make life for the Good Guys even more difficult.

    The BGs, and those still practicing after a few more tacquerias, will be the unrepentent hard core, will modify their tactics to gain whatever perceived advantage they can, so the GGs will have to change to accommodate. Where the real change willl occur is when we notice the BGs being hunted, and Level 3 will be when “things start happening” to the Soros-funded DAs.

    I’d like to think that, as a country, we’ll find a way to resolve the problem well before we reach that point because if we do it will be a harbinger of much worse just over the horizon. And, fixing it, while quite challenging because of all the leftist Bravo Sierra we’ve buried “Normal Living” with, the individual parts aren’t nuclear secrets, they just need to be adminstered all the time and administered consistently. Which, so far, seems quite far beyond our abilities as a society.

    In the meantime, carry a major caliber (plus a backup), get training, do lots of practice, and embrace situational awareness because the ride will become a lot bumpier before it gets any smoother.

  23. The idea that the police exist to protect the criminals from their victims in particular and the general public in general is historically accurate.
    In the past vigilantes used to handle criminals ad hoc, as it were, so to speak, which led to a lot of inconsistencies and basic unfairness and blatant injustice in many cases.
    So, someone got the bright idea of hiring professionals to do the job, and, though never a perfect solution, it worked pretty well, until the nihilistic luciferian liberals got carried away with it and now the police are the official enemies of the entire human race.

  24. No. Not fatuous. Branca states more than once that he is doing a legal analysis, not a political or emotional analysis.

    Fatuous.

    My search engine of choice gave me “complacently or inanely foolish : silly.” as the first result.

    I went with that, not because I doubt Branca’s legal competence in any way, but because I can’t help but conclude that he’s an expert in something increasingly irrelevant.
    That is, the untold millions of law-words that comprise the present US legal code.

    The left has spent my entire life ****ing on the idea of the rule of law, with great success. Yet somehow they imagine that none of their adversaries have noticed, and thus their opponents will always back down when lectured about the sacred law-words.

    I suspect that impetus has passed. Branca gives us a competent evaluation of something I think rather few people now care about- that is, what do the law-words have to say about this particular case. The murderer loving left is upset that one of their own is dead and law-abiding folks are tired of having to tolerate the endless criminality of career criminals.

    Neither side cares much about the law-words.

  25. Annoying Old Guy: You may so assume, when the “vote” is whether or not to threaten people with a gun as you rob them. Best “vote” as if your life depended on it! You may also assume it to be true of an increasing percentage of the population everywhere. (I’m “voting” for a change of venue to Bexar county — I’m about due for a jury summons. Maybe with Sgt Mom & “Corporal Blondie” on the jury, too…Wouldn’t that be some fun!)

    Elrod: Your “Level 3” makes one think of Claire Wolfe & what she calls “the bastards.” Not a scenario we “normals” seek, but some folks seem set on getting that going.

  26. No offense, Xennady, but I can’t help but find your comments to be fatuous and overwrought.

    Complacently or inanely foolish? You have no grounds for that characterization. Branca focuses on the law, because that is his profession and what he is most qualified to give advice on. Furthermore, you cannot honestly say Branca is “complacent” because he does recognize the increasingly politicized nature of the law today. But the law is not dead, so legal analysis is still relevant.

    If you were to merely describe his analysis as “sadly undermined by the left’s increasing subversion of the law”, I would have no argument. But it is unfair to denigrate Branca as you do.

  27. pst314,

    I intend no denigration of Branca at all.

    I’d bet he’s one of the best legal minds on my side today. That’s awesome. My metaphorical hat is off to him and I wish him all the best.

    That said, I suspect he is roughly the equivalent of the best typewriter repairman in the country, circa 1975.

    His skill is about to become irrelevant, alas, because events are saddling up.

    The left plainly doesn’t give a rat’s anus about the rule of law, or any law, for that matter. The right-leaning public has noticed. The Gee Ohh Peee is irrelevant as usual.

    Hence I find Branca’s careful evaluation of this case both competent and… quaint.

    Perhaps that’s a better word?

    Regardless, I’m not interested in the legal arguments made by the left, leftists aren’t interested in the legal arguments made by the right, and I suspect this won’t end well, certainly not legally, as we presently define it.

  28. Branca’s legal opinion may be accurate and persuasive. It is to me. But’s it also a Dredd Scott. Any law that punishing the taqueria hero is bad law.

  29. Xennedy:

    If I may toss out an additional thought in re “saddling up”.

    I submit that one reason that our concept of legitimate governance, and to a certain extent the British writings we drew from is different from the version practiced in mainland Western Europe is the difference between Particular Will -v- General Will. If you look at the writings of British political scientists [Locke, Hobbes, etc. in the 1500’s-1600’s] the Will is particular, coming from the individual. If you look at the mainland Western Europe writings [say Rousseau] they consider the Will as applied to governance to be something endemic in society as a whole and only discernible by the more aware upper crust and not the Third Estate. Yeah, I know that is oversimplified, but please bear with me.

    Both eventually evolved to the point where votes and elections were what changed governments instead of something Clausewitz, or Charles I would understand. And both forms gave lip service to the concept of the national Will being expressed by the consent of the governed. That consent is what determines the legitimacy of the government and what it does.

    We here have taken it farther, in that rights are individually held and not held in trust by those who rule. For an example of the latter, take a look north where the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms [like our Bill of Rights] can be cancelled by the government selectively for say, exercising Freedom of Speech against the government.

    In this country, consent of the governed is supposed to be expressed by the individual votes of individual citizens, real people, who agree to accept the outcome on that basis even if they lose under the rules of the game.

    The integrity of the vote and vote counting process in the election a couple of months ago is doubted severely by a plurality of the citizenry. As is that of the 2020 election. And as time goes on, more and more people I talk to are wondering about previous elections. And pretty much everyone figures that absent some really major reforms which no one in the political Nomenklatura wants to even think about even theoretically; that IF there is something called an election in 2024, that it will be at least of as dubious integrity as 2022, and probably worse.

    Question for discussion: If consent of the governed is determined by the actual votes of the people, and we have had at least two elections where the integrity of the vote count cannot be believed in or trusted, how many elections taking place in the absence of that belief or trust have to take place before it can be assumed that there is no consent of the governed?

    And in the absence of that consent, which statutes, rulings, or decrees enforced by the government have to be obeyed and by who?

    Subotai Bahadur

  30. Beyond the merits of this case, everyone inclined to say; “rather judged by 12 than carried by six” needs to remember that the judging part might not be as cut and dried as they imagine, especially before they unholster.

  31. Subotai Bahadur…”We here have taken it farther, in that rights are individually held”

    I notice that it has become fairly rare for media and politicians to refer to Individuals. They do not say ‘This project will help Black people,” they say “This project will help the Black Community”…and so forth—it’s not “gay people,” it’s “the gay community.”

  32. Subotai: “And in the absence of that consent, which statutes, rulings, or decrees enforced by the government have to be obeyed and by who?”

    In the absence of the consent of the governed, the only rules which have to be obeyed are those which the Ruling Class is able to enforce with physical power. When that physical power goes, so does that Ruling Class.

    One alternative is the Romanian example of Ceaușescu, where the people were repressed only for as long as the supreme leader could rely on his Praetorians. Another alternative is what the English refer to as the “Glorious Revolution” in which a fairly bungled invasion by the Dutch leader William of Orange rather implausibly succeeded because very few of the English had much interest in defending their then-ruler.

    Either way, whether the push is internal or external, the lesson of history is that a Ruling Class which fails to secure the consent of the governed is living on borrowed time. Of course, that does not guarantee that whatever replaces the failed Ruling Class will be any better.

  33. his only mistake was still believing in the outmoded “rule of law” enough to actually surrender (via attorney, but still …) to the po-lice. he should never have done that; a mere extension of “never talk to the po-lice” – just walk away, let them find you, and say nothing to nobody nohow. if they can find you, let them prove whatever they can prove in court, don’t help them.

  34. I’m going to take a slightly different angle on this… from the responsibilities of owning and wielding a gun

    Back in Arizona in the 90s when we became a shall-issue state for concealed carry, it revived a lot of talk about the proper public use of firearms, I was in a presentation where the speaker stated that the number one rule of carry safety was to not place yourself in a position where you had to draw your gun. His point being that even the mere act of brandishing a gun, let alone using it, can be a life-changing situation and while “judged by 12 is better than being carried by 6” it is even better to not place in yourself if at all avoidable situation where you need to decide between 12 and 6. If you are in a dangerous situation, fight vs, flight with all the adrenaline starts to flow, and the tactical dominoes begin to fall as you can easily lose control of the situation

    Now our man in the taqueria did not choose his situation. He was peacefully eating his meal when some thug with a gun started waving it around threatening innocent people. I have a hard time shedding a tear for that thug, I will probably relent on that come Sunday morning, but I’m glad our man was there and took action. I have a great deal of sympathy for our shooter, both in the time it took for him to make the decision to pull his weapon and up to the final shot it was 16 seconds, that amount of time for his life to change forever. 16 seconds from taking a bite to firing his 9th shot all the while his body spiking from a fight-flight response. Cops and grunts train for that type of thing and even they don’t get it right

    As for the legal consequences, I think our shooter skates for all the reasons mentioned above. However forget those 16 seconds and instead focus on the last 2 when our shooter put the 9th bullet into the thug, he will be reliving that last action for the rest of his life and wouldn’t be human if he didn’t. Nobody should have been put into situation and that’s what a thin blue line is about and why our current regime is so corrupt for dismantling it. It’s not about protecting people from criminals or vice versa, it’s about protecting us average folk from the moral consequences and trauma from having to take the law into our own hands.

  35. how many elections taking place in the absence of that belief or trust have to take place before it can be assumed that there is no consent of the governed?

    I think we are close now but it will take a cataclysmic event to set off the reaction. That, I believe, is also close ahead. The current budget deficit and the national debt is very close to a failure of the economy. In 1980, when inflation was being defeated by raising interest rates, mortgage interest was 20% and I bought treasury bills at 16% coupon rate for my pension plan. Try to imagine what would happen if interest rates are 10% with a $31 trillion national debt. That’s $3 trillion per year for debt service. What can’t continue, won’t.

    As Hemingway wrote, bankruptcy comes slowly, then suddenly.

  36. Were I in the position of our intervenor, I would have been very tempted to ditch the gun and maintain a low profile until the police stopped looking. I would hope for better sense to assert itself and to do what this gentleman has done.

    I suspect there is at least a 90% probability that the police would have found him.

    First: Even though he was seated facing away form the camera, there should be recognizable footage from when he entered and sat down. Failing that, there were probably an unknown number of outside cameras that may have captured both him and his car and only a matter of time until it was found.

    Second: There will be a record from every cell tower he passed within range of and most especially while he was sitting there eating. These would have been aggregated with all the other phones in the area but the police have become experienced in unraveling that sort of puzzle. Just from the actual shooting video, there would only be so many stock, fiftyish, possibly Hispanic men on their list.

    Third: While he didn’t hang around to settle his check, what are the odds that this was the first time in the restaurant? The staff might suffer from amnesia out of gratitude, the odds are that the police had some sort of leverage against somebody there. And then there are credit/debit card records. The police have both time and manpower at their disposal.

    And finally: How many license plate cameras are in the area and how many did he pass.

    My experience with those on the wrong side of the law has convinced me that the biggest difference between them and us squares is poor to non existent decision making skills.

    I think our intervenor made the right though difficult choice and hope it works out for him.

    Something that should be weighing on the decision to prosecute, is the probability that our intervenor will have benefit of competent counsel. I doubt money will be a problem and I wonder just how many competent prosecutors are still down there; capable of doing anything more than intimidating the drug addled and public defended.

  37. This had toi have been probably 30 years ago, or more. But there was a small town in MO with a local bully – and I forget what all he did but he did threaten people with murder – did he get away with a murder? I can’t remember.

    But one day presumably one of the town folk took it upon themselves to kill him and when the authorities came to investigate, nobody was talking.

  38. Any law that punishing the taqueria hero is bad law.

    But wait, it’s worse.

    I’m reminded of Joseph Tainter and his book about the collapse of complex societies. Andrew Branca has given us a wonderful legal explanation down to the significance of each of the nine bullets. It’s not unlikely this case will expend millions of dollars as it is ground through the legal sausage machine, and it’s not unlikely that this restaurant customer will have his life destroyed because he declined to let a career criminal rob him.

    But that will take years. A long time ago by chance I happened to see a newspaper from about 1952. In it, there was a story about a Korean War vet who had been run over and killed. The driver had been tried and sentenced in the same week as the funeral and memorial service for the victim.

    All other considerations aside, our present legal system takes too long, costs too much, and makes too little sense to succeed.

    It isn’t and it won’t.

  39. And as time goes on, more and more people I talk to are wondering about previous elections.

    I’m one of them. I recall buying the local paper to see election results, circa 2004 or 2006. I was rewarded with page after page of empty column-inches listing a given contest with no vote totals. I figured, OK, the results weren’t in. So I bought the paper again the next day. There were no vote totals in that edition either. I long thought this was merely incompetence, now I figure they were covering up fraud.

    Another: After the 2020 election, I recalled something else. In 2006, radio host Hugh Hewitt had been digging into polls that showed that several GOP senate candidates were behind. He was noting that (for example) the Republican share of the vote had never been as low as that used for this-or-that poll, which convinced that him that the GOP would win these races. On election night, they all lost. I distinctly recall thinking that the polls were right after all. Now I’m thinking that the polls were used to calibrate the fraud, and make sure the public accepted the results as legitimate.

  40. I’ve thrown these out elsewhere, but: Three Predictions:
    (1) The shooter walks. The jurors will say “What would I have done?”
    There’s talk about the ‘extra’ shots, but if he was dead at that point, it’s desecration of a corpse, not murder.
    (2) The usual loudmouths will wail about “vigilante justice”. Sometimes thats the only kind available. It’s evidently on short supply at the courthouse, as the deceased was a violent felon out on bond.
    (3) There will efforts to ‘gin up’ a federal case, and/or the dead guy’s family will try for a lawsuit. Not that the shooter likely has any money.

  41. Xennady – January 14, 2023 at 8:40 pm:
    “… A long time ago by chance I happened to see a newspaper from about 1952. In it, there was a story about a Korean War vet who had been run over and killed. The driver had been tried and sentenced in the same week as the funeral and memorial service for the victim.”

    I recently saw an anecdote about an American couple traveling in Panama, who were victims of a snatch-and-run robber. The thief was caught, and the police asked the couple to be witnesses at the trial. They replied that unfortunately they were returning to the US in a few days. The police said no problem: the trial would be the next day.

  42. Trial? A friend of mine had his wallet stolen in Morocco many years ago. When he raised Yankee hell the cops grabbed a street-corner loafer and beat him up for the crime.

    Before (as well as after?) Memphis had Black (1948) cops, “Alley Courts” were a tradition around Beale Street. Cops as judge, jury, and punisher.

  43. The defender’s only workable option in this case was to flee and vanish somewhere well outside the state. Even if he is not persecuted by the local DA, it is likely that the feds will step in and charge him with either a hate crime or depriving the victim of his civil rights.
    The moral to this story is that anyone who would step up and be a defender, should have a plan and the means to vanish. It requires cash, good friends and advanced planning.

Leave a Comment