08-01-2015, 12:43 PM
(08-01-2015, 11:50 AM)fredtoast Wrote: Considering that the Attorney general and the grand jury disagree with you you might want to back off on the condescending attitude.
Just because you think you know does not mean you really know. It appears that you based your opinion on what you wanted to happen instead of actual knowledge of how the law works.
I will say that it appears Skidmore might have been indicted on some charges that won't stick. But when he attacked the officer after he had broken free then he was no longer acting in self defense. You claim you see the officer drawing his gun, but that just is not true.
You're the second member that's called me condescending lately. I really didn't think I've been, but I'll take it to heart. I apologize.
Beeker was referencing my status, which is tongue and cheek, as was my above response to him, mostly. I presumed the
wasn't necessary, I'll try to keep it in mind for future posts ( that was condescending ). As far as the indictment, it means little. Conviction means more. My opinion is just that -- opinion. knowledge of the law or lack thereof, notwithstanding. But I know a lil
I did post the update, which is opposite of my argument for the guy. That in and of itself should indicate that I'm willing to be wrong and in fact, not condescending.
How do you know he wasn't reaching for his gun? If I can't see that he was, it stands to reason that you can't see that he wasn't. The fact that a shot was fired indicates that he did reach for his weapon. And Ohio law states he only has to perceive a threat, which he did because other guards were ready to pounce and How was he to know the burly council members behind him weren't likeminded?
I hope he doesn't plead out so we can see the results of the trial.
