![When Dad takes the family out for dinner and the smartass son speaks up to correct Dad. [1079x1303 - 163KB]](https://pic8.co/sh/ACQkYR.jpg){kind=link}
I read a good argument for why I tanked the prosecution's case by answering the questions: he was under oath and it's all on video. He cannot and should not directly contradict what is very obviously seen on video. He had no choice.
However, he could have taken the 5th. But that would make him an asshole and the jury would see through that. So his last option was just to answer honestly.
The 5th can be removed so to speak if immunity is granted, however that would bring up the question of why the DA didn't charge him in the first place, but answering the questions and admitting to committing multiple crimes in the process does the same. This kike should be charged with all sorts of things ranging from illegal possession of a firearm to attempted murder.
that would bring up the question of why the DA didn't charge him in the first place, but answering the questions and admitting to committing multiple crimes in the process does the same. This kike should be charged with all sorts of things ranging from illegal possession of a firearm to attempted murder.
Ohhhhh, good point. Never thought of this. That dude approached an innocent person protecting himself, threatening the use of a gun. That's felony assault in most states (you can't threaten people, without cause, with a deadly weapon).
So why DIDN'T the prosecutor charge arm-blast-boy with felony assault? That's an open and shut case.
(post is archived)