There you go again, conjecture.

Hey maybe when you pass the bar you can jump on Vangs defense team,their going to need someone like you.

Mr. Vang is not denying shooting and killing six people. He is attempting to justify it. I haven't seen any reliable evidence which, on its face, precludes him from making such a claim. Self Defense is an EXCUSE, not a DENIAL!

Y'all continue to mischaracterize my statements. I'm not trying to get him off. I'm simply saying that he may, in fact, get off. If O.J. did, anybody can. This is an ideal opportunity for his defense attorney to make his mark on the profession, and you bet he's set to take advantage of that opportunity.

With regard to contaminated evidence, you will see that there will be some evidence that defense will successfully have suppressed. It is probably the most common criminal defense strategy, and will be no different here.

I'm just giving you an analytical look at the way Chi Vang's case will play out. If you disagree, then you disagree, that's your own prerogative.

This hang 'em high attitude sounds nice in Clint Eastwood movies, but doesn't fly here in the states. It may behoove some of you to spend a little less time chastizing me, and a little more time learning about the rights afforded to the accused. Again, quit jumping to wild conclusions.

Funny how you pick and choose what you want to dispute. When your own double speak is pointed out, you ignore it and bring up our "Clint Eastwood hang em high attitude."

Liberals....


Slice

Mr. Liberal,

I really doubt you will agree with me(that liberal thing in you), but maybe all states should have the death penalty and maybe that would deter some of those who feel that killing somone is their only way out of a situation. If it doesn't, then I still don't care. If they are convicted of such a crime and put to death, then my hard earned tax dollars don't have to go to those who have decided that human life just really isn't all the important to them. Why do we have to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars for someone to die in jail anyway? They decided that a human life didn't mean crap. How and why should I show an ounce of compassion to them?

That's another reason why none of us here will even come close to agreeing with what you say...no matter what you say because of what you just typed. YOU EVEN ADMITTED IT!!! It's all about the dollar signs with you guys.

[quote Further, the possibility for intentional tampering did, in fact, exist between the time of commission and when the first law enforcement official's arrival. I would presume that some of the evidence at that scene was compromised[/quote]

You are implying that there was spoilation of the evidence. Which will be vitually impossible to prove considering the fact they had to presume there was an immediate danger and rescue personell had no choice but to enter the crime scene and begin assessing and treating casualites. That defense will slapped around almost as bad as you would if you were spewing your liberal garbage to a group of hunters in that area. Furthermore, your opinons are purely speculative and have 0 factual basis.

That kind of things only happens in Kalifornia. In the any state that is more conservative that Kali, this man stands no chance of setting before a jury that will not demand that he pays for his crimes.

By getting a guilty man off??? You defense lawyers are a slimy group. One of these days you will set in judgement for your actions. Trust me, in the only court that really matters there will be no defense to your actions

Please cut and paste and show me where I said that his defense team was doing charity work out of the goodness of their hearts. Show me where I denied that Chi Vang's zealous defense would not be driven by the almighty dollar. I would like to see those comments. Yes, Stump, attorneys DO like to get paid for their work. I also challenge you to find another profession that isn't "all about the money." Newsflash: People work for a living.

FYI - it costs more in legal expenses and very expensive stay in maximum security death row to execute a convict than it costs to give them live inprisonment at a standard level of security. Don't give me that tax dollars baloney.

I know what you're thinking - a bullet only costs fifty cents, but it doesn't work thataway.

A comedian was talking about the death sentnce he said something along the lines of, if there are three or more people that are an eyewitness to your crime, you go right to the front of the line.

Kinda agree with him.

We need to figure out a way to fix that problem.

Kinda like an express lane! I too like the idea!

I consider myself somewhat of a liberal (not full blown though, have aspects of both cons & lib in my beliefs). Anyway, even with my liberal ideas on some topics, I think Vang is guilty as hell and needs to be punished harshly (death isn't a bad idea - but it would be nice to have a limit on death row, say 5 years and then get it over with - that's why the costs are so high, etc, etc - but that is a whole other discussion). Self defense could be credible if he had shot the one with the gun - that is it. Another aspect is the ability to flee. If he could have safely run, there is no self defense case. He has a right to a trail and I would be astounded if he gets anything other than a guilty verdict on all counts.