Charlottesville- Justice for Heather Heyer

[mongrel]

You forgot to mention President Trump in your bizarre reconstuction of my supposed theories, actually the man used Charlottesville in a very Machivellian style and he is the one who has drawn the most of it ..

What give the driver the idea to murder the woman? Was it

a.Hearing things such as MAGA, lock up Hilary, build the wall?

or

b. A conversation between Nazis on Discord suggesting ways of killing liberals by running over them?

Not difficult to work out.

[Love Mountain]

There are two possibilities here, either:

a) There is a vast conspiracy to frame the poor wittle Nazi, James Fields Jr. for murder. The conspiracy is vast and involves the FBI, Obama, Leftists, the Judiciary and probably Aliens. There's no evidence for this, but then who needs evidence?

or

b) A Nazi, deliberately drove through a crowd of people and killed an unarmed protester.

Occam's razor suggests the second one is more likely, especially when you add the evidence presented at the trial and the complete lack of evidence for the wacky conspiracy theory presented by Diocle.

The Alt-Right razor suggests that Option A is the only possibility. I'm glad this scumbag will be behind bars, at the very least. He might also face the death-penalty. Hopefully he won't be sentenced to death. It's much better for this scumbag to live and see all of his beliefs and hopes be proven wrong. They should play CNN right outside his cell for the rest of his life.

[Diocle]

.. They should play CNN right outside his cell for the rest of his life.

For God's sake, Sukiyama! This is cruel! Even inmates are human beings!

[Heathen Hammer]

There are two possibilities here, either:

a) There is a vast conspiracy to frame the poor wittle Nazi, James Fields Jr. for murder. The conspiracy is vast and involves the FBI, Obama, Leftists, the Judiciary and probably Aliens. There's no evidence for this, but then who needs evidence?

or

b) A Nazi, deliberately drove through a crowd of people and killed an unarmed protester.

Occam's razor suggests the second one is more likely, especially when you add the evidence presented at the trial and the complete lack of evidence for the wacky conspiracy theory presented by Diocle.

Political trials typically don't require vast conspiracies. I recall Memphis trio trial, which put 3 innocent teenagers behind bars because of ongoing Satanic panic. We just have the Right-Wing Panic, which just like Satanic Panic of the 80s and 90s is mostly induced by paranoid mass media and corrupt establishment.

[mongrel]

Political trials typically don't require vast conspiracies. I recall Memphis trio trial, which put 3 innocent teenagers behind bars because of ongoing Satanic panic. We just have the Right-Wing Panic, which just like Satanic Panic of the 80s and 90s is mostly induced by paranoid mass media and corrupt establishment.

However death by car Nazi after a far right discussion about how fun it would be run liberals over. Don't need to be Sherlock Holmes to solve that mystery.

[Raubritter]

the brainwashed Nazi piece of who killed her

Ronald McDonald never stroke me as a National Socialist.

[The spartan]

Political trials typically don't require vast conspiracies. I recall Memphis trio trial, which put 3 innocent teenagers behind bars because of ongoing Satanic panic. We just have the Right-Wing Panic, which just like Satanic Panic of the 80s and 90s is mostly induced by paranoid mass media and corrupt establishment.

I don't think you know what a "political trial" is. Especially in the US.

[Diocle]

I don't think you know what a "political trial" is. Especially in the US.

In my opinion the point you fail to grasp, Spartan, it's that in a democratic society, "political trials", being a legal and moral indecency typical of military juntas or communist/nazi-fascist dictatorships, should not exist.

[Heathen Hammer]

I don't think you know what a "political trial" is. Especially in the US.

I actually do, hence the post that you quoted being 100% factual.

[Vanoi]

Nothing political here. No law allows you or justifies you driving a car into a crowd and killing someone. Even if Fields was attacked the law says he has to try and get away. Not ramming your car into Heather Meyers.

[Diocle]

Nothing political here. No law allows you or justifies you driving a car into a crowd and killing someone. Even if Fields was attacked the law says he has to try and get away. Not ramming your car into Heather Meyers.

At first Fields was indicted for "second-grade murder" for the same murder but, then politics came ..

[mongrel]

At first Fields was indicted for "second-grade murder" for the same murder but, then politics came ..

Meting out justice for murder is a criminal matter, not a political one.

[Vanoi]

At first Fields was indicted for "second-grade murder" for the same murder but, then politics came ..

He'd still be a convicted murderer.

[The spartan]

In my opinion the point you fail to grasp, Spartan, it's that in a democratic society, "political trials", being a legal and moral indecency typical of military juntas or communist/nazi-fascist dictatorships, should not exist.

Uhuh, and the point that you fail to grasp is the most pleasing narrative to you politically isn't automatically true. I watched you, in real time, make up the absolute most forgiving possible narrative you could for the murderer and then claim that that is what happened without any supporting proof. Like, we saw you make up a lie piece by piece.

[Diocle]

Uhuh, and the point that you fail to grasp is the most pleasing narrative to you politically isn't automatically true. I watched you, in real time, make up the absolute most forgiving possible narrative you could for the murderer and then claim that that is what happened without any supporting proof. Like, we saw you make up a lie piece by piece.

I'm not trying to convince you that my truth is The Truth, I don't own any truth, I just own my point of view that is mine, is personal and I am even deeply jealous of it, so, my work here is just showing to the people passing by here that your storytelling about Charlottesville trial is not the only one existing, that what the Left says is not a religious truth, that there is nothing bad in casting doubt on the outcome of a trial (this trial as any other trial on earth!), on the victim and on what she was doing and on the supposed voluntary killer. I don't call this, building a lie, because I don't think it even exists any absolte truth in human affairs, a trial is just a trial, it's not a divine sentence, it may be contested, the judge may be contested, the work of the jury may be contested, the outcome may be contested, the whole leagl system may be contested, because outside there, outside the Leftist storytelling there is a whole world which has just begun to wake up discovering that what the Left has presented as a holy truth in the last two centuries, was just an infamous, gigantic, indecent, now putrescent and stinker lie.

We should not forget that in the USA from 1973 up to 2004, 340 innocent citizens have been sentenced to death, 144 of them have saved their life in some way, but 183 men and women have been murdered by the state.

No, guys, going on repeating that I have to accept the outcome of Charlottesville, otherwise I'm an immoral fascist, or a supporter of terrorism, won't change my mind and it won't stop me from saying that I am not convinced by Charlottesville trial's outcome, that it was a damn political trial, that I don't think it was a case of voluntary murder, and that Ms Heyer was not a socialist heroin and that she and what she was doing that day are not a good examples for anybody on earth.

[Vanoi]

We don't have to convince you though. That's great thing about this. Fields was judged a jury of his peers. It was a jury of his peers that found Fields guilty of murder. I'll accept that. Whenever you do or not is irrelevant. No one is going to take the side of a man who rammed his car into a crowd killing Heather Heyer. Heather did nothing wrong and didn't deserve to die. Fields did though and deserves every ounce of his punishment.

[Gaidin]

At first Fields was indicted for "second-grade murder" for the same murder but, then politics came ..

They upgraded it after they got a video of the wreck. They also got permission from the judge to show the grand jury to convince the grand jury that it should be upgraded. The grand jury said yes. It could’ve said no. Once more the Italian doesn’t know how Virginia works.

[Diocle]

They upgraded it after they got a video of the wreck. They also got permission from the judge to show the grand jury to convince the grand jury that it should be upgraded. The grand jury said yes. It could’ve said no. Once more the Italian doesn’t know how Virginia works.

Maybe, maybe. Think that in Italy the defendant's experts are invited to assist to the autopsy.

Anyway, did the video come out later, or was it at their disposal from the beginning? I've seen a video about the crash and I think it was already on youtube just the day after the crash, but anyway, at first, the charge was for second-grade-murder. Why didn't they charge him for first grade murder from the beginning? Are we possibly talking of two different videos?

We don't have to convince you though. That's great thing about this. Fields was judged a jury of his peers. It was a jury of his peers that found Fields guilty of murder. I'll accept that. Whenever you do or not is irrelevant. No one is going to take the side of a man who rammed his car into a crowd killing Heather Heyer. Heather did nothing wrong and didn't deserve to die. Fields did though and deserves every ounce of his punishment.

I confirm, you've not to convince me, as I've not to convince you. I agree: this it's good.

You say that for the fact he was judged by a jury of his peer we have to accept everything this peers' jury has decided, I remind you that, as I previously wrote, in the USA, 340 citizens have been sentenced to death by they peers who evidently took the wrong decision, cause they were innocent. Sadly for them in 183 cases they have been butcherd by the state even though they were fully innocent. So peers or not peers (believe me monocratic judge is way better!), you can be sentenced to death even being innocent and this happened in 340 cases in 30 years, that is, I repeat: in the USA during the last 30 years, for 340 times, innocent citizens have been sentenced to death by their peers.

About Heyer: I think that if you decide to take part in a counter protest to deprive your fellow citizens from the right to express their opinion, you are not doing a good thing, indeed you're commiting a crime, a fascist action I'd say, in Italy we call it "azione squadrista", so, no, I don't like what Ms. Heyer was doing, I hate it, but I don't think I need to specify that committing such crime you deserve death. Am I right?

[Vanoi]

Heather Heyer has the right to protest. Only the government can violate your right to free speech or expression. Not protesters. There's no evidence Heather was committing any crime. Counter-protesting is not a crime. Maybe in Italy I guess but not here.

And I don't care about the 340 people you keep mentioning. Juries can be wrong but it doesn't mean this one was. So stop with the deflecting.

[Swiss Army Cheese]

I said it was common sense a car can't accelerate without pressing on the gas. Do try again. I know you gotta keep deflecting since you still haven't proven anything you said so far.


I disagree considering the far right did participate in the riots.


https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...-police-latest

And you got a source for the counter-protesters called for violence?

Been reading that article and it says "Both events turned into violent clashes between white nationalists and counterprotestors."

Both of the events cited in the article only became riots when the counterprotestors arrived. To say that the "far right participated in riots" is disingenuous.


Also can we disregard all Vanoi's arguments because his avatar has a really smug face?

Heather Heyer has the right to protest. Only the government can violate your right to free speech or expression. Not protesters. There's no evidence Heather was committing any crime. Counter-protesting is not a crime. Maybe in Italy I guess but not here.

And I don't care about the 340 people you keep mentioning. Juries can be wrong but it doesn't mean this one was. So stop with the deflecting.

If someone's talking over me, I'm going to say he's violating my right of free speech or expression.