• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

Anything new with Jesus Gonzales case?

M

McX

Guest
This will be my last comment until the jury is back.

I pray that Jesus stay strong. I pray that his lawyer does a good job presenting the evidence. I pray that the truth becomes known and I pray that justice is done.

If you are religious, I hope you pray the same. If not, at least think good thoughts.

what that guy said.
 

Brass Magnet

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2009
Messages
2,818
Location
Right Behind You!, Wisconsin, USA
It is if a lesser force would have sufficed. In WI, there must be an imminent threat of death in order to justify the use of deadly force. Even if it is at night you had better be able to articulate that threat and convince a jury of it if you choose to kill or paralyze, etc an unarmed man. This is part of the responsibility and consequences when we choose to arm ourselves with a handgun.

I don't know where you got the "lesser force" idea. This is not really relevant. There is no mention of any "force continuum" that I know of in Wisconsin law as to the privilege of self defense. IIRC, what is relevant is that you were in fear of; and that a "reasonable" person in the same situation would be in fear of; death or great bodily harm. Also, whether or not there was a way to retreat or extricate ones self from the situation goes to the reasonableness of the action. I would think that "lesser force" could only find it's way into the equation if one wasn't reasonably in fear so it's moot. If I'm missing something in the statute, let me know.

We have been quiet this long. Please let's let the case proceed without further conjecture. Let's not give any arguments to the prosecution.

As long as we don't devolve into conjecture about the specific case I wouldn't mind if the thread contains self defense theory and actual FACTS as they come out of the trial.
 

Grapeshot

Legendary Warrior
Joined
May 21, 2006
Messages
35,317
Location
Valhalla
OFF TOPIC: How do you subscribe to a thread? I have never seen that option.

At the top of the thread, just beloew the title, click on Thread Tools. Then click on Subscribe to this Thread.

Also if your set up options are right, just posting to a thread will "subscribe" you and you will get email notification each time someone posts to it.
 

We-the-People

Regular Member
Joined
Aug 13, 2009
Messages
2,221
Location
White City, Oregon, USA
You must have missed the article in a few posts before this?

http://www.jsonline.com/blogs/news/132491203.html

Thanks, yes I missed that one. It's pretty sad when only 2 of 34 potential jurors even own a gun. I'm wondering, did they ask how many of those 34 were prohibited from owning a firearm?

Not sure why they would throw out a guy whos friend was run over by an LA cop.....cops aren't involved in this case other than investigating and arresting.

I can understand why the one that acquitted a defendant in a similar case would be "tossed" but if the evidence pointed that waqy it pointed that way.

Our jury selection process definitely has some issues. A "jury of your peers" yet anyone who would actually be a peer is tossed out of the juror pool. Anyone who espouses any knowledge of the rights of a jury is tossed.
 
Top