He can get 3 dozen lawyers & it still does not change the fact that he killed 6 people & wounded 2 more. Just how do you explain shooting a woman in the back & chasing others without a gun pleading for there life then shooting them multi times to make sure they are dead. He is a scum bag animal & should be treated as such.
I agree but saw these post on other sites makes ya wonder about our justice system.?
Dunno how many of the posters here have seen a jury trial firsthand--especially a jury trial for a homicide case or significant felony. Such events are best viewed as a "reality construction" process rather than a "reality discovery" process. HOPEFULLY, the prosecutor's effort is closely tied to factual information and professional, scientific analysis of the evidence and statements gathered during the inquiry. Criminal defense attorneys will do likewise if possible, but more often than not are confronted with a situation where the client's activities and statements present him with a "dog ate my homework" excuse for those same actions being inquired upon in court.
Such a scenario means that the defense must attack 1) the witnesses 2) the evidence 3) the investigators, and hope to slop some dirt or doubt on one or more of those elements in order to prevail. THAT is the single best reason that the cops better bring their first string players and their best game to a significant event.
One other little game the defense plays is to intentionally invite error into the trial, in order to prevent a death penalty finding by the jury to ultimately be carried out. Claims of counsel incompetency are the latest version of that little game--"I'm just a mid-level public defender, I'm not Johnny Cochran" was one little line I heard in a recent murder trial.
What this means is that trials often turn into circuses that are a mockery of justice. Most juries are disgusted by such practices, see through the BS, and find the facts of the matter. Once in a while, the BS works--so the attorneys persist in the practice.
I would look forward to a lot of the same in the Vang matter. "It's all about ME"--the suspect--he's already played the "race card", and you can just bet that the victims will get figuratively burned at the stake before the case gets finished. Nice try--but a jury will see through that crap, analyze the evidence gathered objectively, and send the murdering thug up the river. The defense will do its damndest to impanel 12 houseplants in the jury box, but that won't work either. Don't read too much into the newspapers' coverage of the crime or the trial--much of their tripe is guesswork and nonsense.
I read (yesterday) that he had asked for, and received, a public defender. In a high-profile case, the PD office usually assigns 2 lawyers. Matbe these are PD's?
I dunno, the Hmong are a very close community, maybe they've sprung for lawyers also.
I also read a "case analysis" by a prominent law expert that stated that Vang has a good chance of getting by with Homicide convictions, as opposed to Murder, because he may have been in reasonable fear of his life, legally defended himself, then over reacted when he started shooting unarmed people.
I don't understand these "shades" of killing. I've always been of the mind that if you killed somebody, it is either murder or the person had killin' comin', in which case no crime has been commited. Now the legals have invented about 37 different levels of killing.
There are noises about a change of venue, because the counties in the area have few minority residents. Charges of racism have been raised. This is going to be a very long, drawn out drama and we, as gun owners, are going to be losers. I'm going out this afternoon and pick up a couple more SKS's while I still can.
After reading these post and reading about the good chance of homicide convictions instead of murder when he shot unarmed folks in the back just makes you wonder about our justice system. Of course I realize at this time it is speculation of the parts of others and we will not know until Monday what the WI AG office is going to charge him with so I guess we will have to wait until then. I know if it is a lesser charge than first degree there are going to be a lot of P Oed folks myself included!
