Gerald Stanley Trial

I just read up more on this case. It's worse than I thought. The entire crew should have been charged and jailed. The fact they weren't actually shows a racist bias. If it had been 5 black or white kids pulling off an attack like this they would have all been charged.
As for the two imbeciles The PM and the Minister of justice, it only emphasizes how much Trudough doesn't understand our constitution and judiciary. He is such a narcissist poseur he truly believes he rules over the courts. Then again he did tell a bunch of students last week that he taught pre law before entering politics.

Fox I don't know where you got the idea that we can shoot a guy standing on your lawn - we only can shoot someone if you feel that your life is in danger - that includes when someone breaks into your home especially when it is at night - you can't chase a crook down the street shooting at him because at that point you are no longer in danger - if a cop does something clearly illegal and your life is in danger because of his actions you can shoot a cop - if you do that you better be sure that you are standing on firm ground and hope other cops don't shoot you before you get a chance to explain what happened

There is a difference between having the right, and exercising the right. You use or brandish a firearm in Canada even defence of your property without a threat to yours of families live...you are going to jail.

You don't have that right to threaten, hold at bay anyone during a property crime.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by terrym

I just read up more on this case. It's worse than I thought. The entire crew should have been charged and jailed. The fact they weren't actually shows a racist bias. If it had been 5 black or white kids pulling off an attack like this they would have all been charged.
As for the two imbeciles The PM and the Minister of justice, it only emphasizes how much Trudough doesn't understand our constitution and judiciary. He is such a narcissist poseur he truly believes he rules over the courts. Then again he did tell a bunch of students last week that he taught pre law before entering politics.

---

...and Trudeau's not done with this yet, he hasn't even cried in front of the cameras. Seriously though, the potential political meddling with the court that we are now seeing is troubling.

This reminds me of the outcry following the Jian Ghomeshi verdict. The mob was outraged, but the flaw was not in the legal system.

Guilty by declaration of emotional response, a new Canadian crime .... (evidence is Justin Crying, sort of like North Korean dictator not liking your smile...) ..... 14 declared guilty all in 1 fell sweep (judge, Stanley and jury) by a drama teacher... must make all involved a bit ticked ... after that for anyone to think that Justin is fit to even be a drama teacher ..... well .... I'd get banned for what I would like to say and the language I would use is usually fit only for tyrants (think North Korea that has 250,000 in labour camps and executes people for watching a western video or owning a Bible etc) and mix that with my comments for someone like Charles Manson or Jim Jones

But back in the real world....take 5 super drunks, that are running around crashing into stuff, had a loaded rifle and that for a minute Gerald thought they had run over his wife apparently, an accidental shooting and innocent based on evidence ..... then the justice minister and Justin Trudeau declare the 14 guilty (charges TBD, may include racism or making PM cry ....) this is so pathetic, in Canada we may have to change the "better judged by 12 than carried by 6" to add something that includes something like "declared guilty by 1 and persecuted by the mob" it seems.... Brian Lilley covered it in more detail than I can put here and his view so far seems the best I have seen so far as far as actually covering the detail and what was probably a political choice of how to charge him ....

https://www.facebook.com/brianlilley...6509411749440/


Justin Trudeau is truly an enemy of our legal system .... and anything with an intellectual or real justice base! The comments that our courts and "leaders" are making is pathetic, race based justice will just breed hate and prejudice and that seems to be what the leftatics want!
https://www.facebook.com/brianlilley...7487864984928/

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebulldog

You need to educate yourself on the particulars of the case.

They weren't "likely looking to steal". They were drunk on booze procured from previous B&Es. They had already tried to steal a truck from a neighboring farm. They tried to steal a truck from the Stanley farm, as well as an ATV. They had a loaded rifle in the SUV with them.

The argument was that it was a hang fire. Police did recover a casing from the SUV which was bulged abnormally. ( anyone who's seen their share of hang fire conditions will attest to the fact that this is one of the defining characteristics).

---

Fair post, you're correct in that I had only read two of the CBC articles and by now we should all know they lean left. However I don't believe that Stanley would have been aware of most of the facts you stated as those details of their day came out after the event.

No doubt it would be nearly impossible for most of us to remain calm in a situation like that and I absolutely agree that people have the right to defend themselves and family from perceived danger.

With all of the above said, a young life is lost, partly because of the choices he and his friends made and partly because a loaded gun was pointed at his head. I believe manslaughter would have been tough to defend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 73hunter

Fair post, you're correct in that I had only read two of the CBC articles and by now we should all know they lean left. However I don't believe that Stanley would have been aware of most of the facts you stated as those details of their day came out after the event.

No doubt it would be nearly impossible for most of us to remain calm in a situation like that and I absolutely agree that people have the right to defend themselves and family from perceived danger.

With all of the above said, a young life is lost, partly because of the choices he and his friends made and partly because a loaded gun was pointed at his head. I believe manslaughter would have been tough to defend.

---

Indeed. Or criminal negligence causing death.

However white farmer, native man dead. One has to wonder why an experienced litigator pressed the Murder 2 charge knowing it would be difficult to achieve a conviction.

Likely they were pressured to make an example of Stanley by the same folks who are now crying foul.

Oh, another small fact that has come out by the race baiters? Several FN in the jury pool were eliminated, mainly due to the fact they couldn’t be impartial.

.....guess who else got eliminated? Most of the middle aged white men.....

I totally believe the Second Degree murder charge was set up, for one of two reasons.

First the Crown was trying to make a name for himself in hopes to show the strong arm of the law and further the feathers (no pun), in hat and resume.

Second, it was political interference and an expectation of outrage over a not guilty verdict to further the Anti Gun Agenda still yet to be released by Trudeau.

Last, is the Crown is white supremacist, land owner and farmer....

I go with #1, with a career path perception and projection for #2.

Bluebulldog that is exactly what I read about this case that he stuck to the gun going off accidentally and that is what the jury had to determine, if he was correct or not. tough call either way that is for sure and very unfortunate incident.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bluebulldog

Stanley never quavered from his statement that the gun just went off.

He had the ACE card of saying that it was self defense, but didn't use it. He in fact fired two warning shots.

The Crown could have preferred the lesser charge of manslaughter, or Crim Negligence Causing Death, but did not. As the Crown was not a novice, one must wonder why he stuck with a 2nd degree murder charge, knowing he had to prove intent to kill.

The fact is, that it is likely that the crown was pressured to "hang" Stanley with the murder charge. The same people who pressured him, are likely the same ones who are now crying foul. The Crown was then forced to play his hand, with witnesses that perjured themselves, provided inconsistent testimony, and in one case, had to have a subpoena and a warrant issued, because he couldn't be bothered to attend.

Meanwhile Stanley's account did not change, and that of his family did not change.....for the jury, I'm sure it wasn't a tough call.

---

I'm reading all this but ain't saying anything - don't need to because you all know how I feel about something like this and how it would have been handled down here -