Yes but riots are good for the elite. The media will blame the rioters, and most voters will agree or not care. Look at what happened to BLM. Do you think that helped the cause?
Yes but in France the elite does not control the narrative the way it does in the US. BLM were mostly peaceful protestors against police violence. Yet, a Fox News viewer only saw the few violent excesses.
I think the issue with riots is the ability of the rioters to control the narrative. For instance, Trump was able to eventually control the narrative around Jan 6, through Fox News and non-traditional media, and so this riot did not end up hurting him. But the left does not have such an ecosystem, and so riots/protests are always interpreted for the left, instead of by the left.
I think this challenge is difficult to overcome, and in any case I am absolutely sure that the people in charge (especially when Trump takes power), believe in their ability to shape the narrative. they will be much happier with riots than with a calm trial in which the jury acquits.
Let’s assume a jury trial does happen. The murder is pre-meditated so the DOJ will have to demand capital punishment. Now consider the case where the jury does not convict. What happens to the lives of CEOs (I.e. the members of the Trump cabinet)? That’s a crazy risk to take.
Self defense ( he killed me, I killed him back ) and deminished capacity ( coverage denial panic or coverage denial derangement syndrome ) are the first two that come to mind.
Most of the time the courts don’t take necessity defenses seriously, even when they are super valid. But sometimes when the defendant is white and has money or prominence, and the victim is not well liked it pops up now and again.
Case in point, when Dan White shot and killed Harvey Milk and George Moscone in 1978.
I’m not sure how much “not guilty” is possible in what is a clear case of murder. Nullification, however.
I mean for nullification you’d have to say not guilty.
And you bet your ass jurors are going to be asked if they know about jury nullification or want to do it, probably in like 10 different ways.
Either he will take a plea deal or he will be “suicided”. No way this comes in front of a jury.
No one rioted for Epstein because no one liked Epstein. If they suicide this guy, there’s going to be a much, much bigger LA Riot situation happening.
Yes but riots are good for the elite. The media will blame the rioters, and most voters will agree or not care. Look at what happened to BLM. Do you think that helped the cause?
We had a series of riots in France the elite were not super stoked about.
Yes but in France the elite does not control the narrative the way it does in the US. BLM were mostly peaceful protestors against police violence. Yet, a Fox News viewer only saw the few violent excesses.
Not so sure about that.
I think the issue with riots is the ability of the rioters to control the narrative. For instance, Trump was able to eventually control the narrative around Jan 6, through Fox News and non-traditional media, and so this riot did not end up hurting him. But the left does not have such an ecosystem, and so riots/protests are always interpreted for the left, instead of by the left.
I think this challenge is difficult to overcome, and in any case I am absolutely sure that the people in charge (especially when Trump takes power), believe in their ability to shape the narrative. they will be much happier with riots than with a calm trial in which the jury acquits.
Why would they suicide him? Epstein could name names. What’s this guy gonna do?
Let’s assume a jury trial does happen. The murder is pre-meditated so the DOJ will have to demand capital punishment. Now consider the case where the jury does not convict. What happens to the lives of CEOs (I.e. the members of the Trump cabinet)? That’s a crazy risk to take.
will have to demand capital punishment? no, murder 1 is not automatic capital punishment.
Not guilty on ground of necessity.
Self defense ( he killed me, I killed him back ) and deminished capacity ( coverage denial panic or coverage denial derangement syndrome ) are the first two that come to mind.
Most of the time the courts don’t take necessity defenses seriously, even when they are super valid. But sometimes when the defendant is white and has money or prominence, and the victim is not well liked it pops up now and again.
Case in point, when Dan White shot and killed Harvey Milk and George Moscone in 1978.