Screw Tookie, Save Maye!

[Quartermaster]

We should save Maye instead (http://www.theagitator.com/archives/025962.php#025962)

Maye was arrested and sentenced to death after police officers, choosing the wrong home to do a drug raid on (he wasn't the intended raidee), broke down his door one night, jarring him from his sleep. Maye, fearing for his life and that of his young child in the next room, shot and killed an officer.

The fact he was convicted makes me sick, what makes it worse are the reasons given by the jurors.

[Surixurient]

wow, that is a disturbing story. I dont think that him being black had anything to do with it though. I think it was all police corruption of the father to the slain officer, who used his position to get revenge for his son's death. He lost his son, so in turn made a girl lose her father. Pretty sick.

[Jon885]

wow..that isn't good at all. hopefully his sentence will be overturned.

[Daishikaze]

Thats what they call Justice huh?

[Xuande]

Geez. It's what's wrong with America in a nutshell: racism, the War on Civil Liber--I mean Drugs, and the death penalty, all in one case.

[setrict]

The fact that his even got to trial disturbs the hell out of me, unless the article is neglecting to mention a few things. I'd trust a random person on the street before I'd trust the 'justice' system. That's just sick.

Edit: Why doesn't this get media air time? We get hours a day on cnn about random missing people, but stuff like this gets ignored? WTF.

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

Okay, how exactly does this guy going to trial disturb some of you or put some of you off? The guy, whether accidentally or on purpose, shot and killed a police officer. Use common sense, of course he's going to go to trial. What's supposed to be controversial is whether or not he deserved the death sentence.

Which he didn't.

However, allow me to pose some amount of uncertainty. As far as it seems to be said, the police did give a warning about breaking into the house, but at midnight. I'm not going to listen to Radley Balko saying that the police gave the warning just seconds before; he doesn't know that, and neither do we. Only Maye does, and he says he that they didn't, but there's a chance he's not telling the whole truth. I'm being a racist, bigoted asshole, I'm just saying that there's a chance.

The jurors were probably racist, truthfully. But, also, Maye's attorney wasn't too intelligent ending the case on that note. However, just how much does it matter that the police officer was white, as was his dad? Radley Balko is trying to pass the police off as racist and corrupt, if just subtley, and I don't like that. I'm more willing to bet that the father is just grieving and is more willing to believe that his son wasn't at fault. There's a chance that he's racist, but also that he's not.

From the evidence that's been presented, Cory Maye did not deserve the death penalty. However, whether the fault of the police or not, he still killed an officer, which is why I'm okay with the trial. I'm not okay with the sentence (guilty of voluntary manslaughter I would have probably been okay with). If the police really did give a warning, and Cory Maye was able to hear them, he should not have been terrified enough to shoot a cop the first he sees them.

But, I'm just 17. I'm rather ignorant on the law.

I'm torn on the issue. I'd like to read a couple more articles on this, if possible.

Also, don't get pissed at the entire country for this. With all due respect, just because this is happening in the South, doesn't mean it's consistently happening everywhere else. This isn't what the United States calls justice, this is what a bunch of jurors in Mississipi call justice.

I forgot where I was going with this post. Oh well.

[setrict]

The guy, whether accidentally or on purpose, shot and killed a police officer. Use common sense, of course he's going to go to trial.

No, not necessarily. The goverment has to decided whether to prosecute the case or not. If Joe Random broke into some guys house, and Maye killled him in obvious self-defense there wouldn't have been a trial. The trial would have come only if the gov't decided there was enough evidence that the shooting wasn't in self-defense. If Joe Random lived, there STILL probably wouldn't have been a criminal trial.. just a civil suit. The police had NO right to break into his home. They had NO valid search warrant. The only difference is that it wasn't Joe Random, it was an officer.

I don't mean to rant, I just get riled up when I see abuse of power like this appears to be.

More abuse of power I just saw on fark http://tinyurl.com/c3wwu

Yes, home of the free, and land of the brave where exchanging a $1.75 transit token for $1.75 to help a guy out ends you up in handcuffs.

[Komachi Angel]

That's a really harsh situation. Given you are asleep in the middle of the night, and then suddenly you hear shouting and your door being kicked in, it seems fairly rational to sympathise with Maye's position. I certainly don't think he should have been given the death penalty, of all things, and I think the police have something to answer for in this situationas well. Naturally, police will make mistakes as well, but I think the situation needs to be rationalised.

[stillbornsinger]

I agree with Phate's assestment of the situation.

Something that is pretty disturbing is it is not unheard of for an organized group of criminals to break into somewhere claiming to be police officers. So even if the officer did identify himself as a law enforcement officer just prior to breaking in, I'm not sure that I wouldn't have made the same choice and opened fire. Knowing very well that I was not a criminal and the police had no reason to be breaking into my home. I would have at the very least identified myself as being armed which probably would have just gotten him shot.

Whats to stop a group of guys from buying "para-military" gear and some swat patches? Then run right into my house, rape and kill my family and steal my possesions?

I'm not claiming that this was the case for Maye and that he heard the police's warning but just didn't believe it, just throwing that possibility out for a hypothetical situation.

In Maye's case I could very well believe he didn't hear the police's warning since he was asleep but was awoken buy some guys in black breaking down his door in the middle of the night. If I was in that situation both of those cops probably would have recieved a double tap to center mass with a .45 :(

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

No, not necessarily. The goverment has to decided whether to prosecute the case or not. If Joe Random broke into some guys house, and Maye killled him in obvious self-defense there wouldn't have been a trial. The trial would have come only if the gov't decided there was enough evidence that the shooting wasn't in self-defense. If Joe Random lived, there STILL probably wouldn't have been a criminal trial.. just a civil suit. The police had NO right to break into his home. They had NO valid search warrant. The only difference is that it wasn't Joe Random, it was an officer.
Er, no, that is not the only difference. Joe Random would break in to probably steal or do something else intentionally criminal. The police broke in to the wrong place with the intention to get a guy selling drugs. They should receive the consequences for acting stupidly.

However, I also at this point refuse to call it self defense if Maye really had nothing to defend himself from. But yes, I do understood his point of view in all this.

But I am also wondering where exactly Maye kept his gun. Radley Balko's take on it doesn't mention it. Guy wakes up because he hears the police breaking in, goes to his gun, and waits for them to come in? We're not really being told, and I'd like more explanation on that little part of what happened. As far as we're being told, police yelled, break down door, and one gets shot. What happened inbetween? This is just me being more curious if anything.

I'd just like to know what exactly happened; not some libertarian's take, whose story is proving to be the only one I can find except this. (http://www.ajs.org/jc/death/2004/jc_death_cases.asp) (Scroll down to "Cory Maye")

Don't get me wrong though. I think that in the big picture, there is probably something definitely wrong with this. There could be a bit of racism, but I don't think that's it. I think that the Pearl River Basin Narcotics Task Force is just refusing to admit that they made a grave mistake and that more of the fault lies with them. Still, I'm questioning Maye's decision to fire at them in "self-defense". (I'm repeating myself I know, but I'm writing this on a whim without going over it. =>)

More abuse of power I just saw on fark http://tinyurl.com/c3wwu

Yes, home of the free, and land of the brave where exchanging a $1.75 transit token for $1.75 to help a guy out ends you up in handcuffs.
So? He broke the law, he got busted. The only thing I disagree with is giving him a citation; I would have given a warning.

EDIT: Err, yeah, stillbornsinger posted while I was typing this. ._.

[Quartermaster]

I want to scrap together a campaign to overturn his death sentence at the least, and at the most/best free him.

I'm think the best way to start this would be to begin gathering all the cases where criminals pretended to be officers and ripped off drug dealers and normal people. Anybody wants to pitch in, go ahead and post it.

[Spaatz965]

There's a couple things that bother me about the invasion into Mr. Maye's residence...

* If the warrent execution was deemed high risk enough to go after daylight hours (which I understand is rare for a multitude of reasons), why not wait until between 3am and 5am when body rythms are at the bottom of their natural ebb. Heck, at midnight, probably even money that someone is still awake and probably intoxicated (alcohol or drugs).

* Given the high risk nature of the warrent execution, why was an UNARMED and UNTRAINED (not a member of the taskforce/swat) officer allowed to enter an UNSECURED residence, let alone as the LEAD officer through the rear door? Unless of course the front entry team declared the residence secured...and if the residence was declared secure, why would the rear entry team bother announcing themselves as they entered?

Personally, based only on the information in the original article, I believe the killing was justified as it was in self defense. Granted, the police made a terrible mistake, it does not change the fact that they had NO LEGAL basis for entering Mr. Maye's residence, let alone in an after dark raid. Further, as the only apparent illegal activity Mr. Maye likely participated was personal use and posession of pot, there was no reasonable expectation Mr. Maye should have had that the police would *ever* break into his residence, let alone after dark. Even if the rear entry team did announce themselves in accordance with tactics and policy, and I think there is a reasonable question there, there was no reason for Mr. Maye to believe the shouts of "police" were true...and every reason to fear for his and his child's life. As a reasonably law abiding citizen, Mr. Maye should not, in the sanctity of his own home, be held to the same standards as trained police officers for identifying whether a threat is real or not.

Again, based on the linked article, this looks like Mr. Maye was wrongly convicted. Morally, ethically, and quite possibly leagally, Mr. Maye was defending himself, his family and his property from intruders who had entered his residence - apparently illegally at that. Because the intruders were police who were making a mistake in the execution of a legal warrent does not make them any less intruders and a potential threat.

Frankly, if it had been me in that situation...and I had decided there was enough threat in the area I was living in to own a home defensive weapon...the cop would likely still be alive. Though, it wouldn't be because I didn't shoot him. It would be because of my prior military training (shoot at center of mass - ie, chest) and my choice of firearms (20 gauge shotgun with the first two shells being #4 birdshot and the rest being #3 buckshot). Blast pretty much would have been taken by his body armor, and he'd probably have had one heck of a bruise. Given the circumstances described, I sure as heck would have shot the officer. Any unidentified intruder in my home is assumed to be a threat (and yelling police in the middle of the night doesn't count for identification in my book, unless they're holding back and give me the chance to safely identify them). Given the opportunity to safely identify that an intruder is not a threat, I wouldn't shoot...but what I read leads me to believe Mr. Maye did not have that opportunity.

[Fermented Yeast Paste]

I still can't find another real take or article on this happening. I even looked on Snopes just to make sure, and didn't find anything relating to it there. If someone has a link to another article on this, I'd like to see it.

Actually, I have found two others, but they don't really say much:
Article 1 (http://www.djournal.com/pages/story.asp?ID=51318&pub=1), Article 2 (Fairly old) (http://www.stopthedrugwar.org/chronicle/218/mississippi.shtml)

[Snake eyeS]

A truly sad story :( I think we all agree that the case is wrong and that the person should get a lesser punishment. I don't think that color has anything to do with it, but I think its just a case of bad politics and the police covering up their case, and having a shitty lawyer to defend him.

*I'm going to totally derail this post by adding my 2 cents about how it could of been prevented. please reply if you love your gun and take it to bed with you for some sweet loving and think I'm some tree hugging hippie ;) )

OK here goes, this wouldn't of happened if he didn't own a gun.

My brother could be in the same exact situation like he was, difference being my brother most likely would take 2 or 3 cops down punching, and he _doesn't_ own a gun. My brother would get a formal excuse and a few bruises from the cops kicking his ass trying to restrain him, and this person gets the death sentence.. Why? Because he is allowed to own a gun. If my brother was able to buy a gun at the local hillbilly gunshot, he would of most likely shot the cop as well, knowing my brother he wouldn't stop firing until he or everyone else was dead. But luckily my brother isn't allowed to buy a gun to defend himself.

Anyways, I'm sure some of you gun hugging possible criminals are going to eat up my post.. i don't mind, just thought I point out what in my eyes was the partly the fault of this whole ordeal.

:( A perfectly honest man has been sent to prison because he is allowed to carry a gun when he is threatened. Everyone would of grabbed for the gun, I most probably would shoot as well(insert stupid gun hugging lines like .45 mm supadupersemi automatic doing the chicken dance gun in the chest x 223402897 rounds) but I'm not able to do so, because I cant keep a gun.

To answer an argument thats bound to be thrown at my head: yes, I'm shit out of luck when I encounter a criminal holding a gun.. But giving me a gun would do me more harm then good in the long run. Most likely if I would ever be held at gunpoint(by a super soaker 200 66mm kick ass gun ofcuz) I would shit myself, then try and find defensive measures to save my body.. Which most likely would be to surrender and comply or to run off.. In a best case scenario kick his sorry ass to hell. But if had a gun i would shoot him right away, without exploring all the other aspects that would come to mind. a criminal isn't always out for the kill, the gun is just to scare the shit out of you so you will do what he wants, do it and you more then likely will walk away unharmed. Try shooting him and you have a 50% chance your gonna get shot yourself(insert Ive been in the army my reflexes are better then a Pokemon ill shoot his ass up so i deserve at least a 25% odd) so in the end i think its just better to NOT own a gun. shoot me for it but i'd rather get beaten up then being killed by my own gun.

Sorry for derailing this topic, and posting this not in the already made gun topic, but i just thought it would entice some discussion. But feel free to ignore it and to find a way to help this poor man in prison who left behind a daughter. :(

[setrict]

i think its just better to NOT own a gun. shoot me for it but i'd rather get beaten up then being killed by my own gun.

I totally agree in that situation. That's your choice, and my choice. What I don't agree with is other people wanting to take away my right to make that choice for myself.

As for Maye, I can't find any significant references on it either online - just drug-legalization advocate sites using it as propoganda against the war on drugs. Not the best source for unbiased information. It's been 3 years, so you'd think someone would have spoken up for him by now - friends, family, anyone.

[Quartermaster]

Snake eyeS:
Yes, you would be out of luck, because you're not supposed to draw your gun if somebody's already bearing down on you, at least unless you can draw like John Wayne (his actual drawing skills be damned).

As for home invasions, a popular style is the smash and grab, or if there's anybody home, the smash-stab-grab, in very quick succession. The experienced criminals know how to get in, grab loot and get out in 55 seconds. It actually happened to my grandparents neighbors. They were sitting at home, and somebody smashed in and killed them.

For an apartment, the time it takes can only be shorter because apartments aren't that large anyway. If Maye was facing a criminal threat (in the assumption that police aren't/weren't criminals) he wouldn't have much time before they killed him or his daughter. Before you mention it, killing is a popular way to keep from being identified, especially in the neighborhoods where there would be drug busts.

It really sounds like you're arguing for compliance with the police assuming the foreknowledge that they are police while ignoring that this foreknowledge would also prevent any hasty trigger pulling. Meanwhile, you say that if you were in this situation with criminals you would fight back, but you'd have the same foreknowledge anyway.

I'm not really understanding your argument or your scenarios. Please clarify?

[Quartermaster]

I totally agree in that situation. That's your choice, and my choice. What I don't agree with is other people wanting to take away my right to make that choice for myself.

As for Maye, I can't find any significant references on it either online - just drug-legalization advocate sites using it as propoganda against the war on drugs. Not the best source for unbiased information. It's been 3 years, so you'd think someone would have spoken up for him by now - friends, family, anyone.

I've searched around, the best news report I could come up with is local newspaper coverage inside a blog. It does seem like a typical newspaper story, and its coverage was basically the story being detailed or as an example of biased journalism.

He also said he's being faxed the court documents/search warrant, so I'll be looking into that.

[Spaatz965]

:( A perfectly honest man has been sent to prison because he is allowed to carry a gun when he is threatened.
I disagree with the charecterization that the cause of the problem was the firearm. The trial and conviction resulted from the (apparently) illegal intruder being a cop killed in the line of duty. That has got to be a HUGE hurdle to get over when positing a self defense justification. Had it been nearly anyone else under similar circumstances, I suspect self-defense would have been an accepted justification.

Here's a frame of reference to try...a firearm is merely a tool. As with any other tool, a skilled operator can use it very safely...someone unskilled is likely to make errors. Almost any tool can be dangerous if handled poorly...problem is, most folks never *formally* learn how to operate their tools safely (past reading whatever anti-liability documentation is provided with the tool).

There are several "begging the question" type arguments we could spin.

* Guns are the problem. If Mr. Maye didn't have a firearm, he wouldn't have killed the cop.
* Gun handling is the problem. If Mr. Maye had practiced more, he probably wouldn't have killed the cop (because the bullet impact would have been taken up by the body armor).
* Police investigative errors are the problem. If the cops hadn't messed up on the execution of the warrent, Mr. Maye wouldn't have killed the cop.
* Police tactical errors are the problem. If the cops hadn't let an UNARMED and UNTRAINED officer lead the rear entry team, Mr. Maye probably wouldn't have had the opportunity to kill the cop.
* Police raids after dark are too risky. Had the raid occurred during dailight hours, Mr. Maye may have had a better opportunity to safely identify the intruders into his home as police officers...and not shot at them.

My point is, a firearm isn't some malignant thing that propogates evil by its mere existence. Mr. Maye's firearm did not *cause* the situation that resulted in his capital conviction. Certainly, without a firearm Mr. Maye likely would not have had the opportunity to kill the entering officer, but there are plenty of "what if" scenerios that would have led to the same result without a firearm.

For the record, I do not own or possess any firearms. I am not, not have been, a member of any organization related to the protection of 2nd amendment rights (actually I'm not a member of any organization at the moment). My firearms exposure and training has been almost exclusive to my service in the US Army Reserves. (ie, I'm not exactly a "gun nut").

In the mean time, there are some serious questions I have about the situation:
* Why was an unarmed officer, not a member of the drug enforcement team, allowed to lead the rear entry team?
* Did the warrent cover the entire structure, or just the one residence...ie, were the police legally in Mr. Maye's residence?
* What was the exent of Mr. Maye's relationship to his neighbor? Was he dealing?
* Why did Mr. Maye keep a (presumably loaded) firearm in his residence?
* Was the firearm registered?
* Why did the police execute the warrent after dark?
* Why didn't the police execute between 3am and 5am?
* Did the front entry team declare the residence clear, not recognizing the structure was a two-family home?
* Did the rear entry team announce themselves?
* Did Mr. Maye have the opportunity to *safely* identify the intruders?
* Given Mr. Maye's position, how would a trained police officer have reacted?

[Snake eyeS]

Thanks for the constructive replies guys,

Even though my previous post inclined that i was under the believe that the weapon caused all the problems, it was merely a post that didnt point fingers at either of them, nor the police nor Maye.. personally i wish that Maye is set free and that the police gives their excuses for fucking up bigtime, but seeing they lost a valued member of their police force, im sure it wont happen again(atleast not on their watch) instead of eleborating on what mistakes were made by the cops i choose to highlight something that in my opinion should not have been there to begin with. Whenever there is a problem its good for to see where the problem started to backtrack what went wrong. For me this is the gun. the cops are at fault, but you cant blaim them for busting down a wrong door(a door that was inside the house of their target) they did a lousy job scouting the area, but even if they knew people lived there they might still have reacted the same way(run in with guns blazing)

I also made this post to arrgovate the gun lovers in this post who more then happy talk about how they would put bullets in their intruders body. these are the people that should not be allowed to carry guns, i can be the best shooter in the wild wild west, but when im in panic and feel the need to defend myself or my childeren, i should not be allowed to have a gun, because believe me i would of fired the whole clip at them if i deemed it nessacery, all directly into his skull. and see what happened, multible lives lost and ruined because of the ability to carry a gun. not one was a criminal during that event, but the weapon made it them all criminals(the police for fucking up, and Maye for killing a person)

Also the term a tool should not be used for a gun, cause what is that tool used for? Killing.

[Kyoushu]

And yet, it's still a tool. A tool for killing.

[Quartermaster]

Snake eyeS:

Bad Snake. No trolling. Bad.

Edit: And yes, I did have a much better reply, but the site ate it.

[setrict]

Had this been a single residence home this sensless tragedy could have been avoided. Obviously a duplex can only serve to combine you and your neighbors lives more closely. It may seem like a good idea at first, with the easy access for borrowing a cup of sugar, lower heat bills and cheaper rent than a normal dwelling - but in the hands of the wrong neighbor, or even an unexperienced neighbor, the situation could turn ugly fast. Poor parking situatons when their friends come over. Parties, loud snoring, audiable love making, and that damn Conan O'Brien show keeping you up at night. The side of the lawn that hasn't been mowed for months. God forbid they should have children. Such a place can't be called a home, let's call it what it is: A recipe for disaster.

Clearly something must be done.

[Kyoushu]

Duplexes cause police deaths.

[Spaatz965]

Whenever there is a problem its good for to see where the problem started to backtrack what went wrong. For me this is the gun.
Root Cause Analysis is always good. I can agree that Chris Maye possessing a firearm was definately a contributing factor, I don't agree that it was a cause of the situation.

The cops are at fault,
Presumably, based on the cited blogger's info. I don't know that we have that conclusively nailed down...or if they were, how were they? There are a lot of inconsistencies in that whole situation that really need to be cleared up.

but you cant blaim them for busting down a wrong door(a door that was inside the house of their target) they did a lousy job scouting the area, but even if they knew people lived there they might still have reacted the same way(run in with guns blazing)
I think we can, and must. If the house had two residential addresses to it, and the warrent was only for one of them, what the police did was CRIMINAL, a violation of Mr. Maye's constitutional and civil rights not to mention illegally damaging property for which Mr. Maye was responsible. If that warrent did not validly include Mr. Maye's residence, the cops didn't just make an "oopsie" mistake...they vandalized Mr. Maye's residence, terrorized him and his child, and generally abused at least his 5th ammendment rights. Throw in ANYONE being injured, let alone a cop being killed, and this is might be the biggest official screw up in that department's history. As to running in with guns blazing, I didn't read that...in fact what I read is, they sent an unarmed officer in first.

I also made this post to arrgovate the gun lovers in this post who more then happy talk about how they would put bullets in their intruders body.
As one who made comments along those lines, allow me to elaborate. My comment was intended to convey that, given the circumstances as I understand them, I would have shot the cop as an intruder. Here is how I understand events:
* At about midnight...presumably everyone in the house is asleep and the lights are off.
* Front entry team enters the other residence, making some level of noise.
* Rear entry team enters Mr. Maye's residence making some level of noise.
* Within 10 seconds of the rear entry an [unarmed] officer is rushing into Mr. Maye's bedroom.

This is my interpretation of what I read, and if things went down reasonably along these lines, Mr. Maye would not have been able to safely identify the intruder as a non-threat before he had to make the shoot/no-shoot decision. At that hour, with an unidentified intruder rushing in, you have to assume they intend to kill you...'cause if you hesitate, and you're wrong, you're likely dead (or worse). Personally, I considered this scenario years ago when I was living in an area where protecting myself in my home was a real concern, and was thinking very seriously about purchasing a home defensive firearm.

but when im in panic and feel the need to defend myself or my childeren, i should not be allowed to have a gun, because believe me i would of fired the whole clip at them if i deemed it nessacery, all directly into his skull.
Practice, training training and forethought overcome panic. As I previously indicated, too many people have tools (especially firearms) and don't learn how to handle them safely and with skill. The key in your statement is "if I deemed it neccessary"... For me that is, I haven't been able to identify the intruder as a non-threat before a shoot/no-shoot decision is forced on me. Rationally, I think that's where most folks are...unfortunately, most folks don't think these types of scenarios through, so when it does happen they're rushed and panicked...and more likely to make poor decisions or hesitate. The same holds true for getting out of your house in the event of a fire...if you don't think it through and practice, when the time comes you won't have time to figure out what to do...and will likely die for that hesitation.

[Xuande]

I don't think the gun was necessarily the big problem here. If he'd bludgeoned the cop the death with a baseball bat or stabbed him with a knife, the outcome would likely be about the same.

Furthermore, from what I've gathered from reading the articles, his story was not that he drew the gun and shot the policement as he was bearing down on him, but got his gun when he was awakened by the sounds of people breaking into the house, before anyone entered his bedroom. When someone did break into it, he shot him.

It's a tragic accident (one man dead, and another probably about to be), but it seems to me the fault rests squarely on the police department. They did not have a warrant to raid Maye's apartment and they intentionally conducted the raid in such a way as to confuse the inhabitants of the apartments.

[FireWolf238]

It's a tragic accident (one man dead, and another probably about to be), but it seems to me the fault rests squarely on the police department. They did not have a warrant to raid Maye's apartment and they intentionally conducted the raid in such a way as to confuse the inhabitants of the apartments.

*the point of a raid is to take the radee by surprise.
But the fact that the wrong house was hit sould cost several high officers their job at least.
also i did not read the details, but in my view, that man had justification to shoot the cop, the fact that a man wears a uniform does not grant him imnunity from self defence. that's why swat exsists...you have to assume that the radees will atempt to defende themselves, and to sucesfully raid those who should get raided, there is special forces.

oh and yea, screw tookie, someone like him cannot redeem himself, unless he can resurect those who he killed, there is nothing he can ever do to redeem himself

[Xuande]

*the point of a raid is to take the radee by surprise.

Once upon a time, American police knocked at the door and waited to see if anyone would come to the door before raiding. They furthermore did this in broad daylight. I believe this is what they still do, in most cases. This seems to me to be a lot less dangerous to innocent people who might accidentally get caught in the situation. If I'm not mistaken, the no-knock nighttime raid was an invention of the justly maligned War on Drugs.

[FireWolf238]

btw, i herd that tookie will be executed.
and yes i'm happy with that, as i said that's four poeple he murdered, he has no right to be alive in this society

[drdan]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20051213/ap_on_re_us/williams_execution;_ylt=Aj1hG49LZYTFQEXGqZK.2lis0N UE;_ylu=X3oDMTA2Z2szazkxBHNlYwN0bQ--

"He was condemned in 1981 for gunning down convenience store clerk Albert Owens, 26, at a 7-Eleven in Whittier and killing Yen-I Yang, 76, Tsai-Shai Chen Yang, 63, and the couple's daughter Yu-Chin Yang Lin, 43, at the Los Angeles motel they owned. Williams claimed he was innocent."


If I'm right, he is also the founder of the Crypts(sp?).

Yes, he deserves the death penalty, and no, it's not because of racism.

[stillbornsinger]

Congrats... you've posted in the middle of a conversation without actually reading a single other post.

[more cheerios]

* If the warrent execution was deemed high risk enough to go after daylight hours (which I understand is rare for a multitude of reasons), why not wait until between 3am and 5am when body rythms are at the bottom of their natural ebb. Heck, at midnight, probably even money that someone is still awake and probably intoxicated (alcohol or drugs).
Maybe they thought he was a flight risk.

[drdan]

Congrats... you've posted in the middle of a conversation without actually reading a single other post.


Would it have been better if I said "I read every f@$kin post" first before I posted my reply?

Geez, I know this was about Maye but I decided to talk about someone else.

Maye deserves death too it that makes you feel better.

[Quartermaster]

It would if you explained why. Dumbass.

[drdan]

It's quite simply actually because I posted my first reply in the wrong thread. I meant to post it on another thread specifically about Tookie. I thought I'd be funny to have people like you retaliate, so I posted a second time just to see what kind of response I'd get.

[Quartermaster]

Yes, yes you are very funny for people like me retaliate.

And by the way, congratulations on being late with your opinion anyway.

[drdan]

Thanks quarter. And yes, my opinion was a little slow since he was already executed by the time I posted.

Anyways, tell your girlfriend I said thanks for last night.

*by the way, that last line was a joke :D