Hard to separate the two, ain't it? Like an eye-witness who testified that Barajas disappeared from the scene, returned a few minutes later, and was seen sticking his head into Banda's car. The teen said he then heard a gunshot, but did not see the actual shooting. Or Witnesses whoidentified Barajas as the person who approached the vehicle before the shooting. And other witnesses said there was a man opening fire but none could identify Barajas as that person. Though circumstantial, a search of Barajas' home found ammunition consistent with the bullet that killed Banda. Who else would've had a reason to walk up to a wrecked car with a drunk (or not) in it and two dead bodies lying on the ground, and shoot the driver? Can't think of any scenario that would happen...unless it was the father of the two bodies lying on the ground. Again, this is not about proving who it was, rather, who it was being given a pass...and he was, rightfully. His punishment will be for life too cause his life will never be the same with losing two kids.
There is nothing "rightful" about this case. It is apparent that the jurors felt he was acting in the heat of anger, possibly even "temporary insanity". That is quite different from thinking that he was justified in shooting an unarmed person.
I really don't know. I suppose a jury can be sympathetic. But at the end of the day, each member of the jury is charged with making a decision beyond reasonable doubt. The evidence here was circumstantial so perhaps the prosecution did not meet their burden. He got a pass. I don't know if he deserved it or not. He lost 2 kids. That is the worst punishment....next to being locked up and having lost 2 kids.
No, it is not apparent. Not one bit. There is nothing to support what you're trying to spin. When u wrong jus say u wrong.
If I am ever wrong, I'll be sure to let you know. There is nothing to support your notion that the jury thought Barajas was justified in killing Banda. Like Vball said, the prosecution failed to demonstrate murder beyond a reasonable doubt. And there was definitely an element of the "heat of anger" involved. The prosecutor likely overreached by bring a first-degree murder charge, when a manslaughter charge may have been more appropriate. http://www.houstonchronicle.com/news/houston-texas/houston/article/Houston-news-5717059.php The jury's acquittal of Barajas on Wednesday may have been a signal to prosecutors that the murder charge against the bereaved father was unduly harsh, said South Texas College of Law professor Geoffrey Corn. Barajas denied shooting Banda, but Corn suggested the case was "like a classroom example of a 'heat of passion' case, which would have mitigated down to a manslaughter charge." "The evidence was compelling" for a conviction, Corn said, but by seeking a murder conviction, the prosecutors had risked a jury backlash. "I wonder what would have happened if they had started with a manslaughter charge," Corn said.
I think both guys got what they deserved, one going home and the other getting shot. Maybe it's because I remember helping my grandpa push his old Ford down a road one time when it broke and I was about 10 or maybe I've got a little bit of Old Testament in me, eye for an eye. I can assure you if someone would have run me over, he would have shot them too. Dude got smashed and killed a couple kids, Dad got pissed, saved a bunch of tax payers money and probably someone else's life.....I get it.
No, you won't. You've been wrong many times (as here) but just can't seem to grasp it. Sure there is. I've already shown that so go back and read. This guy was never going to get convicted, like Tiga said.
Disagreeing with you does not make somebody wrong. You said that after he was acquitted. What prescience!
The first post in this thread says u a lya. I called it then and there. It's WHY I started this thread, gringo. btw, hope you caught Geraldo Rivera (sp?) tonight. He said NO WAY that jury was going to convict. Said everyone KNOWS he did it. Geraldo said it was a slam dunk, otherwise. Thanks for playin.
You had said . . . "This guy was never going to get convicted, like Tiga said." Well, Tiga never said that in post 1. He said that that "juries are sympathetic." Mentuer. You are citing friggin' Geraldo? Seriously? Al Capone did it, no doubt . . .
