I need any "beyond doubt" evidence showing a real plan - not just some joke in the face of a highly arguable event where distractions were made and a brake was pressed at believable traffic speeds.

I cannot find what evidence was used in the pre-meditated MURDER trial.

(why: allot of media articles full of summary and un-findable legal documents)

Please, if you can legal documents OR just know what "beyond doubt" evidence was used, leave the URL or information.

what was the evidence pls? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I need any "beyond doubt" evidence showing a real
> plan - not just some joke in the face of a highly
> arguable event where distractions were made and a
> brake was pressed at believable traffic speeds.
>
> I cannot find what evidence was used in the
> pre-meditated MURDER trial.
>
> (why: allot of media articles full of summary and
> un-findable legal documents)
>
> Please, if you can legal documents OR just know
> what "beyond doubt" evidence was used, leave the
> URL or information.

that lil nazi punk better hope bubba doesn’t get a hold of him in the shower

It is required to be evidence beyond a 'reasonable' doubt.

The evidence is unconvincing on malt-o-meal brains like yourself who are incapable of reasonable thought.

don’t drop the soap Wrote:
--------------

shut the fuck up psychopath

Beyond a reasonable doubt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It is required to be evidence beyond a
> 'reasonable' doubt.

Basically their defense was that Trump was king, who was trying to “make America great again” (aka “#maga”), and that Fields, who was only trying to help President Trump, had the bejesus scared out of him by antifa. So he did what any normal person would do, he tried to kill a whole bunch of them with his car.

For some reason, the jury did not buy this.

if your interested i posted evidence photos (with evidence stamp) here. but none of them have anything to do with "a plan to run people over", one serves to prove against

Re: Can We Fry the Charlottesville Racist Now?

http://www.fairfaxunderground.com/forum/read.php?40,3012886,3015231,page=2#msg-3015231

> Basically their defense was that Trump

Evidence or shut up.

Prosecution must prove their case beyond a doubt. Defense ONLY refutes ONLY WHEN the Judge deems an evidence has tilted the scale so clearly in favor of conviction that defense must refute the evidence or concede

ONLY

what was the evidence pls? Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I need any "beyond doubt" evidence showing a real
> plan - not just some joke in the face of a highly
> arguable event where distractions were made and a
> brake was pressed at believable traffic speeds.
>
> I cannot find what evidence was used in the
> pre-meditated MURDER trial.
>
> (why: allot of media articles full of summary and
> un-findable legal documents)
>
> Please, if you can legal documents OR just know
> what "beyond doubt" evidence was used, leave the
> URL or information.


It does not come down to whether you found the evidence sufficient to convict. What matters is whether a reasonable jury could have found the evidence sufficient to convict. Most informed legally trained scholars would say the evidence was sufficient.

When you have a local jury full of libtards and a white guy on trial, no evidence is required.

Herbert Kornfeld Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> When you have a local jury full of libtards and a
> white guy on trial, no evidence is required.


I’m bettin this Fields fuckface was a big death penalty supporter before he got locked up.

1) Very simple he drove his car down a street that clearly had protesters and ran them over at a high rate of speed.

2) He had been posting Memes on his Facebook page that implied he wanted to kill people.

3) THERE IS VIDEO OF HIM DRIVING INTO THE CROWD UNTIL HE HIT ANOTHER CAR AND BACKING UP.

He will spend the rest of his entire life in a cage like a zoo Trumpanzee.

EML Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

>
> It does not come down to whether you found the
> evidence sufficient to convict. What matters is
> whether a reasonable jury could have found the
> evidence sufficient to convict. Most informed
> legally trained scholars would say the evidence
> was sufficient.

WRONG. that's for a civil trial.

FOR JAIL AND ESP DEATH PENALTY TRIAL ...

the legal standard is "evidence is beyond a reasonable doubt". not opinion beyond doubt: evidence is beyond doubt

Any sane person can clearly see the nutjob ran over the people. It was clearly a terrorist attack by a mentally ill person.

Caged Trumpanzee Now Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> 1) Very simple he drove his car down a street that
> clearly had protesters and ran them over at a high
> rate of speed.

WRONG. police admitted speed was 23 mph and video showed prake was pressed. 23 mph is FACTUALLY BELOW THE LIMIT (so an idiot may think)

it's immaterial in a pre-meditated murder trial, the fact that in a busy school zone you'd reduce your speed to 15 or even 2 mph and that it doesn't have to be printed on the sign for that to be the law

>
> 2) He had been posting Memes on his Facebook page
> that implied he wanted to kill people.

SO DO YOU, so does 3/4 of all bloggers in the world

> 3) THERE IS VIDEO OF HIM DRIVING INTO THE CROWD
> UNTIL HE HIT ANOTHER CAR AND BACKING UP.

a big nigger came up behind the car and protestors were angry. temporary flight is a well know affliction effecting not only those in accidents but police who engage perps. they really could have done something to them. it was an angry mob WITHOUT A SINGLE SENSIBLE PERSON ANYWHERE IN SIGHT, and no cop in sight.

>

He will spend the rest of his entire life in a
> cage like a zoo Trumpanzee.

perhaps. but i'd rather see those drug addicts and corrupt county persons and insurers avoiding payment in prison first

LISTEN YOU SACK OF SHIT NO ONE ASKED YOU FOR YOUR POLITICAL OPINION.

THE ORIGINAL POST obviously asks for evidence of pre-medicated murder only

Life + 419 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Herbert Kornfeld Wrote:
> -------------------------------------------------->
> I’m bettin this Fields fuckface was a big death
> penalty supporter before he got locked up.

DROP DEAD. evidence ONLY.

dhuyk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Caged Trumpanzee Now Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > 1) Very simple he drove his car down a street
> that
> > clearly had protesters and ran them over at a
> high
> > rate of speed.
>
> WRONG. police admitted speed was 23 mph and video
> showed prake was pressed. 23 mph is FACTUALLY
> BELOW THE LIMIT (so an idiot may think)
>
> it's immaterial in a pre-meditated murder trial,
> the fact that in a busy school zone you'd reduce
> your speed to 15 or even 2 mph and that it doesn't
> have to be printed on the sign for that to be the
> law
>
> >
> > 2) He had been posting Memes on his Facebook
> page
> > that implied he wanted to kill people.
>
>

> SO DO YOU, so does 3/4 of all bloggers in the
> world
>

>
> > 3) THERE IS VIDEO OF HIM DRIVING INTO THE CROWD
> > UNTIL HE HIT ANOTHER CAR AND BACKING UP.
>
> a big nigger came up behind the car and protestors
> were angry. temporary flight is a well know
> affliction effecting not only those in accidents
> but police who engage perps. they really could
> have done something to them. it was an angry mob
> WITHOUT A SINGLE SENSIBLE PERSON ANYWHERE IN
> SIGHT, and no cop in sight.
>
> >

He will spend the rest of his entire life in
> a
> > cage like a zoo Trumpanzee.

>
> perhaps. but i'd rather see those drug addicts
> and corrupt county persons and insurers avoiding
> payment in prison first
>
>

> LISTEN YOU SACK OF SHIT NO ONE ASKED YOU FOR YOUR
> POLITICAL OPINION.
>
> THE ORIGINAL POST obviously asks for evidence of
> pre-medicated murder only
>

He posted meme on facebook saying he wanted to kill people. He drove his car into a crowd and killed a person.

Clear, clean cut case. He should have got the gas chamber. Or better yet one of the protesters he hit drive over him until he is dead!

There is no way a car could kill that hippo I saw in the video.

hcc4p Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> EML Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> >
> > It does not come down to whether you found the
> > evidence sufficient to convict. What matters
> is
> > whether a reasonable jury could have found the
> > evidence sufficient to convict. Most informed
> > legally trained scholars would say the evidence
> > was sufficient.
>
> WRONG. that's for a civil trial.
>
> FOR JAIL AND ESP DEATH PENALTY TRIAL ...
>
> the legal standard is "evidence is beyond a
> reasonable doubt". not opinion beyond doubt:
> evidence is beyond doubt


That is not correct. The standard of proof for the trier of fact in most civil trials is either preponderance of the evidence or clear and convincing evidence, while the standard of proof in a criminal trial is beyond a reasonable doubt. Once the trier of fact, in this case the jury, has reached a verdict, the standard for overturning the verdict is the one I stated. If there is adequate evidence presented from which a reasonable jury Could have reached the verdict, the appeals court is not supposed to overturn that verdict even if they disagree with it.

Beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean that reasonable juries could not have reached a different conclusion. Juries in criminal cases can and do reach different results based on exactly the same evidence. Plenty of studies have been done on how different people evaluate the same evidence or information differently. That is why jury selection is such an important part of the process.

It takes very little to get a murder conviction once it is proven that the Defendant committed an act which is likely to result in the death. Like it or not, to prosecutors and judges and many jurors driving a car into a crowd ranks just behind firing a gun into a crown in events likely to result in death. At that point there are a number of inferences and rules that help the prosecution's case. Part of the reason these inferences exist is because it can be very difficult to prove what a person actually intended, and after the fact statements of intent by a defendant are not necessarily honest. When you add to the mix a defendant who was saying how he hated the class of people who he ultimately drove into, that just makes the prosecution's case so much easier.

Cage the Animal for Life Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> dhuyk Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Caged Trumpanzee Now Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > 1) Very simple he drove his car down a street
> > that
> > > clearly had protesters and ran them over at a
> > high
> > > rate of speed.
> >
> > WRONG. police admitted speed was 23 mph and
> video
> > showed prake was pressed. 23 mph is FACTUALLY
> > BELOW THE LIMIT (so an idiot may think)
> >
> > it's immaterial in a pre-meditated murder
> trial,
> > the fact that in a busy school zone you'd
> reduce
> > your speed to 15 or even 2 mph and that it
> doesn't
> > have to be printed on the sign for that to be
> the
> > law
> >
> > >
> > > 2) He had been posting Memes on his Facebook
> > page
> > > that implied he wanted to kill people.
> >
> >

> > SO DO YOU, so does 3/4 of all bloggers in the
> > world
> >

> >
> > > 3) THERE IS VIDEO OF HIM DRIVING INTO THE
> CROWD
> > > UNTIL HE HIT ANOTHER CAR AND BACKING UP.
> >
> > a big nigger came up behind the car and
> protestors
> > were angry. temporary flight is a well know
> > affliction effecting not only those in
> accidents
> > but police who engage perps. they really could
> > have done something to them. it was an angry
> mob
> > WITHOUT A SINGLE SENSIBLE PERSON ANYWHERE IN
> > SIGHT, and no cop in sight.
> >
> > >

He will spend the rest of his entire life
> in
> > a
> > > cage like a zoo Trumpanzee.

> >
> > perhaps. but i'd rather see those drug addicts
> > and corrupt county persons and insurers
> avoiding
> > payment in prison first
> >
> >

> > LISTEN YOU SACK OF SHIT NO ONE ASKED YOU FOR
> YOUR
> > POLITICAL OPINION.
> >
> > THE ORIGINAL POST obviously asks for evidence
> of
> > pre-medicated murder only
> >

>
> He posted meme on facebook saying he wanted to
> kill people. He drove his car into a crowd and
> killed a person.

SO HAVE everyone on FFU and maybe millions in the USA

it was a funny meme

>
> Clear, clean cut case. He should have got the gas
> chamber. Or better yet one of the protesters he
> hit drive over him until he is dead!

i'd rather you sit in it and let him go

and by your legal standards: there's no reason i should hesitate to do it

anyone who makes a meme about auto accidents and later has an auto accident: can be jailed and no insurance payout is due

rediculous

Early Morning Lawyer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> hcc4p Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > EML Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> >
> > >
> > > It does not come down to whether you found
> the
> > > evidence sufficient to convict. What matters
> > is
> > > whether a reasonable jury could have found
> the
> > > evidence sufficient to convict. Most
> informed
> > > legally trained scholars would say the
> evidence
> > > was sufficient.
> >
> > WRONG. that's for a civil trial.
> >
> > FOR JAIL AND ESP DEATH PENALTY TRIAL ...
> >
> > the legal standard is "evidence is beyond a
> > reasonable doubt". not opinion beyond doubt:
> > evidence is beyond doubt
>
>
> That is not correct. The standard of proof for
> the trier of fact in most civil trials is either
> preponderance of the evidence or clear and
> convincing evidence, while the standard of proof
> in a criminal trial is beyond a reasonable doubt.

i already said that

but it IS NOT BEYOND A REASONABLE DOUBT OF POLITICAL OPINION.

it's beyond a reasonable doubt of FACT: you incredible idiot

ADEQUATE EVIDENCE and belief is for civil trial

you can't hold a civil trial purely on opinion either

YOU CAN IN CHINA

YOU CANNOT IN USA

> Beyond a reasonable doubt does not mean that reasonable juries could not have reached a different conclusion

YES IT DOES

people who are wrongly convicted sue the government for MILLIONS

Judges who wrongly convict are fired and sometimes themselves IMPRISONED

what do you say to that gerrymanderer2

like these USA Napoleanic freedom rights? No? Then get a quick flight out of the country when the investigation begins.

Plenty of studies were done during the Spanish Inquisition

Very simple, the guy was caught on tape driving his car into a crowd like the terrorist he is and got 419 in a cage for the rest of his life.

> It takes very little to get a murder conviction

WRONG

wrongful death suits are not interchangable with murder convictions

FURTHERMORE muder convictions can be pre-medicated (planned ahead) or by intense temporary emotion (ie, killing wife but not planned - still a death penalty in va commonwealth law)

traffic accidents are never murder, they are accidental. unless your an insurance company that is avoiding payment and the way to do that without skipping court is a corrupt judge who imprisons with fake charges.

OFF TOPIC: the fact of DWI accident being called a crime is disputable (the prosecution argues drinking and driving is "a planned accident", defense argues not everyone who drinks and drives is involved in an accident - that it's still accidental). the murder charges on DWI came with BILL CLINTON.

murder is a plan to kill for personal benefit: it requires A MOTIVE

everyone has "original sin motives to kill", so the motive cannot be "very general" it must be specific to the crime

you cannot say: a republican was driving, a democrat died - there's a motive. for that case you have to have a CREDIBLE THREAT. not a mere meme.

a 3 month old meme not repeated btw

"It takes very little to get a murder conviction"

And wherever it does, i'm coming after you.

> "at that point there are a number of inferences and rules"

formulaic reasoning is illegal at Law

you didn't even know did you?

you actually have to prove a case with EVIDENCE

you cannot sit around and reason through with statements upon your own logic that self justify your own logic, with fault logic, counting it all up for a personal win

especially not in a death penalty case

equations are especially un-allowed at Law

while you may not be studied or understand: if it's an equation proving something then you have no real proof, you have a flawed logic your pushing instead of evidence

formulas as evidence: NOT ALLOWED