4
52

[–] GLPRefugee [S] 4 points 52 points (+56|-4) ago 

Six downvoters. Six so-called "people" that support murder and lawlessness.

5
40

[–] 8_billion_eaters 5 points 40 points (+45|-5) ago 

You know who (((they))) are.

0
14

[–] LionElTrump 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago  (edited ago)

2 fat blue hairs with 3 accounts each? They need refugees to get laid

[–] [deleted] 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
0

[–] newoldwave 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

was it Hillary?

5
21

[–] 8_billion_eaters 5 points 21 points (+26|-5) ago 

We all know who (((they))) are. ...but shining a light on those cockroaches makes them run.

3
13

[–] GLPRefugee [S] 3 points 13 points (+16|-3) ago 

Yeah - make em' run straight into my oven.

0
1

[–] kevdude 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

They will be the ones playing the victim while they attack you.

0
7

[–] Grunge 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

Shariablue loves seeing innocent people die, especially when they are white. That's all they want.

0
5

[–] obvious-throwaway- 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

They are a growing presence on Voat. Be mindful of them goyim, they tend to voat en masse to give the illusion that you are committing wrong think. Don't let them discourage you, the more they hate, the more you know you're on the right track.

1
27

[–] xobodox 1 points 27 points (+28|-1) ago  (edited ago)

They're not just extremely weak on crime. They're encouraging crime!

https://hooktube.com/results?search_query=obama+illegal+immigrants+vote

0
25

[–] Agile 0 points 25 points (+25|-0) ago 

Its truly amazing, his connection to the everyday man is strong as fuck, MAGA

0
3

[–] EvilSeagull 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago  (edited ago)

He Is the everyday man, he just has more money than most.

0
3

[–] BlackGrapeDrank 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Amen.

MAGA

2
16

[–] NeoGoat 2 points 16 points (+18|-2) ago 

MAGA! KEK!

2
9

[–] FPSFairy 2 points 9 points (+11|-2) ago 

The jury was not told the killer of Kate was a 7 time felon.

IANAL, but I thought that was part of the process, to not bring up past or present legal issues? I want to say the reasoning is that the individual isn't on trial for past crimes or other crimes whose trial may be ongoing, but only the ones put before the current jury, and whether or not they have past convictions or ongoing legal issues shouldn't have any bearing on the facts at hand.

3
38

[–] lexsird 3 points 38 points (+41|-3) ago 

I say bullshit, it establishes the character of the defendant in a truthful light. This isn't some innocent poor little homeless man who just picked up some gun and it went off. Bull fucking shit. This is some pretzel logic stretching the ever living fuck out of the legal system to accommodate this fucking vermin.

If that had been a white guy and he'd shot some nigger cunt, they'd have crawled all over everything he did his entire life. If he had pulled girl's pigtails in 2nd grade, it would be relevant. So I'm not buying this faggot lawyer speak of 'it's got no bearing'.

Frankly I think the judge, the jury, that fucking lawyer, this beaner filth all need to go to the gallows.

0
11

[–] CrustyBeaver52 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

The guy told several radically different versions of what happened. That is because he is lying.

1
8

[–] Myrv 1 points 8 points (+9|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Federal rules of evidence (and I assume California state law has a similar statute) states:

(b) Other crimes, wrongs, or acts. - Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show action in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident....

Basically you can only bring up prior cases if they contradict a statement made by the defense or is directly related to the present case. For example, if a defendant charged with burglary states he didn't know how to jimmy open a window but he has prior convictions for doing just such then you can enter the prior convictions as evidence (it should be noted sex assault cases have special rules that may allow prior convictions to used for establishing character).

In this case, yes Garcia Zarate was a 7 time felon but none of those crimes were violent. I believe most of the those felonies were for crossing the border illegally. He already admitted to being an illegal so there was no basis to present those previous convictions as evidence. He also had several drug related charges (heroin and and marijuana). Again, I don't believe he ever denied using drugs so no reason to introduce these as evidence either. And if you believe a past marijuana charge makes a person implicity guilty of any other crime then I hope half of voat never gets arrested. There are very good reasons prior convictions are usually barred as evidence.

That said, Garcia Zarate got off not because his prior convictions where not entered as evidence. He got off because he should never have been tried for first degree murder in the first place. There was no evidence (that I know of) to support that charge. He however is guilty of (and should have been charged with) manslaughter. If they had presented manslaughter charges to the jury I'm pretty sure he would be behind bars right now.

Edit: After some further digging it appears that manslaughter was an option. I have no idea why the jury didn't convict on that with the evidence at hand. My only guess is the prosecution spent too much time trying to build a murder charge that they failed to adequately explain/justify a manslaughter option.

0
6

[–] FPSFairy 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

I'm not defending or deriding the practice, just stating that I thought it was common practice, as the tweet seems to imply that it was somehow out of the ordinary.

1
1

[–] GLPRefugee [S] 1 points 1 points (+2|-1) ago 

You are a person after my own heart. Good on you, my brother.

0
10

[–] UlyssesEMcGill 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

So a 7 time rapist on trial for an 8th rape wouldn't get convicted based on reputation?

Except that's exactly the point of reputation.

0
1

[–] Womb_Raider 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

There's an exception for sexual crimes

0
1

[–] MRPockets 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

That is the point of reputation but that's why the jury is supposed to be made up of the accused's peers (meaning those who are familiar with him, such as neighbors).

0
0

[–] hypercat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

No. In that case, if the person on trial said he never raped someone, or was in good character, or said he was not convicted of another crime etc., it's admissible if it's "proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident" character evidence vs. intent.

0
3

[–] obvious-throwaway- 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

That's weird, because I started a thread about how video from major incidents like Mandalay Bay should be released 3 days after so the public themselves can see what happened. All these shills showed up saying what a terrible idea this would be as this (as in knowledge/information) could cause problems for (((lawyers))) trying to manipulate juries.

Yes, the goyim must be kept in the dark about all things and trust in our government to make all the decisions for us. We goyim are too simple minded to make decisions for ourselves.

0
0

[–] Random101 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Back in the day it was the juror's job to investigate the crime as well as to deliver a verdict. I agree that video of crimes against the public should be made public.

0
0

[–] hypercat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

well reddit did use the video and photos from the boston bombing to accuse random people. SO, the masses can be dumb.

1
-1

[–] elephantdoesntforget 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

Don't be dumb. Video is not going to show what the real story was.

The actor (shooter) is programmed to do specific things. No need for anything else. They have their playbook down.

Most (((lawyers))) you are eluding to are of many varieties not just ((())). Don't ignore all bad actors that aren't part of the ((()))... too easy for them to find people that fit other demographics to go under the radar.

3
3

[–] GLPRefugee [S] 3 points 3 points (+6|-3) ago 

Since this thing was an ILLEGAL it is NOT protected by the rights guaranteed by the Constitution. We CANNOT continue to look at these things as our equals.

3
5

[–] Butler_crosley 3 points 5 points (+8|-3) ago 

Not true. Immigrants, legal or illegal, are protected by the Constitution. SCOTUS has ruled on this multiple times, usually citing the 14th Amendment's Equal Protection Clause.

0
5

[–] drozzxd 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Need to build that wall up the border of California as well. Keep those fucking commie traitors from coming into the rest of the country.

1
2

[–] hypercat 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

Well we don't want you to have our almonds, apricots, dates, figs, kiwi fruit, nectarines, olives, pistachios, prunes, walnuts, avocados, grapes, lemons, melons, peaches, plums, and strawberries. Oh and only Texas grows more cotton than we do. Oh yeah, we are #2 behind Texas in livestock as well. Dairy is the best in CA.

Oh yeah, and the whole silicon valley and your internets.

California does not suck. Some people suck, but this whole damn state is like 70% agriculture. It's fertile as fuck. We grow shit. And there is innovation in technology, science (you know like Genentech, Litton Labs was established here). And some cool shit like Disney for all the faggots who think it's normal to wear a fucking Winny the Poo shirt as a grown ass adult.

Guess what? We do mining in CA too. You want some motherfucking boron? Well then you better ask California, because we are the only state who produces it. And fucking oil, we got shit tons of oil. Everywhere!

FISH?! We got goddamn 800 miles of coastal preserved fishing shit. We get all the goddamn fish. We keep our coast clean and fish in designated spots and fucking dominate the fish market. Tuna? Ask CA.

So kindly fuck off, California is fucking awesome, and contributes a shit ton to the this awesome country. California along with 49 other states and some territories and protectorates are what makes america great. It's a fucking diverse place. Get over it.

0
2

[–] drozzxd 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

So kindly fuck off, California is fucking awesome, and contributes a shit ton to the this awesome country. California along with 49 other states and some territories and protectorates are what makes america great. It's a fucking diverse place. Get over it.

Unfuck your stupid ass state before you go bragging about how awesome it is. I hope a level 10 earthquake hits that san andreas fault with you standing over it. Niggerfaggot.

0
1

[–] elephantdoesntforget 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

hypercat your blind support of Commie California... why? You like the corrupt government destroying people like they are?

Diverse doesn't mean Communist Social Hell hole. Some animals are treated better than other animals on the California Farm. Wonder which animal you are to be happy with the state of affairs in California...?

1
-1

[–] Artofchoke 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

California is a cess pit. Poison air and water roll in from China, poison people parade in with impunity from the South. Hollywood is an outrage comprised of the greediest, the most power hungry, and the most desperate. You've got an enormous, incredible drug issue, an overpopulation issue, and the cost of living is out of proportion to wages. California is an indebted, dysfunctional disaster. That's not 'diversity', that's cancer.

0
5

[–] 8_billion_eaters 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

God bless President Trump. This is how we MAGA.

0
4

[–] OhRutherfordBehave 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

You need to read Ann Coulter's "Adios America!" and realize what a dire situation we are in. That book will red pill the living fuck out of you. Guaranteed.

0
1

[–] ardvarcus 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Don't need to read it, I know the situation. We are undergoing white genocide even as I write these words, but because the libtards and their Jew masters control the media and won't talk about it, and because the people are not too bright when it comes to thinking for themselves, and because that genocide is just slow enough to creep under their radar, they don't recognize that it is happening. I mean, if the Jews can convince the public that they don't run Hollywood, while stating themselves in articles in major publications that they do run Hollywood, they can convince the public of anything.

0
1

[–] elephantdoesntforget 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Yes ardvarcus. It's interesting how in a decade (or less), the media has been able to change our culture's perception of race.

New rules we have been condition to obey:

  1. White's are oppressive and mean. They keep back women and minorities.
  2. Revisionist history. White America stole land from Mexico... other lies.

I don't think it's under the radar anymore... most people on the street know what's up. But don't go after just Jews... you give the rest of them a free pass. IMO, it's much easier to hide behind a 'Jewish Conspiracy' than the real players be named... you guys eat that right up.

load more comments ▼ (18 remaining)