On Mar 24, 4:52*pm, DD_BobK wrote:
On Mar 23, 11:16*pm, harry wrote:





On Mar 23, 10:37*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:

gonjah wrote:

There is no evidence of oil lamp lanterns and pitch forks.

*That guy is guilty as sin. He was told by the police not to pursue
the guy but he did anyway.

Nope. He was told by a 911 operator, who is NOT a cop, "We don't need you to
do that."

The shooter, however, was on the scene - the 911 operator was not. He
decided to follow. Sure enough, the suspect entered a dark passageway and
the neighborhood watch warden followed. Suddenly, the suspect turned.
Something metallic is his had flashed in the dim light. The watch warden, in
fear of his life, discharged his service weapon in an attempt to stop the
threat.

At least that's the way his statement is going to read.

"is going to read?" *You really are mentally deranged.

Harry-

Cannot you perceive the voice of experience?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I would have thought there was very little room to manipulate "facts".
The kid was young, small and unarmed and not breaking any laws.
The "perp" had no reason to follow him and was told not to.
Ballistics evidence will no doubt prove he shot the kid.
No doubt it is known exctly when/where the incident occured.
The perp has a history of irrational behaviour.

It's a loony country when a kid with a candybar gets shot in the
street by a paranoid nutcase with a history, the police take no action
and some people are making excuses for him.

The really sick thing is the people who are not worried about the kid
and his family, they are worried it might lead to restrictions on
carrying guns.
Evil sick *******s.