And we need more gun laws??

[spence]

I don't think you can say from this instance the laws don't have teeth. They reduced his sentence because he gave them a ton of information to secure the death penalty for Tsarnaev.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

I don't think you can say from this instance the laws don't have teeth. They reduced his sentence because he gave them a ton of information to secure the death penalty for Tsarnaev.

That's the problem with gun laws, they are always pleaded out. Even when a criminal is convicted they are put back on the street . The NRA has been asking for current commonsense, gun laws to be enforced , and mandatory sentencing but those convicted of gun crimes . Does this make sense to you?
I'm not a professional prosecutor but on the face I would say the two terrorist could've been convicted without his testimony . This kid gave them a firearm knowing a felony was going to be committed with it . The prosecutors just took the easy route . Pretty sure your tone might change if one of your family members had been killed . That seems to be that way with liberals
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

That's the problem with gun laws, they are always pleaded out. Even when a criminal is convicted they are put back on the street . The NRA has been asking for current commonsense, gun laws to be enforced , and mandatory sentencing but those convicted of gun crimes . Does this make sense to you?
I'm not a professional prosecutor but on the face I would say the two terrorist could've been convicted without his testimony . This kid gave them a firearm knowing a felony was going to be committed with it . The prosecutors just took the easy route . Pretty sure your tone might change if one of your family members had been killed . That seems to be that way with liberals
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I think there was concern he would gain sympathy by saying his brother was the ringleader and he was just being dragged along. The information by Silva specifically countered this defense. This was a high profile case and I think the prosecutors wanted to ensure the death penalty...because the family members wanted accountability.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

I think there was concern he would gain sympathy by saying his brother was the ringleader and he was just being dragged along. The information by Silva specifically countered this defense. This was a high profile case and I think the prosecutors wanted to ensure the death penalty...because the family members wanted accountability.

I would buy that as plausible except for the fact that he said he knew nothing about the bombings or the intentions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

I would buy that as plausible except for the fact that he said he knew nothing about the bombings or the intentions.
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

Well, the testimony was directly in context of his dealing with the younger brother to acquire the handgun. He certainly could have learned enough about their relationship to form an opinion based on those dynamics without knowing about the plot.

Flip side is the prosecution fails to get the death penalty and you'd be beotching about that now and most likely blaming Obama.

[buckman]

Originally Posted by spence

Well, the testimony was directly in context of his dealing with the younger brother to acquire the handgun. He certainly could have learned enough about their relationship to form an opinion based on those dynamics without knowing about the plot.

Flip side is the prosecution fails to get the death penalty and you'd be beotching about that now and most likely blaming Obama.

I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure "opinions" are not allowed in court.
If this kid knew more , then you're not making his extremely light sentence any more palatable .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

[spence]

Originally Posted by buckman

I'm not a lawyer but I'm pretty sure "opinions" are not allowed in court.
If this kid knew more , then you're not making his extremely light sentence any more palatable .
Posted from my iPhone/Mobile device

I said he could have seen enough to form an opinion. You testify to the facts in the case, doesn't mean the person doesn't have an individual perspective...it just has to be relevant to the evidence.