This is in response to something originally discussed in the thread of Msg #82790
"Abbott want to pardon convicted murderer".
The way the whole ‘willing to pardon’ announcement came about made me uneasy. Something just didn’t seem right to me that Abbott did that. Then, seeing how the media immediately start piling on, trying to smear Daniel Perry as a racist, with only two (2) text and/or email messages, one of which wasn’t even his but someone writing to him, in over a 700+ day period (really? That was their racist smoking gun?). The several different “he’s a bad guy” stories from different outlets, sometimes with conflicting and in some cases totally inaccurate information; and only “How dare Abbott do this” kind of “news” reports, I knew there had to be more to this that neither the left or right wing media wanted to tell.
Really, No media outlet thought to ask Abbott, "Can you tell us how you came to this decision? What prompted you to decide to announce this today?"
After finding the background information below, I know believe Gov. Abbott is 100% correct in his desire to pardon Daniel Perry as quickly as he can. This case really is one that should have never been brought against him.
Other than the obvious areas within this post that are my opinions, everything I am sharing about this case comes from news reports, sometimes from the very same outlets that seemed to have forgotten they reported more honestly prior to the trial. I have included links to the information 1) Because I believe a person should cite their sources so everyone else can not only verify the information but also to help ensure people responding can do with at least the same information I am using even if they add their own citations, and 2) Because I am not so conceited as to believe that everyone else only gets their information from the same sources I do. Providing links is not “doing someone’s homework” for them, as some like to think. Rather, it’s part of the responsibility of communication of the one presenting a viewpoint or argument on a topic.
After performing a few quick Bing searches, I remembered that I had actually heard about the shooting when it happened. At the time, the first few reports I read off my phone indicated that the evidence and witnesses indicated that it was a justified self-defense shooting. So I didn’t put it together that this was the same case.
It seems that after the verdict, the media only wanted to mention a witness (a friend of the deceased) who claimed that he did not raise his gun at Perry. However, there were, in fact, actually multiple witnesses (including independent ones) who were intervened that day and who signed affidavit’s saying they saw him raise and aim his rifle at Perry before Perry shot him.
Some of the major issues with this case included the fact that the lead investigating detective, determined that this was a self defense shooting; The DA, and attorneys in his office have a history of unethical and dishonest actions in other cases, as well as in this one; The lead detective was pressured and threatened by members of the DA’s office to remove exculpatory evidence from his presentation to the grand jury in order to get the grand jury to return an indictment. Knowing this alone, should make anyone question the validity of the case the DA had, imo.
A little about the DA:
http://tinyurl.com/2p8handf
"Soros-funded Texas DA accused of evading court order, grand jury to charge police officer"
SOROS backed: According to data compiled by the Capital Research Center, Garza is one of dozens of district attorneys around the country to have been substantially backed by leftwing billionaire George Soros, via direct contributions and supporting ads from activist groups such as the Texas Justice and Public Safety PAC.
A Texas court has ordered Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza to record all grand jury proceedings related to investigations into use-of-force by law enforcement, said attorneys for a police officer charged in connection with allegedly assaulting a man.
Perry Indictment:
The indictment itself was not without controversy. Detective David Fugitt, the well-respected lead investigator in the case who is known locally as the "godfather of the homicide unit," claimed in a sworn affidavit in August 2021 that prosecutors under Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza, one of several district attorneys who have been funded by leftwing billionaire George Soros, forced him to remove exculpatory evidence from his presentation to the grand jury. http://tinyurl.com/yshp3xds
"It became clear to me that the District Attorney’s Office did not want to present evidence to the grand jury that would be exculpatory to Daniel Perry and/or to show that witness statements obtained by the family of Garrett Foster and/or their attorneys were inconsistent with prior interviews such ‘witnesses’ gave the police and/or the video of the incident in question," Fugitt wrote in the affidavit.
[This type of action (by) the DA is why a court was asked to order him to record grand jury proceedings ]
A little more information about the Perry case than what NPR chose to report –
Foster was carrying an AK-47, according to KVUE news ( http://youtu.be/S7DqxeFOi3w ). An AK-47 is a select fire / fully automatic rifle, which is supposed to be illegal in the U.S. for normal citizens. Unless the media got the actual type of gun he had incorrect (I know that to some anti-gun people all rifles are “AK-47” in their minds), I’m not understanding why this wasn’t reported more or why he was not relieved of the gun sooner as he had carried it during multiple protests and was known for having it.
http://tinyurl.com/4rb64cjx
According to Perry, protesters began beating on his car when Garrett Foster approached his vehicle. Foster motioned with his AK 47 to lower his window. When he did so, Foster allegedly began to raise the AK 47 weapon towards him
APD says officers spoke with multiple witnesses at the scene that described several different versions of the shooting. Witnesses say a vehicle started honking its horn as it turned south onto Congress from 4th Street. The vehicle stopped as there (were) a large number of people in the road.
Foster, who had been holding an AK-47 type assault rifle, approached the driver's side window as others began striking the vehicle.
http://tinyurl.com/yshp3xds
Perry's defense team says that the demonstrators encircled and starting pounding on his vehicle and that Foster raised the firearm at Perry, prompting him to open fire with a handgun he legally carried for self-defense.
I feel this information is worth being repeated:
"It became clear to me that the District Attorney’s Office did not want to present evidence to the grand jury that would be exculpatory to Daniel Perry and/or to show that witness statements obtained by the family of Garrett Foster and/or their attorneys were inconsistent with prior interviews such ‘witnesses’ gave the police and/or the video of the incident in question," (Det. David) Fugitt wrote in the affidavit. ** Link to Fugitt’s sworn affidavit http://tinyurl.com/2bdrwesu
=====
It is easy to understand how a DA can act as unethical as Det. Fugitt claims in his affidavit when you consider that DA’s and the police are basically “co-workers”, even though under the ideas and concept of our judicial system, they are not supposed to be that cozy. That, plus the fact that here in Texas, if someone wants to complain about the actions of their local DA, we cannot turn to the TX AG or ANY governmental agency. For some strange reason, only the Texas Bar Association (not a part of the DOJ or any government agency) is the ONLY place to file a complaint. If they were to find the DA did something wrong, the most they could do is disbar them.
I only discovered that local Texas DA’s were not really accountable to anyone recently due to the actions, and lack of actions, of the Hardin County DA in 2 recent cases involving family members. One being falsely accused with absolutely NO (that’s zero) proof, while actual proof of innocence and a verified alibi are being ignored by the DA. In another, a different family member was brutally attacked and almost killed. She and her team have worked hard to give the attacker cover and a defense, which is specifically denied in law as a defense in Texas in this case, because he is a key (false) witness in the other case. The attack was unrelated to the other case. At this time, I am unable to go into the details of either of the cases.
There are a lot of things that I do not agree with Gov. Abbott and the TX Republicans on, but on this issue, I do think he will be doing the right thing to pardon Danial Perry.
|
