Subject: Re: An observation: Biden v. Trump
Let's start with these two: Ferrone Claiborne and Terence Richardson

Let's. These two went to trial for murder and were acquitted. Found not guilty. Legally, they are not cop killers. But in the second article, which you apparently didn't actually read, we learn that the cops completely messed up this case, including the police chief himself handling the murder weapon without gloves on and destroying evidence in the process. Prosecutors also failed to tell the defendants about exculpatory evidence they had collected, further damaging the case against them. What they did get convicted of is a drug charge. But the judge sentenced them to life in prison on the drug charge.

I'm not omniscient. I don't know if they really did kill the cop or not. But I do know that from a legal standpoint, they are NOT cop killers because they were tried for that crime and found not guilty.

But you don't get any of that information from Fox news lying to you. They just rant and rave about "cop killers" being set free so that you will get riled up and fearful. Fearful people are profitable people to Fox. Do you like being used by Fox? Apparently so, as you just keep going back for lie after lie.

As to Biden's actions - he did NOT pardon these two. He commuted their sentence - shortened it to time served. So they remain convicted criminals who have served their time in prison.

Glenn Youngkin? I don't care what he said about the case. His opinion is irrelevant. What is relevant is the opinion of the 12 men and women who heard the evidence against these two men and found it lacking.


Leonard Peltier.

On a quick reading, this one is considerably more complicated. But I would not say that the "facts are beyond dispute" as Wray claims. The evidence is circumstantial. (Peltier owned a gun of the type used in the shooting.) Once again, exculpatory evidence was withheld from the defense. (Ballistics could not connect Peltier's gun with the rounds that were fired.) Again, I certainly don't know everything about this case, as I've only been reading for 20 or 30 minutes. But unlike the above two, the evidence was sufficient to obtain a conviction, and has withstood multiple appeals.

On the other hand, murderers often don't serve their full sentences. Many get paroled after 20 or 30 years or so. Peltier has been in prison for over 50 years and is in declining health. He most likely does not present a danger to society. I can see an argument that it's time for some mercy (there's that nasty word again) and allow him to get out of prison and be with his family for his final couple of years. Again, Biden did not pardon Peltier, he commuted his sentence.



But let me ask you this question. If you are upset about 1 cop killer being released from prison after serving 50 years for his crime, shouldn't you also be upset about 1500 convicted cop assaulters being completely pardoned of their crimes? Which of these represents a greater risk to the public - 1 80 year old man in failing health or 1500 young and middle aged people who don't think that their assaults were a crime at all?

--Peter