For those of you who followed the Meredith Kercher murder trial, I just have one question. Does this b*llshit below sound at all familiar? I'm not just talking about the murder and the trial and the defense, I am also talking about some of the loopier peripheral events involving outsiders who became actively involved, some of them from Seattle (material below quoted from the New York Times article that appeared after Robert Bales was formally charged)*:
“There’s definitely brain injury, no question about it,” Mr. Browne said.
Mr. Browne said Thursday that he expected the charges.
“I’m not persuaded by many facts,” he said. “There’s no crime scene. There’s no DNA. There’s no confession, although they’re leaking something, which I don’t believe until I see it. This is going to be a hard case for the government to prove. And my client can’t help me a lot with some of the things because he has mental problems and I believe they’re totally legitimate.”
So if Browne believes that these mental problems drove Bales to kill 17 innocent people and that they are legitimate, I'd like to know what his plan is for keeping this guy from "snapping" again and killing more innocent people? What is his plan for this in the US, where gun control is, well, pretty loose?
And, while we are on the subject of shooting people, is anyone besides me shocked to learn that 21 US states now have laws that allow anyone to shoot to kill if they feel threatened? It turns out that Florida is not the only state that has made it super easy to carry a gun and super easy to use it. All you have to say is that you were standing your ground! Just remember to shoot to kill, so that there is only one side to the story. And if there are witnesses, kill them too.
*For those who did not follow the Meredith Kercher murder case, I should explain: One of the local luminaries who participated in the shameful US media manipulation campaign, driven by the Seattle PR firm (Marriott Gogerty Stark) hired by the parents of Amanda Knox (the American initially convicted and then acquitted, whose acquittal is pending final court review), was picked up for drunk driving when the car she was driving hit a median. A local lawyer, she initially claimed that her car had been hit and that she had suffered a head injury that caused her speech to become slurred and her behavior to mimic that of an inebriated person. She did not explain how this same injury caused a strong smell of alcohol to emanate from her car... She then tried to use her media connections (and a PR advisor) to get the brain injury story out, and got a psychiatrist friend involved as well. No one bought the story. I spoke to many lawyers who generally rolled their eyes and said gimme a break. She eventually pleaded guilty to the DUI. A few months ago, I was alerted to the fact that she was able to wipe it off her record. It is apparently possible to do so if you are willing to pay thousands of dollars or if you have the legal connections and knowledge needed to do the footwork.
