Avatar feed
Responses: 8
CPO Glenn Moss
2
2
0
I don't think these people would get quite the support they think they would from a jury of Trump supporters.

Regardless, the problem the prosecution has, according to what I've read on this, is that these people so far had only talked about a plot to bomb a mosque. If this is true, then there is an important distinction to be made here, and that is how the prosecution proves that "talking about" an action translates into an actual reasonable fear that the action was going to take place.

If the prosecution has evidence, for example, that shows these people were gathering equipment and supplies which directly support the plot(s) they were "talking about", then they have a pretty strong case. If not, and all they have is a bunch of unsupported "talking" going on, then the prosecution has a hard road to pave towards a conviction.

It's part of MMO: Method, Motive, Opportunity.

If you can provide all three in evidence, you've a strong case in your favor. If not, you've a much weaker case.
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
Capt Dwayne Conyers
2
2
0
(2)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 William "Chip" Nagel
1
1
0
PO1 Tony Holland Some Real Pillars of Society *SARCASM MUCH* Looking for a Fair Impartial Trial from their Peers in the Far Right Republican Party. *FACEPALM*
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close