Since he admits he was guilty under the terms of the law I don’t see how this is possibly relevant. Are we knowing he is guilty supposed to think they were biased for finding him guilty?
LaKeith was non-violent
Breaking into homes with a gun to shoot the home owner if things get dicey isn’t non-violent. Invading people’s home is inherently violent
offered him a plea deal of “only” 25 years.
Which would have seen him potentially out in 20 a man of 35
LaKeith, being a child with a life ahead of him, declined the plea deal and exercised his constitutional right to a trial.
It is absolutely his right but it was also fucking stupid.
It is likely that if LaKeith had been tried as a juvenile and/or tried appropriately for the burglary, he would be free today.
Are we assuming this is a good thing. He broke into a home with a gunman ready to murder the occupant. What sort of man is he now?
Since he admits he was guilty under the terms of the law I don’t see how this is possibly relevant. Are we knowing he is guilty supposed to think they were biased for finding him guilty?
Breaking into homes with a gun to shoot the home owner if things get dicey isn’t non-violent. Invading people’s home is inherently violent
Which would have seen him potentially out in 20 a man of 35
It is absolutely his right but it was also fucking stupid.
Are we assuming this is a good thing. He broke into a home with a gunman ready to murder the occupant. What sort of man is he now?