Thursday, May 14, 2009

If You Can't Refute, Change the Argument.

Well, seems that the Indigenous Chicano now has a new argument as to why the Shenandoah teens have been acquitted. The argument now relies on Ariel Garcias interview and a statement of "It happened so fast".
Ariel was not even sure what color the shoes were that kicked Ramirez. But it happened so fast. Her friend was on the ground foaming from the mouth. It was perhaps the craziest, most chaotic few moments of her life.

This understandable uncertainty was used by the defense attorney used to allow the all-White local jury to "find" the all_white local defendants not-guilty.

Other witnesses' credibility were also attacked for their lack of perfect recall. Eyewitness Eileen Burke was not even called to testify in court. She has stated that the prosecutor told her that she had discrepancies in her statements.
According to the video he has posted of Ariel explaining what happened, at the 39 second mark she states "It happened so fast" in regards to the second fight moving from the grass on W. Lloyd Street to the middle of the Asphalt on W. Lloyd Street. She explains how her Husband Victor is trying to get kids off himself and how Ariel is screaming to "Stop". Next thing they know Luis is laying on the ground. She explains how there was a kid standing next to Luis and then she shows how he was kicked @1:02. Now, if she can show "how" he was kicked, surely she should know who did it, or at the very least recognize the type of shoe that was worn and its description.

As Indigenous questions, Can the Drunk Teenage Boys Have Perfect Recall? I don't think they can simply due, as Indigenous points out, People cannot drive straight drunk but they can have perfect recall of a crazy violent beating? If this truly is the case, then how can anybody take their testimony in court as credible? Since 3 of the boys pointed the finger at Piekarsky for the "last kick to Ramirez' head". How can the advocates then themselves hold Piekarsky as the "MURDERER" of Ramirez when he was only pointed out by the 3 teens who were drunk at the time and were told the next day by, as they alledge, Piekarsky himself told them that he kicked Ramirez in the head? The one teen who was not drinking, Redmond, his testimony points to Ramirez swinging first and Piekarsky "tackling" Ramirez. Redmond ran from the scene at the point of Walsh knocking "Ramirez out cold".

Again, according to court testimony by 2 officers on the scene not of Shenandoah, Ariel stated: "Sculy was the kicker". But according to the advocates, the police, DA, Judge, and Jury have conspired in a cover up of a Mexican National being MURDERED and HATED due to "Walking While Brown."

4 comments:

Turtle said...

Liquid, you really need to send me your email address!

I wanted to tell you, the jury foreman was on WITF radio this morning saying the jurors used racist words in deliberations and the Shen PD tried to cover up the "hate crime."

They station is going to be doing a followup story and will likely be asking listeners to call in. I'll let you know when that's supposed to take place, once I find out.

Also, I will be posting a story on PA Pundits within the next day or two, about the May 30 protest against MALDEF and illegal aliens in Shenandoah.

My email is PAP_Wendi (at) yahoo (dot) com

Wendi said...

that's www.witf.org and it's the second headline down right now. Click the arrow to hear. Macklin starts his moron rant at just under ten minutes, and goes on until 31 minutes.

Liquidmicro said...

I already listened to it. I get a lot of my info from the "other side" because they post it almost as quickly as it comes up. IX had a post about it yesterday.

From what I understood from Macklin was "some" said what he termed racist names for Blacks and Asians. He later said only a couple of jurors said it like that and that none of them said anything about Hispanics. He also brought up the simple fact that Ramirez "immigration status" never came up either.

His best statement though was that there was no witness testimony tying Piekarsky or Donchak to saying anything that would have been construed as "Ethnical Intimidation" and brought up the fact that he believes that Scully was the most at fault.

Another point he made was that Ramirez own friends who were on the scene could not identify who the kicker was, nor could the witness, Schlack. (Had Burke been called to testify, she would also have been unable to identify the kicker or the persons responsible for making racial slurs simply because she only "heard" the words.)

Piekarsky was implemented as the kicker due to telling the rest of the boys the next day that he "kicked Ramirez in the head", yet he never specified as to "when" he did it. And Ariel shows quite well how the boy stood and kicked in her interview on the CNN video, yet she could not identify the kicker.

Wendi said...

It's cool that you troll the Pro-illegal sites. I don't often have the stomach for that.
Dee has banned one of my email addresses. LOL That's okay, I have many more. :D
There is another vigil going on in Shenandoah to "pray for peace and unity" (peace and unity for illegal aliens only, of course) tonight. Bob Reynolds of WNEP is covering it. Race baiter Amilcar Arroyo (El Mensjero "newspaper," Hazleton) is leading this one, from what I understand.

I find it strange that so few know this was happening tonight, not even the boys' families knew. They can't possibly have a good turnout when no one knows. It's strange. Like it's just another media whoring show. Then again, it probably is.