loen houston found innocent

[wildfire]

the trial of loen houston ended yesterday.he was found innocent of all charges.that is twice they tried him and couldent prove he and his brother shot that cop and his buddy in cold blood.i think he did what he had to do i believe the cop went there to kill both of them.

[right on]

i dont even know houston personally,but ive been keeping up with the trial just out of curiosity,and i am very happy to hear that he has finally been declared innocent and free.

[whatever]

yeah until you both have problems with him pulling a gun on you , and when he does dont call the cops cause he will be inocent yeah right

[wildfire]

you dont get found not guilty twice without a reason.i dont know him but i bet he would treat me right if i did the same.bill jones use to be a cop in cumb. county he was a jerk.he meant to kill those boys but they beat him to it.

[mama]

In his trial it was stated that only one of his bullets struck one of the cops,and it was not fatal.So how was he even charged with murder?

[because]

mama wrote:

In his trial it was stated that only one of his bullets struck one of the cops,and it was not fatal.So how was he even charged with murder?

well for one thing ,the intent was there , he shot at 2 men , which kept them pinned in the car , which resulted in thier deaths. lady if it had been your son, you wouldnt be asking.

[heres why]

wildfire wrote:

you dont get found not guilty twice without a reason.i dont know him but i bet he would treat me right if i did the same.bill jones use to be a cop in cumb. county he was a jerk.he meant to kill those boys but they beat him to it.

may bbe to you , what did he catch you doing???? you dont know him its odvious . bill would have broughtrocky in but thats it. found not guilty twice?? no but you have to remember that the jury didnt see all the evidence nor were they sequestered whech meant they went home every night to see the news get phone calls ect ,,,,,,plus they were from the same area think ,,,they hated cops and the roane county govt in general, bill just happened to be the one to stop in

[mama]

heres why wrote:

<quoted text>may bbe to you , what did he catch you doing???? you dont know him its odvious . bill would have broughtrocky in but thats it. found not guilty twice?? no but you have to remember that the jury didnt see all the evidence nor were they sequestered whech meant they went home every night to see the news get phone calls ect ,,,,,,plus they were from the same area think ,,,they hated cops and the roane county govt in general, bill just happened to be the one to stop in

It is sad that two people died,but it was testified by a dispatcher that they did not call in that they were going to be out at that house,it was also testified that the police had been told not to serve the warrant at their home,you have to listen to the evidence in that trial.I do not know these people,but I think the police went there to cause trouble,it does happen,you know.

[heres why]

mama wrote:

<quoted text>It is sad that two people died,but it was testified by a dispatcher that they did not call in that they were going to be out at that house,it was also testified that the police had been told not to serve the warrant at their home,you have to listen to the evidence in that trial.I do not know these people,but I think the police went there to cause trouble,it does happen,you know.

there were warrants on file, law officers do not have to have them in hand. officers do not have to call in to dispatchers because of scanners. the warrants were because rocky pointed a gun at a forestery worker who was trying to put out a fire near rockys land.the cops have better things to do then as you put it cause trouble. you know it seems that the only ones who claim that is ones who stay in trouble

[mama]

I wouldn't know,I have had two speeding tickets in my life,I'm just going by the sworn testimony in this trial.

[wildfire]

heres why wrote:

<quoted text>may bbe to you , what did he catch you doing???? you dont know him its odvious . bill would have broughtrocky in but thats it. found not guilty twice?? no but you have to remember that the jury didnt see all the evidence nor were they sequestered whech meant they went home every night to see the news get phone calls ect ,,,,,,plus they were from the same area think ,,,they hated cops and the roane county govt in general, bill just happened to be the one to stop in

no he didnt catch me doing anything.i know a lady whos ex husband was a cop with him the reason shes his ex is she is really his widow he killed himself.jones use to come to her house all the time.she said he was very overbearing.i dont want to talk about the dead but she has told me some of the things he has done.this was in line with the way he was.it didnt surprise her none that he had a shootout.he lived to show his authority.just telling it like i hear it.

[heres why]

wildfire wrote:

<quoted text>no he didnt catch me doing anything.i know a lady whos ex husband was a cop with him the reason shes his ex is she is really his widow he killed himself.jones use to come to her house all the time.she said he was very overbearing.i dont want to talk about the dead but she has told me some of the things he has done.this was in line with the way he was.it didnt surprise her none that he had a shootout.he lived to show his authority.just telling it like i hear it.

over bearing??, does that give a person a right to pump him full of bullets, if some one dislikes you, would you deserve that from them????

[wildfire]

no but he was told not to go there but he had a grudge and did.and it was pointed out in the trial that he had said that he would kill both of them if they would just give him a reason. so if someone pulled up in your driveway with a badge and a gun and had said he was going to kill you. you would defend yourself also because if he would have got out of his car first he would have killed both brothers first.i wish no one would have even gotten hurt much less killed. but if someone pulled up here and had said he was going to kill me i would shoot first if i could and so would you.and the jury saw it was true and there we got the verdict.your not allowed to kill someone because of bad blood even if you are a cop.i hate it for all his family. but justice was served.

[wondering]

Inbreeding makes crazy people.

[heres why]

wildfire wrote:

no but he was told not to go there but he had a grudge and did.and it was pointed out in the trial that he had said that he would kill both of them if they would just give him a reason. so if someone pulled up in your driveway with a badge and a gun and had said he was going to kill you. you would defend yourself also because if he would have got out of his car first he would have killed both brothers first.i wish no one would have even gotten hurt much less killed. but if someone pulled up here and had said he was going to kill me i would shoot first if i could and so would you.and the jury saw it was true and there we got the verdict.your not allowed to kill someone because of bad blood even if you are a cop.i hate it for all his family. but justice was served.

you actually believe that??? oh dear wildfire that was thier defense. those people who testified are the houstons pot smoking buddies, oh gosh surely you dont believe what they said lol. cops dont pull into peoples driveways shooting , that was their story because the two dead men cant talk and roane county is to cheap to buy car cameras

[Skippy]

heres why wrote:

<quoted text>you actually believe that??? oh dear wildfire that was thier defense. those people who testified are the houstons pot smoking buddies, oh gosh surely you dont believe what they said lol. cops dont pull into peoples driveways shooting , that was their story because the two dead men cant talk and roane county is to cheap to buy car cameras

It doesn't matter. The guy was found innocent through a jury of his peers. Do you not like the justice system? Are you aware of the full details that happened that day?

As an officer, I actually agree with the verdict. The commanding officers must be aware of what the officers are attempting to do. On scanner or not. Which they failed to do. The officers acted on false pretenses, therefore they got killed. I hate to see fallen officers, but the circumstances were false and unjustified.

Officer's can be just as bent as a drug dealer. Remember that. I knew Bill Jones personally. He was an excellent officer. I cried when I heard that he was shot.(I knew him through other personal means). If protocol was followed and they did their job, then it wouldn't have came to a innocent verdict. So therefore, with evidence that we have, I believe the jury made the right decision.

Even if they acted upon the right pretenses and got killed, they still didn't follow protocol. Which is a fact. We will never know who shot at who first. If those officers had made aware to others that they might be engaged, then the problem might have resolved peacefully.

Don't try to speak of a situation when you don't know how we work.

[wildfire]

Skippy wrote:

<quoted text>
It doesn't matter. The guy was found innocent through a jury of his peers. Do you not like the justice system? Are you aware of the full details that happened that day?
As an officer, I actually agree with the verdict. The commanding officers must be aware of what the officers are attempting to do. On scanner or not. Which they failed to do. The officers acted on false pretenses, therefore they got killed. I hate to see fallen officers, but the circumstances were false and unjustified.
Officer's can be just as bent as a drug dealer. Remember that. I knew Bill Jones personally. He was an excellent officer. I cried when I heard that he was shot.(I knew him through other personal means). If protocol was followed and they did their job, then it wouldn't have came to a innocent verdict. So therefore, with evidence that we have, I believe the jury made the right decision.
Even if they acted upon the right pretenses and got killed, they still didn't follow protocol. Which is a fact. We will never know who shot at who first. If those officers had made aware to others that they might be engaged, then the problem might have resolved peacefully.
Don't try to speak of a situation when you don't know how we work.

hhank you for your comments.it is true that you have to follow the law wheather you wear a badge or not.i hate that anyone got hurt that day.i dont know the houston boys but they did have a right to defend themselves.the jury has spoken and i bet they dont like being called pot smoking buddies.i saw the jury and they looked like every day citizens.they didnt ask to be put on the jury and the prosacuter accepted them.maybe he is their pot smoking buddy.this is the reason we have a court system if you dont like roane countys maybe you should move.

[heres why]

wildfire wrote:

<quoted text>hhank you for your comments.it is true that you have to follow the law wheather you wear a badge or not.i hate that anyone got hurt that day.i dont know the houston boys but they did have a right to defend themselves.the jury has spoken and i bet they dont like being called pot smoking buddies.i saw the jury and they looked like every day citizens.they didnt ask to be put on the jury and the prosacuter accepted them.maybe he is their pot smoking buddy.this is the reason we have a court system if you dont like roane countys maybe you should move.

again cops dont roll in a blazing , especially with just a hand gun, if it had been a swat team , but again cops dont shoot until some one points a gun at them , i knew bill to and i know he wasnt dumb enough to roll in there with just a hand gun , good grief!!!im not talking about the jury ,i was talkung about the witnesses, who by the way was on the porch smoking pot and testified that they were. there were no independent witnesses , only the houstons friend , its a no brainer. but its a done deal now, no going back

[well_well]

Sorry that you are not(obviously) happy with the verdict, I myself am not familiar with the case. But they stood trial and as you said it is a done deal, no going back now so why do you continue to argue. Just accept the fact that our justice sysytem is crooked as hell and usually works in a criminals favor. I think it is sad that two men are dead and the only thing argued here is who fired first. what about their families. Any sympathy for them. Iam just saying... As far as anyone smoking pot, I have never seen someone shoot anyone else just cuz they are smoking. There are always other reasons. The fact that anyone was smoking pot is irrelevant. It does not make people act irrationally. Off subject, why don't you guys take a look a the "why this country should legalize" thread..

heres why wrote:

<quoted text>again cops dont roll in a blazing , especially with just a hand gun, if it had been a swat team , but again cops dont shoot until some one points a gun at them , i knew bill to and i know he wasnt dumb enough to roll in there with just a hand gun , good grief!!!im not talking about the jury ,i was talkung about the witnesses, who by the way was on the porch smoking pot and testified that they were. there were no independent witnesses , only the houstons friend , its a no brainer. but its a done deal now, no going back

[ella blue]

wtf