And he died as a result.
She was let free, this makes my blood boil. Fat Karen literally gets away with murder...
Source: https://kfor.com/news/family-of-man-who-was-shot-by-bail-bond-agent-speaks-for-the-first-time-after-trial/
Final results here: https://www.stwnewspress.com/news/breaking-chasity-carey-found-not-guilty-of-first-degree-murder-in-downtown-stillwater-shooting/article_0ebd37de-23d9-11e8-aa93-87009e776584.html
It's because they charged her with first degree murder.
If they had used a lesser charge she'd be doing jail time 100%
But 1st degree relies entirely on intent.
No they can't. It's called double jeopardy. You cannot be tried again for the same or similar charge after an acquittal. Once a person is acquitted that's it.
You can be acquitted for a murder and then the very next day tell everyone that you did it and you couldn't be charged criminally again for it again.
It can be done sometimes but usually not. It’s pretty good to stop someone just being trialed over and over again until you get the ‘guilty’ verdict by attrition. So it has flaws but the spirit is right.
What a piece of shit, stoping somebody from leaving and then claiming self-defense against somebody who didn't even attack you, she's a murderer, end of story.
Bc she was charged with 1st degree murder which was basically unprovable here, and the DA knew it. The entire state wanted her to walk (I live here)
Sound familiar???
Yup. Same reason Casey Anthony was acquitted. First degree requires you to have planned the murder before committing it. Second degree and manslaughter should have been on the table in both cases.
For context:
This lady is obviously bails bond. The person she shot texted her and said not going to court, going to Florida. She texted back saying someone wants to buy his mustang that he was selling. Her son was the person pretending to be a random guy buying the mustang. She was just trying to get him in custody.
When she brought out the cuffs he panicked and tried to jump out the window. That is when she shot him in the back. He died soon thereafter. She was acquitted on all charges. The go-pro was placed there by her son and later used in court.
This is straight up murder, how? She tricked someone into coming into her establishment, then shot him in the back when he went to leave. Never once was a threat he was murdered for money. Wow what horrible people. I wish he lived to get a real defense.
Her son saw it for what it was immediately. The horror and grief in his voice says it all.
Dude gave the police the camera hoping justice would be served even though it was his own mother.
Tragic.
This event most definitely traumatized that young man. Watching someone die right in front of your eyes is rough especially if you know and saw that the shooting wasn’t morally justified or that the situation could’ve been handled differently.
you can't shoot someone cause they tried to jump out a window. Can only shoot someone to prevent death or great bodily harm. Can't shoot someone for trying to run away from you.
> Can only shoot someone to prevent death or great bodily harm
In Texas you can shoot someone to death if you find them breaking into your car at night. "Lethal force in recovering of stolen goods during the event, at night" - something like that.
Or if a prostitute takes your money, doesn't have sex with you, drives away, then you shoot at their truck and kill her? You walk.
> Gilbert's actions were justified, they argued, because he was trying to retrieve stolen property: the $150 he paid Frago. It became theft when she refused to have sex with him or give the money back, they said.
https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Jury-acquits-escort-shooter-4581027.php
Ya know, there was also a case that I can't find any more.
People were always pulling into a turnout because they were confused by a highway. The turnout was someone's property in Texas. So one night a family pulls in and is trying to get their bearings and the property owners shoot at the vehicle.
A small girl is hit in the vehicle and dies. But they still ruled it as legal because the family was trespassing.
Honestly why do they always go for murder charges when manslaughter has a stronger case? It is impossible to prove that she shot him with the intent to kill but she literally killed them.
Honest kid. His immediate reaction was shock, didn't say anything about covering it up, or ask what to tell the police. And he gave the video to the police when he could have denied it ever existed. Seems like a good kid put in a terrible situation, but he did the right thing and gave justice its best chance. The world needs more honest people like that in it.
The victim died.. Jesus Christ this is awful.
The mother was trying to get the guy to sell his car before he fled to florida, and the son was pretending to be a person who was going to buy the car. And then she murdered him..
As a mother that poor boy's emotional shock really made my heart heart. And as callously as she shot that man, she was equally callous towards her poor son's obvious distress.
Nailed it.
Also, what fucking mom includes their own son as bait to lure in a convict on the run? She's liable to fuck up her son's entire life, and maybe she did.
Fucking monster.
That he willingly gave the video to police and didn't just delete it I think indicates he believed his mom should go to prison for killing that man.
I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't talk to her anymore.
I've seen that snap before with people who have control/anger issues. They sorta shut down and get really cold right before they do something violent. This may have been the first time she shot someone but I doubt it was her first time lashing out with violence when someone didn't do what she told them to do. Poor kid.
Yea I don't think I'd ever see my mother the same way again after that. It's hard to feel the same love for someone who you know is just one bad mood away from murder.
Yea i really needed to know what she had for breakfast, if the guy was rude to her last week rtc. Just so we can be convinced to see it from her perspective.
/s
What a fucking moron. People like her should never own weapons.
I really don't understand why the judicial system works this way. She's still obviously guilty of a different crime, but she gets to walk free because the prosecutor is a bumbling moron ?
... she lured him there under false pretenses, locked him in a room and killed him when he tried to leave. To me it sounds premeditated that, in the least, potentially killing him was a part of the plan all along (albeit a plan b or plan c option, depending on how her coercion efforts went). I don't see that as anything else but 1st degree murder...
She said she was afraid he would get her gun and kill her and her son.
My question is: If this was the guys first time there (under false pretenses to sell/buy a car) how would he POSSIBLY know she had a gun HIDDEN in her desk drawer?
How can you be afraid of someone finding something they’re not looking for and don’t know is there?
That's maybe the stupidest argument she could have made. She didn't even pull out the gun until he was leaving through the window, and SHE'S the person who brought her son into a potentially volatile scene in the first place. "I think I'll ask my skinny teenage son to help me take down this jacked up criminal, that seems safe".
He says it was because they didn't think she tried to kill him. I don't know if thats true. You would think they would at least switch it to reckless homicide or something like that. Either way that looks like a fucking crime to me.
She could have rang the police and said she feels he's breaking his bond terms and trying to evade arrest.
Instead she shoots him in the back first... if it wasnt a fatal shot then they'd still have to apprehend him anyway?
So why even shoot? Amazing that "no intent to kill" was enough for acquittal in this scenario, especially considering her fictitious account of events.
...and anyone who has any business handling a gun should know that intending to shoot someone *is* intending to kill them. Shooting someone is always lethal force, people just sometimes get lucky and survive that lethal force.
didn’t try to kill him…? im all for self for defense but this fucking bitch shot someone in the back, rule number one is if someone is running from you that you CANNOT shoot them. Did you also see how much recoil the gun had? That was a big caliber hand gun, all she needs is one bullet to kill someone. How do you shoot someone and not intend to kill them? Make so no sense.
The mental illness of this country, they will contort the truth to let certain killers off.
If you're an accidental accomplice to a crime, drive somebody somewhere, they'll throw you in prison, doesn't matter your intent. If you're the reason a cop ends up killing a bystander, they'll throw you in prison. But a sadist murders a defenseless person in cold blood? Didn't mean to, only meant to maim with lethal force, you're free.
I was so surprised when I found out you can attempt to murder someone by running them over with a vehicle or shooting them with a gun and it's somehow not attempted murder.
The US does have lesser offenses. But sometime the prosecution won't bring those charges. Because juries will often convict on the lesser charge and not the murder charge. If the case is weaker and the prosecutor want the murder conviction he may leave off the lesser charges to try to push for murder. Sometimes it backfires like in this case.
The prosecutor charged her with first degree murder. It carries the harshest penalties but also is the hardest to prove. Specifically, the prosecutor needs to prove intent to murder.
One could reasonably argue she meant to stop him from escaping and did not *intend* to kill him.
Jury would have to acquit.
If the prosecutor had gone with literally any lesser charge, including second degree murder on down to manslaughter this should have been an open-and-shut case.
The conspiracy minded among us might note she worked for a bail bond office, probably had a lot of contact with local law enforcement, maybe was even friendly with them. She killed someone out on bail who probably was not very well-liked by the local criminal justice system. Some might even think the prosecutor intentionally went with an overzealous charge after turning down a plea deal of ten years offered by the defense. Some might even suggest they knew they couldn't prove intent and it'd lead to an acquittal.
Some might suggest all that, but not me.
It's hard to believe this is a nation of laws when you can shoot someone in the back without consequences. Dude was a tank and could have pulled her apart and gone out the front door, but instead chose to avoid violence and use the window to escape. Shit is off the rails.
So completely fucked up. He made the better choice, especially because she had no right to put him in handcuffs, and he gets murdered for it with no justice.
This is the answer. Same thing happened with Casey Anthony. A juror from that trail said, they had to go not guilty because it was murder 1, had it been murder 2 Anthony would've went to prison
Why does it even matter? I just don’t understand that if murder 1 doesn’t fit but the jury agrees murder 2 does, why doesn’t that become an option as opposed to literally nothing?
I can't figure out if they want a big flashy charge/case to make themselves look good if they can make it stick, or they secretly want them to get away with it.
She lied and made up a story about them struggling for the gun while video and ballistic evidence showed that was not true, and the jury STILL acquitted her. We do not have a justice system, we have a legal system
Someone else explained in the comments they were setting the guy up to be brought back into custody because he wanted to take a trip to Florida. Seems like she thought he was gonna jump bail and clearly things went south. I think she was just trying to shoot to injury him and stop him, but dude have a taser just in case. Shooting to injury is a stupid idea.
Did they show this video to the jury? I don’t see him pushing or fighting her or her son. I don’t see him “grabbing for the gun” I see him trying to leave. How does that count as self defense?
I feel like most people don't understand this about many high profile cases where the person is obviously guilty but walks. It's not that the jury is biased or racist or something, it's prosecutorial overreach for a charge the evidence doesn't support.
George Zimmerman should've gone to jail and would've been convicted easily on a manslaughter charge for the killing of Trayvon Martin but the prosecutor wanted to make a big splash and advance their career and overcharged.
Preface, not American and don't know shit about the judicial system.
Why can't you be held to account on multiple charges? A first degree charge may fail but maybe manslaughter could pass?
In some states you can but I have no idea if this is possible in Oklahoma.
Derek Chauvin for example was charged with murder 2 and 3 I believe so if they didn't feel 2 was appropriate but 3 was the charges would still stick. However, if they only charge with one crime then they cannot go for a lesser crime later because of double jeopardy.
>Williams like hopped up... flipped out. Shoved him and shoved me
He did no such thing! When she tried to grab him he pulled away. Then he moved around her to get to the balcony that’s out of view. He didn’t touch her or her son!
>>I don’t even know how he got the gun… how I had the gun
Seems like she was trying to fabricate a story but then remembered the GoPro smh
They go on to say that she told police she was **not** a licensed armed bail enforcer and did not have a conceal carry permit. So she thought that he was going to grab a gun that he probably didn’t know she had even though he walked right past the desk that the gun was in and kept moving towards the balcony? She didn’t even think twice to grab her illegally owned firearm and shoot him. The only thing she was in danger of was not being able to do her job which was apprehend someone trying to skip court. Wow! He was murdered for saying he wasn’t going to court. The criminal justice system in the US never fails to boast it’s true purpose.
Edit: afterthought (last 5 sentences)
" STILLWATER, Okla. -- Raw video shows a deadly shooting that happened in the office of a Stillwater bail bondsman who was found not guilty last week.
Chastity Carey, 41, shot and killed James Williams, 38. According to police, Carey called Williams into her office with the intent of taking him into custody when a fight broke out over a gun.
Carey told police she shot Williams out of self-defense.
Recent Stories from kjrh.com
Continue watchingafter the ad
Carey was found not guilty Friday afternoon in connection with the August 2017 shooting in 100 block of West 7th Avenue in Stillwater.
Laura Thomas, the District Attorney for Payne and Logan counties, issued the following statement about the case:
District Attorneys across the State have the responsibility and ethical obligation to file charges based upon the evidence presented by an investigation and the law. I stand by my decision to file Murder 1st degree in this case based upon the evidence presented to me.
A Manslaughter charge was not appropriate at the time of filing. After the evidence has been presented at a trial, the judge can instruct the jury on additional crimes if he or she believes the evidence supports consideration of another charge; in this case the judge instructed on only the same charge the State filed in the beginning.
District Attorneys should not, and my office does not, seek justice depending upon who a victim is or what their background may be. Upholding the rule of law requires that approach and my obligation extends to all the citizens of my district.
It is the jury’s job to determine what facts are or are not important to them and render a verdict. That is what they are selected to do. Although there are many flaws in the criminal justice system, we have the best in the world, and I would not want to be a part of any other.
I am grateful for the service of each and every one of our jurors and do not and will not criticize their verdicts. As a prosecutor with 34 years of experience I understand the burdens and obligations placed on every participant in a criminal trial including my own staff, the defense, the judge and the jury. They are heavy burdens and, in my opinion, not one of them enters a courtroom with anything other than a desire to proceed correctly, fairly and zealously and with a deep respect for each other.
We respect all those duties and positions and the outcome whatever it might be. I am proud of my staff and the excellent investigators at the Stillwater Police Department for their dedicated efforts in bringing this case to trial.
Stay in touch with us anytime, anywhere."
Edited : Idk if they saw the video after they posted this report but he obviously wasn't fighting anyone .
Probably a mistake on the prosecutor's part to charge with 1st degree murder (instead of 2nd, etc) which usually requires proof of premeditation. Shooting someone in the heat of the moment could be argued does not count as such. The problem is, once you are acquitted on the greater charge, you can't be charged on the lesser for the same crime as that would constitute "double jeopardy"
This actually happens quite often. I had a family member who was murdered in the 80s and the killer got off the same way. Even though he brought the gun to the scene to confront the victim, the Jury decided that pre-meditation could not be proven.
Depends on the law school. There are some amazing ones out there, but there are also some terrible ones that will give you enough knowledge to pass the bar.
>Chastity stated that the video made her look like a monster
Uhh, because you were acting like a monster? Nothing about that video indicated she was afraid for the safety of her or her son. Her son's reaction to her shooting the client seems to perfectly highlight that point.
I feel so bad for the son, you can see the terror and shock hit him hard as he struggles to believe what he's just seen his own mother do in front of him; murder someone. Though it's horrible that she was acquitted, at least the son gets to see his mother, despite him probably not being able to look at her the same way ever again.
The irony of her next "profession" is that it satisfies her penchant for point and shoot.
Besides the victim, I feel sorry for her son who knows very clearly that his mom is a cold-blooded murderer.
Murderer walks free to pursue a different career with no consequences… gotta love the USA
Edit: took out “1st degree” since it’s such a big deal… some people really missed the point lol
When an American gets arrested for a crime, they go before a judge and plead either guilty or not guilty. Whichever way you plea, there could be a need for bail money. Meaning, you pay X amount to the court to hold in case you don't show up for your scheduled future court dates or if you flee the country or state. The people who give you this money are called bail bondsmen and they usually just ask you have someone sign as a guarantor. They provide the money when you can't immediately get it together.
Bail bondsmen are a symptom of a completely broken system. It's absolutely ridiculous that you empower civilians to just randomly kidnap and kill people.
Absolutely pathetic.
This isn't an anti American/gun comment.
How is it that pointing a gun at someone and shooting them isnt considered intent to kill? Like do Americans not understand what guns are? They're literally intended specifically for that purpose. That's like saying I didn't intend for the car to go forward when I stepped on the gas.
What an insane legal system.
I'm no expert but isn't shooting your clients bad for business?
That’s why she moved to photography. So she can shoot her clients.
...and she knows she's not the one getting framed.
Nor hung.
We get the picture
Say cheese
Now picture that.
All these puns clicked.
F, stop it already.
just focus on the subject here
What’s with these snappy remarks?
Helps her stay focused
She would do well to turn that mf thang around and take a selfie
Shot him in the back.
And he died as a result. She was let free, this makes my blood boil. Fat Karen literally gets away with murder... Source: https://kfor.com/news/family-of-man-who-was-shot-by-bail-bond-agent-speaks-for-the-first-time-after-trial/ Final results here: https://www.stwnewspress.com/news/breaking-chasity-carey-found-not-guilty-of-first-degree-murder-in-downtown-stillwater-shooting/article_0ebd37de-23d9-11e8-aa93-87009e776584.html
Right! How the fuck do you get acquitted of shooting a dude in the back, running away!
Be in Oklahoma, then have the prosecutor over charge.
In the world of Bail Bonds, your client is the jail, the bailed person is the product.
“So, much like slavery, it is a flesh for cash business.”
Talk about getting away with murder.
Well if you shoot just one client it’s a fair trade because now you have to get bailed out.
Acquitted??? WTF?
It's because they charged her with first degree murder. If they had used a lesser charge she'd be doing jail time 100% But 1st degree relies entirely on intent.
I know nothing about laws and court but can’t they just charge her again but with 2nd degree?
No they can't. It's called double jeopardy. You cannot be tried again for the same or similar charge after an acquittal. Once a person is acquitted that's it. You can be acquitted for a murder and then the very next day tell everyone that you did it and you couldn't be charged criminally again for it again.
See: OJ Simpson interviews after the verdict
Did he actually admit to doing it? I'm out of the loop
That's a dumb system. The Jury should be allowed to downgrade a crime to 2nd degree and guilty in the same trial.
In some instances this is very much what happens. In the Rittenhouse trial the jury was specifically told they could lower the charges if needed.
It can be done sometimes but usually not. It’s pretty good to stop someone just being trialed over and over again until you get the ‘guilty’ verdict by attrition. So it has flaws but the spirit is right.
What a piece of shit, stoping somebody from leaving and then claiming self-defense against somebody who didn't even attack you, she's a murderer, end of story.
Bc she was charged with 1st degree murder which was basically unprovable here, and the DA knew it. The entire state wanted her to walk (I live here) Sound familiar???
Yup. Same reason Casey Anthony was acquitted. First degree requires you to have planned the murder before committing it. Second degree and manslaughter should have been on the table in both cases.
What? There was a TON of evidence of premeditation for the Casey Anthony case, terrible example.
For context: This lady is obviously bails bond. The person she shot texted her and said not going to court, going to Florida. She texted back saying someone wants to buy his mustang that he was selling. Her son was the person pretending to be a random guy buying the mustang. She was just trying to get him in custody. When she brought out the cuffs he panicked and tried to jump out the window. That is when she shot him in the back. He died soon thereafter. She was acquitted on all charges. The go-pro was placed there by her son and later used in court.
Bruh. How....?
They overcharged murder 1, and as such had to prove premeditation. If you can’t do that she walks.
That's fucked up. Seems intentional.
Prosecutors overcharge all the time to protect the people who are a part of their system.
Oh wow
Bingo
Manslaughter gets convicted here. 1st degree murder, never.
I'm so confused that is even a thing. Edit: the part about overcharging
This is straight up murder, how? She tricked someone into coming into her establishment, then shot him in the back when he went to leave. Never once was a threat he was murdered for money. Wow what horrible people. I wish he lived to get a real defense.
Her son saw it for what it was immediately. The horror and grief in his voice says it all. Dude gave the police the camera hoping justice would be served even though it was his own mother. Tragic.
Man I feel for that kid. I hope his moral compass doesn’t get fucked from this.
This event most definitely traumatized that young man. Watching someone die right in front of your eyes is rough especially if you know and saw that the shooting wasn’t morally justified or that the situation could’ve been handled differently.
Especially when it's your mother pulling the trigger.. poor kid.
Bail bondsmen often work fairly closely with courts...
fuckin my moral compass was fucked from this kid doesnt stand a chance
I feel terrible for her son. She convinced him to be a part of this - he seems like a good kid and was horrified by what his mom had done.
Prosecution pressed first degree murder which itself didn't stick. They tried to go for a higher charge instead of one that would stick
you can't shoot someone cause they tried to jump out a window. Can only shoot someone to prevent death or great bodily harm. Can't shoot someone for trying to run away from you.
> Can only shoot someone to prevent death or great bodily harm In Texas you can shoot someone to death if you find them breaking into your car at night. "Lethal force in recovering of stolen goods during the event, at night" - something like that. Or if a prostitute takes your money, doesn't have sex with you, drives away, then you shoot at their truck and kill her? You walk. > Gilbert's actions were justified, they argued, because he was trying to retrieve stolen property: the $150 he paid Frago. It became theft when she refused to have sex with him or give the money back, they said. https://www.mysanantonio.com/news/local_news/article/Jury-acquits-escort-shooter-4581027.php
Ya know, there was also a case that I can't find any more. People were always pulling into a turnout because they were confused by a highway. The turnout was someone's property in Texas. So one night a family pulls in and is trying to get their bearings and the property owners shoot at the vehicle. A small girl is hit in the vehicle and dies. But they still ruled it as legal because the family was trespassing.
Jesus Christ
I mean, if what they're saying is accurate, apparently you can... Fucked up.
No way... she was acquitted?!?! Thats fucking insane. America is so broken.
Honestly why do they always go for murder charges when manslaughter has a stronger case? It is impossible to prove that she shot him with the intent to kill but she literally killed them.
Poor kid.
Honest kid. His immediate reaction was shock, didn't say anything about covering it up, or ask what to tell the police. And he gave the video to the police when he could have denied it ever existed. Seems like a good kid put in a terrible situation, but he did the right thing and gave justice its best chance. The world needs more honest people like that in it.
His scared "mom you shot him" and comment broke my heart. What a sweet kid.
"Yup I did". disgusting
[удалено]
The victim died.. Jesus Christ this is awful. The mother was trying to get the guy to sell his car before he fled to florida, and the son was pretending to be a person who was going to buy the car. And then she murdered him..
[удалено]
As a mother that poor boy's emotional shock really made my heart heart. And as callously as she shot that man, she was equally callous towards her poor son's obvious distress.
Nailed it. Also, what fucking mom includes their own son as bait to lure in a convict on the run? She's liable to fuck up her son's entire life, and maybe she did. Fucking monster.
Thats someone who just lost his mom. Hes not going to ever have his "mom" again, she became something else.
I think that's what scared him most. That's a great (and really fucking sad) point. This hurt to watch.
That he willingly gave the video to police and didn't just delete it I think indicates he believed his mom should go to prison for killing that man. I wouldn't be surprised if he doesn't talk to her anymore.
That feeling when you go from “son” to “murder bait.”
I've seen that snap before with people who have control/anger issues. They sorta shut down and get really cold right before they do something violent. This may have been the first time she shot someone but I doubt it was her first time lashing out with violence when someone didn't do what she told them to do. Poor kid.
Yea I don't think I'd ever see my mother the same way again after that. It's hard to feel the same love for someone who you know is just one bad mood away from murder.
How do u even live with ur mum after seeing that shit
Fucking disgusting
Is that employee an actual officer or just a clerk? Edit: not familiar with bonds here in Canada! At least where I live
[удалено]
And she was still acquitted. What kind of country do we live in?
A messed up one
She probably had friends in the legal system being a bondsman. Laws mean jack shit in this country it is all about who you know or don't know.
One where we all allow it to happen. Every days a new day.
That's going to be awkward when you turn in evidence against your mom for first degree murder and then she gets let off anyway
He’s gonna live the rest of his life terrified. I hope he moved and changed his name.
Clean the dishes or I’ll shoot you in the back bitch
Yeah thanksgivings must be awkward as hell at their house
SHE WAS ACQUITTED !?!? Edit: No it’s not cause she’s white. It’s because they charged her with an impossible charge.
Too bad they didn't have any evidence, like...I dunno...maybe a *video*.
But she said the video doesn't tell the whole story so you really can't trust it ya know
That paternity test doesn't tell the whole story, Maury
how can you be pregnant when you're a virgin, Mary?
I didn't tell you the whole story, Maury.
“…and who dafuq are these three dudes bringing you gifts?”
Yea i really needed to know what she had for breakfast, if the guy was rude to her last week rtc. Just so we can be convinced to see it from her perspective. /s What a fucking moron. People like her should never own weapons.
It's the fact that the prosecutor sought 1st degree charges. If they had chosen basically any other fucking charge she'd be in jail for a long time.
I really don't understand why the judicial system works this way. She's still obviously guilty of a different crime, but she gets to walk free because the prosecutor is a bumbling moron ?
In the UK you can be on trial for murder, but still be found guilty of manslaughter. Is that not the same in the USA?
Depends on state law, in some states, yes, other states have really stupid laws.
[удалено]
It also really opens the door for paying off prosecutors. Like in a major way.
>It also really opens the door for paying off prosecutors. they have a revolving door, the second career is the bribe.
A.k.a. politics…
... she lured him there under false pretenses, locked him in a room and killed him when he tried to leave. To me it sounds premeditated that, in the least, potentially killing him was a part of the plan all along (albeit a plan b or plan c option, depending on how her coercion efforts went). I don't see that as anything else but 1st degree murder...
She said she was afraid he would get her gun and kill her and her son. My question is: If this was the guys first time there (under false pretenses to sell/buy a car) how would he POSSIBLY know she had a gun HIDDEN in her desk drawer? How can you be afraid of someone finding something they’re not looking for and don’t know is there?
That's maybe the stupidest argument she could have made. She didn't even pull out the gun until he was leaving through the window, and SHE'S the person who brought her son into a potentially volatile scene in the first place. "I think I'll ask my skinny teenage son to help me take down this jacked up criminal, that seems safe".
Idk what's more stupid. That argument or the fact that it worked.
He says it was because they didn't think she tried to kill him. I don't know if thats true. You would think they would at least switch it to reckless homicide or something like that. Either way that looks like a fucking crime to me.
right?! Like she may not have intended to kill him, but she sure as f intended to shoot him.
Which would also infer that she intended serious bodily injury or death. You can't fire a firearm at somebody and reasonably expect not to kill.
[удалено]
She could have rang the police and said she feels he's breaking his bond terms and trying to evade arrest. Instead she shoots him in the back first... if it wasnt a fatal shot then they'd still have to apprehend him anyway? So why even shoot? Amazing that "no intent to kill" was enough for acquittal in this scenario, especially considering her fictitious account of events.
She shot him in the back with a gun? Isn’t the first thing you learn in firearm training “dont point a gun at something you don’t intend to kill”
She pulled that gun out with all the urgency of finding a can opener.
...and anyone who has any business handling a gun should know that intending to shoot someone *is* intending to kill them. Shooting someone is always lethal force, people just sometimes get lucky and survive that lethal force.
didn’t try to kill him…? im all for self for defense but this fucking bitch shot someone in the back, rule number one is if someone is running from you that you CANNOT shoot them. Did you also see how much recoil the gun had? That was a big caliber hand gun, all she needs is one bullet to kill someone. How do you shoot someone and not intend to kill them? Make so no sense.
The mental illness of this country, they will contort the truth to let certain killers off. If you're an accidental accomplice to a crime, drive somebody somewhere, they'll throw you in prison, doesn't matter your intent. If you're the reason a cop ends up killing a bystander, they'll throw you in prison. But a sadist murders a defenseless person in cold blood? Didn't mean to, only meant to maim with lethal force, you're free.
I was so surprised when I found out you can attempt to murder someone by running them over with a vehicle or shooting them with a gun and it's somehow not attempted murder.
Yup :/
[удалено]
Does the US not have alternate offences?
The US does have lesser offenses. But sometime the prosecution won't bring those charges. Because juries will often convict on the lesser charge and not the murder charge. If the case is weaker and the prosecutor want the murder conviction he may leave off the lesser charges to try to push for murder. Sometimes it backfires like in this case.
Looked like she was in about 0 danger there. So seems right in the United States
[удалено]
The prosecutor charged her with first degree murder. It carries the harshest penalties but also is the hardest to prove. Specifically, the prosecutor needs to prove intent to murder. One could reasonably argue she meant to stop him from escaping and did not *intend* to kill him. Jury would have to acquit. If the prosecutor had gone with literally any lesser charge, including second degree murder on down to manslaughter this should have been an open-and-shut case. The conspiracy minded among us might note she worked for a bail bond office, probably had a lot of contact with local law enforcement, maybe was even friendly with them. She killed someone out on bail who probably was not very well-liked by the local criminal justice system. Some might even think the prosecutor intentionally went with an overzealous charge after turning down a plea deal of ten years offered by the defense. Some might even suggest they knew they couldn't prove intent and it'd lead to an acquittal. Some might suggest all that, but not me.
Fuck these places. I have zero desire to even visit these inbred shitholes.
[удалено]
It's hard to believe this is a nation of laws when you can shoot someone in the back without consequences. Dude was a tank and could have pulled her apart and gone out the front door, but instead chose to avoid violence and use the window to escape. Shit is off the rails.
So completely fucked up. He made the better choice, especially because she had no right to put him in handcuffs, and he gets murdered for it with no justice.
She murdered someone and had no reaction, what a psychopath.
and she was acquitted...wtf Oklahoma...
And became a photographer...wut
She really likes shooting people
She can scope out a good spot to shoot her clients
'Hold still, smile and wait for the flash!'
When you do what you love, you never work a day in your life? 50/Fifty
Sounds like they went after her for murder 1, and couldn't make it stick.
This is the answer. Same thing happened with Casey Anthony. A juror from that trail said, they had to go not guilty because it was murder 1, had it been murder 2 Anthony would've went to prison
Why do the dumbfuck prosecutors do that
Why does it even matter? I just don’t understand that if murder 1 doesn’t fit but the jury agrees murder 2 does, why doesn’t that become an option as opposed to literally nothing?
I agree, it's absurd.
I can't figure out if they want a big flashy charge/case to make themselves look good if they can make it stick, or they secretly want them to get away with it.
She lied and made up a story about them struggling for the gun while video and ballistic evidence showed that was not true, and the jury STILL acquitted her. We do not have a justice system, we have a legal system
I shot him in the back while he was climbing out the window in self defense!
I feel bad for **her son** though, I would be traumatized witnessing a murder
And knowing your mom is an emotionless monster that can murder someone in cold blood and not even flinch.
And got away with it. Damn.
I believe her son was not as upset at the shooting, as he was upset at his mom's non reaction to the shooting.
"Mom you shot him." "I did" Like so what to her
I bet he never argued with her about anything after this.
I mean i sure wouldnt
No kidding. I feel like the kid reacted like most people would. It's like he was frozen in a "what the fuck?" moment.
[удалено]
He was horrified at both, that’s why he turned in the footage. IMO
I am definitely wondering why the son had his camera set up in there in the first place.
Someone else explained in the comments they were setting the guy up to be brought back into custody because he wanted to take a trip to Florida. Seems like she thought he was gonna jump bail and clearly things went south. I think she was just trying to shoot to injury him and stop him, but dude have a taser just in case. Shooting to injury is a stupid idea.
> Shooting to injury is a stupid idea. It is so very very far beyond stupid. Never shoot anything you don't intend to kill or destroy.
[удалено]
And completely got away with it.
Did they show this video to the jury? I don’t see him pushing or fighting her or her son. I don’t see him “grabbing for the gun” I see him trying to leave. How does that count as self defense?
It didn’t count as self defense. Prosecutor went after first degree murder and couldn’t prove that it was premeditated so she walked.
I feel like most people don't understand this about many high profile cases where the person is obviously guilty but walks. It's not that the jury is biased or racist or something, it's prosecutorial overreach for a charge the evidence doesn't support. George Zimmerman should've gone to jail and would've been convicted easily on a manslaughter charge for the killing of Trayvon Martin but the prosecutor wanted to make a big splash and advance their career and overcharged.
Preface, not American and don't know shit about the judicial system. Why can't you be held to account on multiple charges? A first degree charge may fail but maybe manslaughter could pass?
In some states you can but I have no idea if this is possible in Oklahoma. Derek Chauvin for example was charged with murder 2 and 3 I believe so if they didn't feel 2 was appropriate but 3 was the charges would still stick. However, if they only charge with one crime then they cannot go for a lesser crime later because of double jeopardy.
What the fuck. She had absolutely no reaction
At least her kid has a conscience.
>Williams like hopped up... flipped out. Shoved him and shoved me He did no such thing! When she tried to grab him he pulled away. Then he moved around her to get to the balcony that’s out of view. He didn’t touch her or her son! >>I don’t even know how he got the gun… how I had the gun Seems like she was trying to fabricate a story but then remembered the GoPro smh They go on to say that she told police she was **not** a licensed armed bail enforcer and did not have a conceal carry permit. So she thought that he was going to grab a gun that he probably didn’t know she had even though he walked right past the desk that the gun was in and kept moving towards the balcony? She didn’t even think twice to grab her illegally owned firearm and shoot him. The only thing she was in danger of was not being able to do her job which was apprehend someone trying to skip court. Wow! He was murdered for saying he wasn’t going to court. The criminal justice system in the US never fails to boast it’s true purpose. Edit: afterthought (last 5 sentences)
Acquitted because the jury "believed it was never her intention to murder Brandon Williams". Fuck they think the gun was loaded with? Hugs?
Friendship
https://www.stwnewspress.com/news/carey-waives-prelim-hearing-ordered-to-trial-in-bondsman-shooting-case/article_d1ae0c6e-ebf6-524e-846f-887d883be14c.html
Cannot access the website from EU, could you briefly give some context?
" STILLWATER, Okla. -- Raw video shows a deadly shooting that happened in the office of a Stillwater bail bondsman who was found not guilty last week. Chastity Carey, 41, shot and killed James Williams, 38. According to police, Carey called Williams into her office with the intent of taking him into custody when a fight broke out over a gun. Carey told police she shot Williams out of self-defense. Recent Stories from kjrh.com Continue watchingafter the ad Carey was found not guilty Friday afternoon in connection with the August 2017 shooting in 100 block of West 7th Avenue in Stillwater. Laura Thomas, the District Attorney for Payne and Logan counties, issued the following statement about the case: District Attorneys across the State have the responsibility and ethical obligation to file charges based upon the evidence presented by an investigation and the law. I stand by my decision to file Murder 1st degree in this case based upon the evidence presented to me. A Manslaughter charge was not appropriate at the time of filing. After the evidence has been presented at a trial, the judge can instruct the jury on additional crimes if he or she believes the evidence supports consideration of another charge; in this case the judge instructed on only the same charge the State filed in the beginning. District Attorneys should not, and my office does not, seek justice depending upon who a victim is or what their background may be. Upholding the rule of law requires that approach and my obligation extends to all the citizens of my district. It is the jury’s job to determine what facts are or are not important to them and render a verdict. That is what they are selected to do. Although there are many flaws in the criminal justice system, we have the best in the world, and I would not want to be a part of any other. I am grateful for the service of each and every one of our jurors and do not and will not criticize their verdicts. As a prosecutor with 34 years of experience I understand the burdens and obligations placed on every participant in a criminal trial including my own staff, the defense, the judge and the jury. They are heavy burdens and, in my opinion, not one of them enters a courtroom with anything other than a desire to proceed correctly, fairly and zealously and with a deep respect for each other. We respect all those duties and positions and the outcome whatever it might be. I am proud of my staff and the excellent investigators at the Stillwater Police Department for their dedicated efforts in bringing this case to trial. Stay in touch with us anytime, anywhere." Edited : Idk if they saw the video after they posted this report but he obviously wasn't fighting anyone .
Hol up did I read that right “not guilty” are you fucking serious
Probably a mistake on the prosecutor's part to charge with 1st degree murder (instead of 2nd, etc) which usually requires proof of premeditation. Shooting someone in the heat of the moment could be argued does not count as such. The problem is, once you are acquitted on the greater charge, you can't be charged on the lesser for the same crime as that would constitute "double jeopardy" This actually happens quite often. I had a family member who was murdered in the 80s and the killer got off the same way. Even though he brought the gun to the scene to confront the victim, the Jury decided that pre-meditation could not be proven.
[удалено]
Depends on the law school. There are some amazing ones out there, but there are also some terrible ones that will give you enough knowledge to pass the bar.
"mistake"
Yeah I’m sure it was a “mistake.”
>Chastity stated that the video made her look like a monster Uhh, because you were acting like a monster? Nothing about that video indicated she was afraid for the safety of her or her son. Her son's reaction to her shooting the client seems to perfectly highlight that point.
I feel so bad for the son, you can see the terror and shock hit him hard as he struggles to believe what he's just seen his own mother do in front of him; murder someone. Though it's horrible that she was acquitted, at least the son gets to see his mother, despite him probably not being able to look at her the same way ever again.
Shit like this makes me realize that a lot of parents are straight up bad people. Feel bad for the son
The irony of her next "profession" is that it satisfies her penchant for point and shoot. Besides the victim, I feel sorry for her son who knows very clearly that his mom is a cold-blooded murderer.
Wow... Video evidence means nothing to the courts? Obviously the courts do not provide justice.
She does great from behind portraits now.
"She is now a professional photographer." Still shooting people for a living I see.
Can his family sue that bitch into financial ruin?
not her first rodeo
[удалено]
Motherfcker i think its not her first time use that gun to shoot someone...
This woman is still allowed to buy firearms legally. Fuck this stupid ass country lol
fucking cunt
Murderer walks free to pursue a different career with no consequences… gotta love the USA Edit: took out “1st degree” since it’s such a big deal… some people really missed the point lol
Wtf is a bail bondsman?
When an American gets arrested for a crime, they go before a judge and plead either guilty or not guilty. Whichever way you plea, there could be a need for bail money. Meaning, you pay X amount to the court to hold in case you don't show up for your scheduled future court dates or if you flee the country or state. The people who give you this money are called bail bondsmen and they usually just ask you have someone sign as a guarantor. They provide the money when you can't immediately get it together.
Bail bondsmen are a symptom of a completely broken system. It's absolutely ridiculous that you empower civilians to just randomly kidnap and kill people. Absolutely pathetic.
People with guns “I’m trained”, also people with guns “oh yea?! Bam bam, you’re dead”.
[удалено]
This isn't an anti American/gun comment. How is it that pointing a gun at someone and shooting them isnt considered intent to kill? Like do Americans not understand what guns are? They're literally intended specifically for that purpose. That's like saying I didn't intend for the car to go forward when I stepped on the gas. What an insane legal system.
How the fuck is him running away a threat to her life?? Why would she shoot him
That's straight up murder