Eric Zuesse
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
A good example of ‘justice’ in today’s police-state America is the Texas case that became big nationwide on Friday April 7th when the Austin Chronicle headlined “Might Have to Kill a Few People”, and sub-headed “And other texts that suggest Daniel Perry intended to commit murder at a Black Lives Matter demonstration,” and then the reporter Brant Bingamon opened:
The murder trial of Army Sgt. Daniel Perry for the killing of Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster is halfway over. The trial – District Attorney José Garza’s most important prosecution to date – began on March 27 and has so far provided little new information about the killing. But prosecutors have developed a fuller picture of Perry’s intention and possible premeditation by showing the depth of the hatred he harbored for BLM demonstrators protesting police violence in the summer of 2020.
Two months into those protests, on Saturday, July 25, 2020, Perry, a sergeant stationed at Fort Hood and working as a rideshare driver in Austin, accelerated his car into a crowd of protesters at the corner of Fourth Street and Congress Avenue. Garrett Foster, a 28-year-old Air Force veteran openly carrying an AK-47 across his chest, approached the car. The driver’s side window opened and Perry shot Foster four times in the chest and abdomen. Perry turned himself in to Austin police seconds later, claiming he’d shot in self-defense after Foster raised the barrel of his gun. Austin Police Department officers questioned Perry and let him go.
Bingamon continued:
The testimony confirming Perry’s anger toward protesters came on the third day of the trial as prosecutors displayed text messages and social media comments showing that he thought about killing them. “I might have to kill a few people on my way to work, they are rioting outside my apartment complex,” Perry wrote to a friend in June of 2020. “I might go to Dallas to shoot looters,” he wrote on another occasion. Perry also encouraged violence in a variety of social media posts.
In addition, Perry speculated about how he might get away with such a killing – by claiming self-defense, as he is now doing. Prosecutors presented a Facebook Messenger chat between Perry and a friend, Michael Holcomb, which occurred two weeks before he shot Foster. In it, Perry argued that shooting protesters was legal if it was in self-defense. Holcomb, who was called to the stand Wednesday afternoon, seemed to try to talk Perry down. “Aren’t you a CDL [Commercial Drivers License allowing concealed carry] holder too?” he asked, referring to the men’s licenses to carry concealed handguns. “We went through the same training … Shooting after creating an event where you have to shoot, is not a good shoot.”
Later on April 7th, the newspaper bannered “Jury Finds Daniel Perry Guilty of Murdering Black Lives Matter Protester: Texts expressing his murder fantasies were critical to prosecution”, and opened by saying, “The jury in the Daniel Perry murder trial returned its verdict Friday afternoon, April 7, declaring the active-duty Army sergeant guilty of the murder of Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster. He will be sentenced on Tuesday.”
On the Republican billionaire Rupert Murdoch’s Fox News Channel, his employee Tucker Carlson headlined “ARMY SGT CONVICTED FOR ACT OF SELF-DEFENSE”.
The Democratic billionaires’ Yahoo News site headlined on April 8th “[Republlican] Gov. Greg Abbott announces he will push to pardon Daniel Perry who was convicted of murder” and reported that:
Less than 24 hours after a jury in Austin found Daniel Perry guilty of shooting to death a protester, Gov. Greg Abbott announced on social media Saturday that he would pardon the convicted killer as soon as a request “hits my desk.”
The unprecedented effort, which Abbott announced to his 1 million followers on Twitter, came as Abbott faced growing calls from national conservative figures such as Fox News host Tucker Carlson and Kyle Rittenhouse, who was acquitted in the shooting deaths of two Wisconsin protesters in 2020, to act to urgently undo the conviction.
“Texas has one of the strongest ‘Stand your ground’ laws of self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or progressive district attorney,” Abbott said in a statement. “I will work as swiftly as Texas law allows regarding the pardon of Sgt. Perry.”
The populist Republican financial news site Zero Hedge had headlined earlier on that same day, “Will Texas Governor Pardon Army Sergeant Sandbagged By Soros DA In Self-Defense Shooting?”, and opened:
A jury in Travis County, Texas found Army Sgt. Daniel Perry, 33, guilty of murder on Friday, nearly three years after he shot a BLM protester who had a history of threatening people with rifles, after a Soros-funded DA withheld nearly 100 pages of exculpatory evidence from the grand jury according to the lead investigator in the case.
While driving for Uber, Perry shot protester Garrett Foster during a July 2020 protest in downtown Austin, after Foster and other protesters surrounded his car. After Foster raised his rifle at Perry, the Army Sergeant shot and killed Foster, then called the police to report what happened.
Perry told police he shot in self-defense, which both the Austin police department and the lead detective in the case agreed with – concluding it was justifiable homicide.
Then, Soros DA Jose Garza stepped in and instructed lead detective David Fugitt “to remove exculpatory information that I had intended to present to the grand jury during my testimony.”
That news-report featured two tweets:
Sounds messed up
— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) April 7, 2023
I urge everyone to call the Texas board of pardons and paroles and put pressure on them to do the right thing and set Sgt. Perry free. 512-406-5452 pic.twitter.com/k7ME5J8ErX
— Kyle Rittenhouse (@ThisIsKyleR) April 8, 2023
Musk is a libertarian Republican billionaire who pretends to be nonpartisan but, as the majority owner of Twitter, has replaced its prior Democratic billionaires’ censorship by his own censorship. His “messed up” is the type of noncommittal ‘criticism’ that is his normal style of saying nothing in order to be inscrutable and to seem to fools to be deeply insightful instead of merely manipulative.
Kyle Rittenhouse is a White who actually HAD (unlike Daniel Perry) innocently acted in self-defense and shot to death another White (again unlike Perry) who had been participating in a Black Lives Matter riot, and Rittenhouse was ruled innocent (and actually WAS innocent, on authentic self-defense grounds) by a jury but was widely propagandized-against as having instead been guilty (and that jury was widely criticized for its having rendered actually the correct verdict), by Democratic billionaires’ media, as-if he had been a racist White who had murdered a black man (or else a pro-Black-Lives-Matter White — but those ’news’-media smudged-over this question so as to deceive the audience about it).
Whereas we have Democratic billionaires who propagandize liberals to think that the problem in America is Whites against Blacks, we have Republican billionaires who propagandize conservatives to think that the problem in America is Blacks against Whites.
And, all the while, the billionaires are actually in control of the Government and of its major ‘news’-media, so that Americans will continue (and increasingly) to fight against each other, instead of to fight against and have a revolution to overthrow and replace their actual oppressors (the billionaires who control the Government) who fool them in this way and thereby continue to remain in control by means of such “manufactured consent,” which is carefully engineered consent, or ‘democracy’ instead of representing the public (rather than representing only the nation’s super-rich as now is the case).
—————
Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s new book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
So, with Perry, on the one hand his social media messages seem to point to some vague premeditation. But on th other hand, the DA did exclude exculpatory evidence — so did the jury make the right decision?
You unfortunately got suckered by the Zero Hedge article that I had linked to (as an example of Republican ‘alt-news’ reporting about this matter), which alleged that “a Soros-funded DA withheld nearly 100 pages of exculpatory evidence from the grand jury.” If you clicked onto that article, you will see that it fails to link to any alleged source for it, and instead it alleges that this was “according to the lead investigator in the case” but fails to identify that person — so the allegation has no identifiable source. However, if you will ALSO click onto the real NEWS-reporting… Read more »
PS: I am now digging further and have found this: https://forums.somd.com/threads/protest-shootings.360452/page-2. It includes excerpts from the affidavitt by detective David Fugitt, who worked on this case. He charges that the DA had disallowed some evidence that Fugitt was wanting to include. Often, there is evidence in a case which is disallowed as failing to meet the rules of evidence (being less reliable/trustworthy than meets the minimum legal standards to constitute “evidence” in a case). I cannot say whether that disallowal was or wasn’t valid. Normally, the judge participates along with the prosecuting and the defending attorney in determining which evidence… Read more »
ok so im a bit confused by the wording: “Kyle Rittenhouse is a White who actually HAD (unlike Daniel Perry) innocently acted in self-defense..” is the author stating perry did not innocently act in self defense?? because if the d.a. really did instruct the lead detective to withhold exculpatory evidence from the grand jury, and “exculpatory evidence” means: “evidence, such as a statement, tending to excuse, justify, or absolve the alleged fault or guilt of a defendant.” then had the grand jury been presented with said evidence, they may have decided there wasnt enough inculpatory evidence present to issue an… Read more »
The evidence that I linked to regarding the Rittenhouse case includes nothing to indicate that he had racist or any other sort of bigoted motivation for anything that he did. The evidence that was presented at trial in the Perry case definitely did. Though some Republican media reported (whether truthfully or not) that Perry’s victim, Black Lives Matter protester Garrett Foster, had a criminal record, that criminal case wasn’t about Mr. Foster but about Mr. Perry, and so one would hope that Foster’s criminal record (if any) was NOT revealed to the jury, because murdering an ex-convict is no different… Read more »
ok so the article above didnt exactly tell us what specific evidence was withheld, nor were we told that it was probably withheld for a good reason..
if we had been, it would have made it all far less ambiguous, at least from where im sitting, and as far as my previous comment is concerned, i probably wouldnt have made it.
so thank you for pointing that out.
Police state is not always a bad thing. It depends who controls the police.
It’s always a bad thing because only a country that is in poor shape ‘needs’ it; which is to say that only a fool would want to be there. However, everything is matters of degree; so, every country is more or less a “police state.” Since a higher percentage of Americans than of any other country are in prison, America might be a reasonable standard to qualify as being the most a “police state.”
During the “pandemic” lockdowns I found most cops are a good people, who would not enforce nonsense. We will need them on our side to help us to get rid of the traitors.
PS: I think it was disobedience of the cops that ended the lockdowns.
I have had a similar experience. The police have a tough job and I have no intention of making their lives more difficult. Of course, they come from the general population so we understand what the possibilities are.
I can’t speak for America, but would you prefer monopolist paid (so called antifa) fascist mobs to replace the police?
What a nightmare that would be!
“...would you prefer monopolist paid (so called antifa) fascist mobs to replace the police?” ‘..fascist mobs..’? Antifa (Antifaschistische Aktion) is a Jewish Bolshevik terrorist organisation, that was formed in the Weimar Republic in 1932, by members of the Communist Party of Germany (KPD). From the Jewish ADL website — ‘Most antifa adherents today come from the anarchist movement or from the far left,’—’Antifa’s professed purpose is to vigorously oppose fascism.’— ‘The movement’s ideology is rooted in the belief that the Nazi party would never have been able to come to power in Germany if people had more aggressively fought them… Read more »
Most are paid tools. And I am not talking about actual anti-fascists who fight actual fascists in the SMO.