Jump to content

Perry pardoned by Abbott


Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, BarryLaverty said:

Yay! Justified murder of a protester, because it's for a cause not agreed upon by 'conservatives'. Sure, having a gun out should be grounds for being shot, right? 

If you're pointing it at someone, yes. 🤦‍♂️

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

Yay! Justified murder of a protester, because it's for a cause not agreed upon by 'conservatives'. Sure, having a gun out should be grounds for being shot, right? 

Police are taught to not shoot someone unless they are wielding a weapon and become an actual violent threat.  
 

This guy wasn’t a police officer and did just that.  Calling it murder for shooting someone who is literally pointing a weapon at you is not murder.  It is self defense in Texas.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Coach Rab said:

Police are taught to not shoot someone unless they are wielding a weapon and become an actual violent threat.  
 

This guy wasn’t a police officer and did just that.  Calling it murder for shooting someone who is literally pointing a weapon at you is not murder.  It is self defense in Texas.

Anywhere. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

Yay! Justified murder of a protester, because it's for a cause not agreed upon by 'conservatives'. Sure, having a gun out should be grounds for being shot, right? 

There's simply no words to describe the incredible stupidity of this statement.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A jury convicted him because of the information in this article. I know some of you burn for the chance to shoot someone you disagree with, but this guy went out of his way to do so. I think if this had happened during  'stop the steal' demonstration, some of you would think differently about the outcome. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-69013312

Daniel Perry: Texas pardons US soldier who shot Black Lives Matter protester

By Mike Wendling,BBC News
 

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has pardoned a man convicted of killing a Black Lives Matter protester in 2020.

Daniel Perry, an ex-US Army sergeant, was moonlighting as an Uber driver in Austin when he turned on to a street where demonstrators were marching.

Garrett Foster, one of the protesters, approached the vehicle carrying a rifle. Perry shot him dead.

Perry said he acted in self-defence, but he was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Foster, 28, a former US Air Force mechanic, was openly carrying an AK-47 semi-automatic assault rifle - something that is legal under Texas law - at the time of the confrontation on 25 July 2020. He was white, as is Perry.

Perry, now 37, had no passenger in his taxi and said some of the demonstrators, who had gathered in the wake of the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, began banging on his car. The protesters said they feared the vehicle might ram them.

During the trial, Perry's lawyers argued that Foster raised his rifle, a claim that some witnesses disputed. Perry lowered his window and shot Foster five times with a .357 revolver before driving off. He called 911 shortly afterwards.

 

The case became a rallying point for conservatives and Governor Abbott previously said he would pardon Perry as soon as he received an official request. Perry was convicted of murder in April 2023.

In announcing the pardon on Thursday, the Republican governor said that the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles had conducted an "exhaustive review" of the case and Perry's personal history.

"Texas has one of the strongest 'Stand Your Ground' laws of self-defence that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive District Attorney," Governor Abbott said in a statement, referring to Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza, a Democrat.

"Stand your ground" laws generally permit an individual to use force, including deadly, against someone if they believe that person is about to commit murder or other serious crimes.

In a statement Mr Garza said: "The Board and the Governor have put their politics over justice and made a mockery of our legal system. They should be ashamed of themselves."

 

According to court documents, Perry began searching for the locations of Black Lives Matter protests weeks before the shooting and messaged friends on social media, comparing protesters to "a bunch of monkeys flinging [expletive] at a zoo".

In May 2020, shortly after Floyd's death, he sent a text message saying: "I might go to Dallas to shoot looters."

He also sent messages about "hunting Muslims" and about killing a daughter if she had a crush on "a little negro boy".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, BarryLaverty said:

A jury convicted him because of the information in this article. I know some of you burn for the chance to shoot someone you disagree with, but this guy went out of his way to do so. I think if this had happened during  'stop the steal' demonstration, some of you would think differently about the outcome. 

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-69013312

Daniel Perry: Texas pardons US soldier who shot Black Lives Matter protester

By Mike Wendling,BBC News
 

Texas Governor Greg Abbott has pardoned a man convicted of killing a Black Lives Matter protester in 2020.

Daniel Perry, an ex-US Army sergeant, was moonlighting as an Uber driver in Austin when he turned on to a street where demonstrators were marching.

Garrett Foster, one of the protesters, approached the vehicle carrying a rifle. Perry shot him dead.

Perry said he acted in self-defence, but he was convicted by a jury and sentenced to 25 years in prison.

Foster, 28, a former US Air Force mechanic, was openly carrying an AK-47 semi-automatic assault rifle - something that is legal under Texas law - at the time of the confrontation on 25 July 2020. He was white, as is Perry.

Perry, now 37, had no passenger in his taxi and said some of the demonstrators, who had gathered in the wake of the murder of George Floyd in Minneapolis, Minnesota, began banging on his car. The protesters said they feared the vehicle might ram them.

During the trial, Perry's lawyers argued that Foster raised his rifle, a claim that some witnesses disputed. Perry lowered his window and shot Foster five times with a .357 revolver before driving off. He called 911 shortly afterwards.

 

The case became a rallying point for conservatives and Governor Abbott previously said he would pardon Perry as soon as he received an official request. Perry was convicted of murder in April 2023.

In announcing the pardon on Thursday, the Republican governor said that the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles had conducted an "exhaustive review" of the case and Perry's personal history.

"Texas has one of the strongest 'Stand Your Ground' laws of self-defence that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive District Attorney," Governor Abbott said in a statement, referring to Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza, a Democrat.

"Stand your ground" laws generally permit an individual to use force, including deadly, against someone if they believe that person is about to commit murder or other serious crimes.

In a statement Mr Garza said: "The Board and the Governor have put their politics over justice and made a mockery of our legal system. They should be ashamed of themselves."

 

According to court documents, Perry began searching for the locations of Black Lives Matter protests weeks before the shooting and messaged friends on social media, comparing protesters to "a bunch of monkeys flinging [expletive] at a zoo".

In May 2020, shortly after Floyd's death, he sent a text message saying: "I might go to Dallas to shoot looters."

He also sent messages about "hunting Muslims" and about killing a daughter if she had a crush on "a little negro boy".

A jury convicted him because of information provided by 'witnesses' that were part of the MOB attacking his car!

 

Get your head out of your butt and wake up! Someone points a gun at you, you have EVERY right to defend yourself. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, his social media posts and text messages had no more to do with what happened when he defended himself, than George Floyd's past had to do with a cop exceeding his powers. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BarryLaverty said:

Yay! Justified murder of a protester, because it's for a cause not agreed upon by 'conservatives'. Sure, having a gun out should be grounds for being shot, right? 

Aren't you the same guy who got a number of facts wrong (according to court testimony) with regard to the Rittenhouse trial?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DAWG91 said:

There's simply no words to describe the incredible stupidity of this statement.

Although it almost seems like he's OK with The State having the power to silence people he doesn't like. I'm sure he'd LOVE to see Harrison Butker "silenced".

Harrison Butker, a Catholic, was speaking to graduates at a Catholic University, about things that a Catholic might believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

Aren't you the same guy who got a number of facts wrong (according to court testimony) with regard to the Rittenhouse trial?

NOPE, but aren't you the guy who gets told what to think about 'conservative' trials on LEGAL INSURRECTION, you bot? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)
2 hours ago, BarryLaverty said:

NOPE, but aren't you the guy who gets told what to think about 'conservative' trials on LEGAL INSURRECTION, you bot? 

No, because I read and consume news across multiple outlets.

And I find it absolutely hilarious that YOU call ME a bot. It's almost at :rofl:levels.

You're blind to yourself, Barry. You think you're a "free thinker" who's open to other opinions, but your posts on here absolutely say otherwise. Which is why I call you out on it so much. You're a hypocrite, you just won't admit it.  And you constantly dodge or deflect questions you either don't want to or can't answer. Why is that? Again, I'm sure you wouldn't allow that in your classroom, would you? But you won't answer that either, will you?

Edited by Monte1076
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BarryLaverty said:

Yay! Justified murder of a protester, because it's for a cause not agreed upon by 'conservatives'. Sure, having a gun out should be grounds for being shot, right? 

If you point it at me, hell yes!

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, BarryLaverty said:

Yay! Justified murder of a protester, because it's for a cause not agreed upon by 'conservatives'. Sure, having a gun out should be grounds for being shot, right? 

What a buffoon you are…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, gamewatcher63 said:

I’m the most peaceful person you could ever meet…except when you threaten me 

I wasn't really talking about your actions, but your endless stream of constant bitterness and vitriol aimed at every target. You ain't a ray of sunshine, for sure. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Monte1076 said:

We roll our eyes every time you say that. Is that your other fallback?

Spoken like a true bot. Is that your endless response? I turned to ChatGPT for a response to you:

Imagine encountering someone who always has an opinion, even when it's completely irrelevant. They're like a human Wikipedia page on steroids, spewing out facts, anecdotes, and unsolicited advice at every opportunity. They have an insatiable need to prove their intelligence, often interrupting conversations just to assert their superiority on any topic imaginable.

Their demeanor is smug, as if they're the ultimate authority on everything under the sun. They speak with an air of condescension, dismissing others' contributions with a subtle eye roll or a patronizing chuckle. It's as if they're on a mission to prove that they're the smartest person in the room, regardless of whether anyone else cares.

Engaging in conversation with them feels like stepping into a verbal minefield. Every innocent comment you make becomes fodder for their relentless barrage of trivia and opinions. They're quick to correct any perceived mistake, no matter how trivial, and they never miss an opportunity to showcase their encyclopedic knowledge.

What's most frustrating is that they seem completely unaware of how their behavior affects those around them. They're oblivious to the eye rolls, the stifled sighs, and the subtle hints that they've overstayed their welcome. Instead, they plow ahead, oblivious to the social cues that scream, "Enough already!"

Interacting with them is like trying to navigate a maze with no exit. No matter how hard you try to steer the conversation in a different direction, they inevitably find a way to steer it back to their favorite topic: themselves. And so, you find yourself trapped in a never-ending cycle of irritation, longing for the sweet relief of silence.

  • LOL! 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, BarryLaverty said:

I wasn't really talking about your actions, but your endless stream of constant bitterness and vitriol aimed at every target. You ain't a ray of sunshine, for sure. 

Not when leftist/Marxist such as yourself are determined on destroying America…not one thing that Obama’s proxy has done in the last 3 and 1/2 years has been to make America a better nation…change for the sake of change is not a coherent policy strategy…

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Here's a full throated attack on the pardon. It has some thoughts in it that I agree with very much and have said before. 

https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/greg-abbott-daniel-perry-pardon/

Why Did Greg Abbott Pardon a Racist Murderer?

The governor didn’t offer much of a rationale in granting clemency to Daniel Perry, who killed a Black Lives Matter protester in 2020, but apparently the enemy of his enemy is his friend.

 

Christopher Hooks

0

 

Daniel Perry pardon Jay Janner/Austin American-Statesman/AP

Before we get to the substance of what happened on Thursday, when Governor Greg Abbott pardoned Daniel Perry for murder, it’s important to be specific and clear about what happened to Perry on the night of July 25, 2020. The state leaders celebrating the pardon—most prominently Attorney General Ken Paxton—are effectively telling us the specifics of the case are not important. When someone in power tells us that, it’s a good idea to look more closely.

In the summer of 2020, protests against police violence erupted across the United States. Most of these protests were peaceful, and some, like the one I witnessed in Vidor, a former “sundown town,” were downright wholesome. Others, though, turned violent, and rioters destroyed property in cities such as Minneapolis and Los Angeles. For many, it seemed a moment when long-sought reforms were possible; for others, it was a time of fear.

Garrett Foster, a 28-year-old white man and Air Force veteran from a conservative family, who was sympathetic to the protests, carried an AK-47-style rifle to a rally in downtown Austin, as is legal in Texas, with the stated goal of protecting other marchers, including his longtime girlfriend. Daniel Perry, a 30-year-old white man and Army sergeant who was driving for Uber that night, ran a red light and drove his car into a crowd. He was also legally carrying a gun. Foster, sensing a potential threat, approached Perry’s car. Perry, seeing a man with a rifle, also sensed a potential threat.

At this point, both men were fully in compliance with Texas gun laws, which makes those laws seem pretty silly in retrospect. When you have this many armed men running around, what do you expect is going to happen? His defenders claim that Perry fired because Foster pointed his rifle at Perry. He did not, as Perry made clear in his initial interview with police. He told officers that he was the first to point his gun. To police, Perry said, “I believe he was going to aim [his rifle] at me. I didn’t want to give him a chance.” He was not, in other words, claiming the right to self-defense. He was claiming the right to preemptively kill someone he thought might become a threat. 

No witness testified that Foster raised his weapon. A jury of Perry’s peers determined he had not acted in self-defense, and he was sentenced to 25 years in prison for murder in 2023. A day later, Abbott vowed that he would pardon Perry pending a recommendation to do so by the Texas Board of Pardons and Paroles, whose seven members Abbott appointed. At the time, Kyle Rittenhouse, a 17-year-old who killed two at a protest in Wisconsin and was cleared of murder charges after arguing self-defense, was becoming a right-wing celebrity. For Abbott, who is ever trying to bolster his credentials on the right, vowing to pardon Perry was a no-brainer—particularly after TV host Tucker Carlson taunted him for not doing so.

A few days later, the court released records showing that Perry used racist language, compared protesters to “monkeys” in a “zoo,” and had fantasized for weeks about shooting a protester at a Black Lives Matter rally. “I might have to kill a few people on my way to work,” he wrote once. Another time: “I might go to Dallas to shoot looters.” He flirted online with teenagers. He reminisced about the time he shot “an Afghan in the chest with a 50 cal,” adding that “they are not real people.” His other messages reveal a man who was angry, alienated, and conspiratorial. (He wrote that he believed the Black Lives Matter movement wanted his parents to lose their “4 bed room house” by giving it to a poor Black family.) His job as an Uber driver makes it hard not to draw the comparison with Travis Bickle, the character played by Robert De Niro in the 1976 movie Taxi Driver.

Given all the ugliness Perry spewed before committing murder, one might think Abbott would have second thoughts about offering clemency. The governor had until then been extremely reluctant to use his pardon power. While his predecessor, Rick Perry, often offered clemency to dozens of Texans a year, Abbott has been less lenient—granting just two pardons in 2022 and three in 2023—and typically only for nonviolent crimes such as writing hot checks and for convictions more than a decade old. I repeatedly asked Abbott’s aides in 2023 if the awful evidence of Perry’s racist views and homicidal intentions had changed his mind. I received no reply, which seemed like an answer of sorts. Criminal lawyers I interviewed thought the board would decline to recommend a pardon, saving Abbott the trouble.

Instead, on Thursday the agency recommended a full pardon. Abbott granted it less than an hour later, issuing a full restoration of Perry’s rights—which means that not only is Perry free, he gets his guns back. He can join Rittenhouse on the road as a hero to those who will have him. Abbott, a former Texas Supreme Court justice, did not offer a particularly compelling rationale for granting clemency. In a statement, he did not litigate the details of the case or advance a legal theory. He said simply that “Texas has one of the strongest ‘Stand Your Ground’ laws of self-defense that cannot be nullified by a jury or a progressive District Attorney.”

The DA who brought the charges, Travis County’s José Garza, did not render the verdict, of course. Perry had his day in court and lost. Abbott clearly believes, unlike the jury, that Perry had the right to self-defense just because he was fearful upon seeing a man with a rifle in public. But what does the governor think of the rights of Foster, the murder victim? Does self-defense belong only to the man who shoots first? If Foster had gunned down Perry, and he had become a cause célèbre on the left, would Abbott have pardoned him?

That’s doubtful, for the reason Attorney General Ken Paxton laid out in his statement about the case. Paxton ranks as the top law enforcement official in Texas. Most AGs would be a little circumspect about commenting on a high-profile criminal case like this. But not our Ken. Abbott’s pardon was important to deliver, Paxton said, as a kind of psychological balm. Americans had been “praying for justice after BLM riots terrorized the nation in 2020.” You could say that was a non sequitur. What do the protests have to do with Perry’s claim to self-defense? But the two are not unrelated; the link between them goes to the heart of the matter. 

The protests in 2020 didn’t terrorize “the nation,” but they did terrify a significant portion of it. And some of those folks wanted to see blood spilled. Rittenhouse and Perry satisfied a carnal need. What terrified many was not just the sight of Black protesters on the streets and occasional scenes of buildings in flames, but also the possibility that the country was actually engaged in the reckoning over racial justice that protesters on the left—and all Americans horrified by irruptions of police violence—thought was possible. Some portion of the right cried out for the utopians to be disciplined. Perry provided a measure of that discipline.

Abbott rewarded him for it, just as he rewarded Austin police officer Justin Berry. When Berry was indicted in 2022 on charges he had used excessive force on protestors at a BLM rally in 2020, Abbott responded by endorsing his bid for the state House and then, when he lost, appointing him to the state commission that sets standards for law enforcement. (The charges against Berry were later dropped by Garza, who requested the Department of Justice investigate the police department’s practices at large.) 

You see this desire for punishment again and again across the decades. When the idealist students at Kent State, peacefully protesting the Vietnam War, were disciplined by a unit of the Ohio National Guard, which killed four and wounded nine protestors in 1970, many Americans cheered. The Houston Post wrote in an editorial that the shooting of students was possibly the result of “permissiveness in child-rearing,” which had led the young to think they could challenge the old order. “At the very least,” the paper wrote, “it would appear that they have not yet learned the necessity of submitting to discipline.” 

In September 2020, a friend wrote a column for Foreign Policy putting the events of the preceding summer in the context of an ugly period of Italy’s recent history: the so-called Years of Lead, the heightened political violence in Italy from the 1960s to the 1980s. In those decades, left-wing groups challenged the established order, some peacefully and some violently. To quell them, the government drew from the Mussolini playbook and allowed independent criminals, gangs, and secret societies to break knees, rather than deploying men in uniform. 

Some political scientists describe this strategy as “state crime,” violence tacitly permitted or encouraged by the government. It can be helpful to a state to push back members of certain communities and signal that their lives are not deserving of protection. Some examples of state crime we’ve seen recently include the crackdown at UCLA, when police stood by while counterprotesters beat and assaulted anti-war protestors, and the January 6 riot, when the president encouraged a mob to march to the U.S. Capitol.

Texas is not a military dictatorship, and Abbott did not send Perry to attack Black Lives Matter protesters. We are not yet in the Years of Lead. But the unjustified pardon of Perry is a form of state crime, and it’s ugly. What’s next? The news of the pardon came soon after Abbott deployed state police, heavily armed, to crack down on another peaceful protest movement that is unpopular among his supporters: the rally at the University of Texas in Austin against Israel’s conduct during its war against Hamas in Gaza. What strange forces are waiting in the wings that have taken the wrong lesson from what Abbott did this week? What will Abbott do—or fail to do—when they act?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...