In my eyes, Foster's previous interactions with the police raise doubt. He was clearly attempting to be threatening and intimidating on previous occasions to car drivers.
Not so 'clearly':
[Foster] 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.
https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/greg-abbott-daniel-perry-pardon/
Walking around with an AK47 standing in front of cars whilst other "protestors" attack those vehicles. I'm starting to see why there is reasonable doubt here.
I find it interesting that Off. Cleveland only testified to seeing "other officers" talk to Foster on previous occasions and admitted he'd never spoken to Foster himself, yet none of these officers was identified much less called to give testimony. What we have is Cleveland's opinion that Foster was "visibly and verbally not receptive".
Foster was not standing in front of Perry's car; he walked up to the driver's side window.
Another witness, Jeremy Lett, who was Foster's roommate, also testified Wednesday that he saw Foster walk toward Perry's car holding his rifle almost parallel to the ground with the barrel slightly down. He said Foster stopped about 10 feet from Perry's car.
Lett said he was standing behind Perry's car and saw the driver's door open slightly. Foster said to Perry, "Hey, get back in the car," Lett said.
Foster's rifle was across his chest, and he wasn't holding the gun but was gesturing upward with his hands in an open position to indicate he wanted Perry to leave, Lett said. Lett said he looked away briefly to watch someone else writing down the license plate number of Perry's car when he heard gunshots.
Foster's girlfriend testified that she heard Foster say, "Move on" to Perry.
https://www.statesman.com/story/new...-witnesses-say-didnt-raise-rifle/70060062007/
That doesn't sound to me like someone who was "clearly attempting to be threatening and intimidating" but rather someone who was trying to de-escalate a dangerous situation.
The "deliberately created" is the bit I have an issue with. He is/was an uber driver, at the time in question he had a passenger, correct?
No, there was no passenger in Perry's car.
He talked about shooting people who had hypothetically attacked him. During that conversation he even says you can't just start shooting people. I'd say during a heated possibly violent incident, a man appearing carrying an Ak-47 would cause someone to think their life was in danger.
The evidence showed that Perry discussed he could get away with killing protesters
legally if he claimed self-defense:
"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 Messen*ger 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 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."
https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2023-04-07/might-have-to-kill-a-few-people/
I don't think the Governor should have pardoned him, I think he should have let the appeals process run its due course. I do think, from what has been presented, there should have been enough doubt not to convict.
Only if you disregard what Perry wrote in his exchanges with others and what he said himself. He first claimed to police Foster had pointed his gun at him, but several witnesses say Foster did not.
Body-camera video played the next day shows Perry, after being taken into custody, telling officers Foster had pointed his gun at him. "I didn't know he was going to aim it at me," Perry says. "I thought he was going to kill me ... I've never been so scared in my life."
https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2023-04-07/might-have-to-kill-a-few-people/
I believe the previous incidents with Foster were not made aware to the Jury.
Yes, they were as I previously quoted and cited Cleveland's testimony in court.
My opinion on this case is that Foster and others were openly looking for a confrontation. I doubt even in the USA it is common for people to wander around openly carrying an AK-47 for no reason."
The evidence shows that Foster was trying to AVOID a confrontation and to de-escalate the situation when he told Perry to "get back in the car" and to "move on". He didn't go up to Perry's car window and start threatening him or screaming at him.
As for carrying around an AK-47, Foster had a reason as I've already posted. |(And before I'm accused on thinking that's just jim dandy as long as it's a "liberal" as someone previously claimed, let me point out that Foster was a conservative there to 'protect' people and that I think AK-47s should be illegal for
any civilian to carry or even own.)
I don't believe Perry ended up where he did because he was looking for it. I haven't seen anything that says Perry had any violence on his record, his comments come off to me as someone with some pretty nasty views spouting off to someone he knew.
I disagree. I think Perry deliberately put himself in the situation looking for trouble as supported by his own words then lying to the police about Foster aiming his gun at him. He also had a choice to go out that night when he wrote that there were "looters and rioters outside around his building" and he could have kept his window closed and driven off slowly instead of rolling down his window and murdering Foster.
Perry had no criminal record, but his own writings show he fantasized about killing people.
“I might go to Dallas to shoot looters.”
“I wonder if they will let my
cut the ears off of people who’s decided to commit suicide by me.”
“To bad we can’t get paid for hunting Muslims in Europe.”
I've seen reports saying Perry drove at the crowd, others say there is evidence that that didn't happen.
I've seen no evidence "that didn't happen".
There was at least one witness who originally told police he saw Foster point his weapon at Perry, this one witness changed his testimony at the trial and said he didn't know if he raised it. I think it would be very easy for anyone in that situation to misjudge where the AK was actually pointing. Eye witness testimony is weak. Why would these witnesses even be looking at Foster? Surely their eyes would be on the car that allegedly is driving at them?
I agree that eye-witness testimony can be weak...but not when several eyewitnesses all say Foster did not point his gun at Perry.
Why would they be looking at Foster? Because the car wasn't driving AT THEM when Foster went up to Perry's STOPPED car to tell him to move on. That is exactly where people would be looking.
In my eyes there is enough here for the situation not to be clear cut.
The jury (and I) think there was. This is a political move by Abbott to appease his right-wing supporters as is clear by his move to get the Pardons and Paroles Board (all of whom Abbott appointed) to approve his pardon request less than 24 hours after the verdict.
Conservatives have attacked the prosecutor who brought the case, Travis County District Attorney Jose Garza, a Democrat.
Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton told Fox News that Mr Garza "maliciously prosecutes people that he doesn't like for political purposes".
