Posted on Apr 17, 2023
Army sergeant convicted of murder made racist remarks, violent threats
850
53
16
9
9
0
Update to story about military veteran and convicted murderer, Daniel Perry...
Texas state governor Greg Abbott wants to pardon him over the lethal shooting of a BLM protestor. Perry's social media record includes memes of violence with racist connotation along with comments over wanting to hurt Muslims in Europe.
Texas state governor Greg Abbott wants to pardon him over the lethal shooting of a BLM protestor. Perry's social media record includes memes of violence with racist connotation along with comments over wanting to hurt Muslims in Europe.
Army sergeant convicted of murder made racist remarks, violent threats
Posted from armytimes.com
Murder
Threat
Racism
Social Media
Posted 1 y ago
Responses: 6
5
5
0
The guy killed was white. The guy killed had a rifle at ready position and got shot. FAFO If racist remarks are such a big deal why is it OK for the Tennessee three?
(5)
(0)
LTC Eugene Chu
1. Eyewitnesses at the trial contradicted Perry's account about weapon position.
2. Perry's interview with police said he was worried that Foster was going to aim his weapon, not actually being aimed at him.
3. Foster's weapon had the safety on with no round in chamber.
4. What specific racist comments did the Tennessee three make?
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/daniel-perry-guilty-verdict-murder-blm-protester-garrett-foster [login to see] /
2. Perry's interview with police said he was worried that Foster was going to aim his weapon, not actually being aimed at him.
3. Foster's weapon had the safety on with no round in chamber.
4. What specific racist comments did the Tennessee three make?
https://www.rollingstone.com/culture/culture-news/daniel-perry-guilty-verdict-murder-blm-protester-garrett-foster [login to see] /
U.S. Army Sgt. Guilty in Murder of BLM Protester
In July 2020, Daniel Perry drove his car into a crowd protesting police brutality and shot Garrett Foster multiple times through his driver’s side window
(2)
(0)
LTC David Brown
LTC Eugene Chu - Kumar, an immigrant from India was told, once to his face and once on the floor of the Tennessee legislature that he is the brown face of white racism. Kumar has been in America 50 years and that is the first racial insult he has received. Foster had the weapon shouldered and elevated when he was shot. What was he doing with a weapon in a riot? People block streets and attack people. Even one of the Tennessee three attacked a motorist.
(3)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
1) The witnesses at the trial were part of the BLM mob, of course they are going to contradict the position of a weapon.
2) As for the actual pointed position of a firearm, it doesn't matter if the barrel is pointed directly at you, is moving, or pointed six inches in any direction away from you. It is a threat. It takes less than a second, faster than it takes to react to move the barrel and squeeze the trigger.
3) As someone in the military, you should know that there is no way for him to know if there was a round in the chamber or if the safety was on (when the firearm is pointed at him). At that point, he either takes the risk of being shot (and killed) in that split second or that someone pointing a gun at you won't shoot. That is an individual choice and there are a lot of dead police officers who made the wrong decision.
4) While I don't condone any type of racist language, I worked decades in primarily black and Hispanic areas. I heard a lot of truly racist comments and saw racist actions including robberies where the suspects targeted victims based on their race. I seldom saw the suspects get an enhanced charge never heard the news call them racist or describe the action as racist if the suspects weren't white.
5) The suspect and victim were both white in this case meaning race wasn't a factor. It seems people here BLM and automatically make an assumption.
Here is a less than lethal way to test the above. You and a friend have pellet guns. You don't tell each other if they are loaded or not. One hides and the other doesn't. If you see the person jump out at you, and you shoot and they don't have a pellet loaded, they get to shoot you 10 times. If you don't shoot and they shoot you, they get to shoot you 10 more times.
Before long, you should recognize there is no way to win this game.
2) As for the actual pointed position of a firearm, it doesn't matter if the barrel is pointed directly at you, is moving, or pointed six inches in any direction away from you. It is a threat. It takes less than a second, faster than it takes to react to move the barrel and squeeze the trigger.
3) As someone in the military, you should know that there is no way for him to know if there was a round in the chamber or if the safety was on (when the firearm is pointed at him). At that point, he either takes the risk of being shot (and killed) in that split second or that someone pointing a gun at you won't shoot. That is an individual choice and there are a lot of dead police officers who made the wrong decision.
4) While I don't condone any type of racist language, I worked decades in primarily black and Hispanic areas. I heard a lot of truly racist comments and saw racist actions including robberies where the suspects targeted victims based on their race. I seldom saw the suspects get an enhanced charge never heard the news call them racist or describe the action as racist if the suspects weren't white.
5) The suspect and victim were both white in this case meaning race wasn't a factor. It seems people here BLM and automatically make an assumption.
Here is a less than lethal way to test the above. You and a friend have pellet guns. You don't tell each other if they are loaded or not. One hides and the other doesn't. If you see the person jump out at you, and you shoot and they don't have a pellet loaded, they get to shoot you 10 times. If you don't shoot and they shoot you, they get to shoot you 10 more times.
Before long, you should recognize there is no way to win this game.
(4)
(0)
Maj John Bell
LTC Eugene Chu You are sitting in your vehicle. All around you about 20 people, some of whom are kicking and slapping your vehicle. A man stands next to your vehicle. He is armed with a semi-automatic rifle. Is that weapon on safe? Is there in a round in the chamber? You have fractions of a second to make a decision, "shoot - don't shoot." Guess wrong and you face death or grievous bodily harm. How can you possibly know the weapon is on "safe?" How can you possibly know that there is no round in the chamber? What odds would you give on your powers of observation if the wager on your side was your life if you guess wrong? Those two points are absolutely irrelevant to a "reasonable belief" defense.
The ONLY relevant question is was there something about the way either man was holding his firearm that led the other to believe that deadly force was justified. Foster, the victim could have just as easily raised his rifle because he perceived that Perry was intent on the use of deadly force either with his vehicle or his sidearm. Foster guesses wrong, the wager is his life or the lives of those around him. Both Foster and Perry could be correct in their assumptions and the quickest on the trigger comes out alive.
We do not know what the deciding factor in Governor Abbot's decision will be. It is not a requirement that a person have no warts to receive a pardon. The plain and simple is that innocence is not a pre-requisite for a pardon. All that is required is that the governor do what he thinks best.
The ONLY relevant question is was there something about the way either man was holding his firearm that led the other to believe that deadly force was justified. Foster, the victim could have just as easily raised his rifle because he perceived that Perry was intent on the use of deadly force either with his vehicle or his sidearm. Foster guesses wrong, the wager is his life or the lives of those around him. Both Foster and Perry could be correct in their assumptions and the quickest on the trigger comes out alive.
We do not know what the deciding factor in Governor Abbot's decision will be. It is not a requirement that a person have no warts to receive a pardon. The plain and simple is that innocence is not a pre-requisite for a pardon. All that is required is that the governor do what he thinks best.
(3)
(0)
4
4
0
I haven't been following this aside from the snippets I read now and then, but I followed the link and looked at the DA's court filings* being referenced - it's 259 text messages from his phone (75 pages of them) cited by the DA to reinforce their charges (side note: I did see references to page numbers in the 1740s ... don't know if that's a lot or not).
A lot of it reads like he is a racist right-wing extremist Vet with PTSD acting out violent fantasies from video games. They certainly do paint a damning picture of Mr. Perry, however that is what I would expect the prosecutions evidence to do. Keep in mind that this is one side of the picture with context that puts the prosecutor's case in the best light. There is nothing to balance out the portrait that the prosecution painted of him.
However, everyone needs to keep in mind - this man was found guilty at trial by a jury that DID see both sides of the portrait. Could the jury have been biased? Sure it could. Does that mean it was? No, only that it might have been (and it also means that the Jury was not biased).
However flawed the legal system is, I have to believe in it because just like Democracy, it is the worst form of a legal system, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
Was this a case of "Stand your ground" or was this as case of murder? The jury was shown both sides and rendered a unanimous verdict that it was the later. Do juries get it wrong? Absolutely they do, but not often. Is this one of those cases? Time will tell.
----------------------------------------------
* https://www.scribd.com/document/638145231/Court-filing-in-Daniel-Perry-case?irclickid=z1bxbs0c5xyNTT%3AwYtzsxVdLUkAT-V3WUz3kVA0&irpid=10078&utm_source=impact&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=affiliate_pdm_acquisition_Skimbit%20Ltd.&sharedid=houstonchronicle.com&irgwc=1#
A lot of it reads like he is a racist right-wing extremist Vet with PTSD acting out violent fantasies from video games. They certainly do paint a damning picture of Mr. Perry, however that is what I would expect the prosecutions evidence to do. Keep in mind that this is one side of the picture with context that puts the prosecutor's case in the best light. There is nothing to balance out the portrait that the prosecution painted of him.
However, everyone needs to keep in mind - this man was found guilty at trial by a jury that DID see both sides of the portrait. Could the jury have been biased? Sure it could. Does that mean it was? No, only that it might have been (and it also means that the Jury was not biased).
However flawed the legal system is, I have to believe in it because just like Democracy, it is the worst form of a legal system, except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.
Was this a case of "Stand your ground" or was this as case of murder? The jury was shown both sides and rendered a unanimous verdict that it was the later. Do juries get it wrong? Absolutely they do, but not often. Is this one of those cases? Time will tell.
----------------------------------------------
* https://www.scribd.com/document/638145231/Court-filing-in-Daniel-Perry-case?irclickid=z1bxbs0c5xyNTT%3AwYtzsxVdLUkAT-V3WUz3kVA0&irpid=10078&utm_source=impact&utm_medium=cpc&utm_campaign=affiliate_pdm_acquisition_Skimbit%20Ltd.&sharedid=houstonchronicle.com&irgwc=1#
Court filing in Daniel Perry case | PDF | Facebook | World Wide Web
A court filing from the Travis County District Attorney's Office of Daniel Perry's internet history that was filed during his murder trial.
(3)
(0)
COL Randall C.
PV2 Larry Sellnow - Regarding your comment that Mr. Perry "ran his vehicle into the crowd" (I deleted your first response as it is was a bit too far over the edge regarding vulgarity and personal attacks), that is an opinion and not a finding from the jury.
From what I read, the DA tried charged him with that crime, but based on the testimony and evidence given in the trial, the Jury did not find that credible and found him not guilty of that. I even searched for reports that others were injured by his vehicle striking them and couldn't.
Again, I don't know what evidence was presented in the trial and it's very possible that his vehicle made contact with, but did not injury anyone (hypothetical) but whatever picture was painted for the Jury by the prosecution and defense, that picture did not support the charge.
From what I read, the DA tried charged him with that crime, but based on the testimony and evidence given in the trial, the Jury did not find that credible and found him not guilty of that. I even searched for reports that others were injured by his vehicle striking them and couldn't.
Again, I don't know what evidence was presented in the trial and it's very possible that his vehicle made contact with, but did not injury anyone (hypothetical) but whatever picture was painted for the Jury by the prosecution and defense, that picture did not support the charge.
(3)
(0)
MSG (Join to see)
COL Randall C. -
At the time this occurred, the news article I read said the crowd surrounded his vehicle, not that he drove into them.
I attached the YouTube video. While I can't tell which vehicle it is, the crowd seems to start to run toward a vehicle before shots were heard.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=austin+texas+man+shoots+blm+with+ak-47&docid= [login to see] 48956080&mid=258992A069F26C [login to see] 92A069F26C783328&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
I attached links to articles that occurred in other places around that same time where BLM rioters attacked drivers or shot them. In a court of law, the defense would normally introduce this to show the state of mind why someone takes the action that they do.
https://hbg100.com/2020/06/02/white-female-torn-from-vehicle-stomped-in-street-by-blm-during-riot-in-york-pennsylvania/#:~:text=The%20march%20took%20a%20violent%20turn%20when%20a,on%20the%20vehicle%20and%20shattering%20the%20rear%20window.
https://news.yahoo.com/driver-pulled-truck-beaten-black-144628849.html
https://www.westernjournal.com/blm-rioter-shoots-suv-driver-tries-escape-angry-mob-surrounding-vehicle/
At the time this occurred, the news article I read said the crowd surrounded his vehicle, not that he drove into them.
I attached the YouTube video. While I can't tell which vehicle it is, the crowd seems to start to run toward a vehicle before shots were heard.
https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=austin+texas+man+shoots+blm+with+ak-47&docid= [login to see] 48956080&mid=258992A069F26C [login to see] 92A069F26C783328&view=detail&FORM=VIRE
I attached links to articles that occurred in other places around that same time where BLM rioters attacked drivers or shot them. In a court of law, the defense would normally introduce this to show the state of mind why someone takes the action that they do.
https://hbg100.com/2020/06/02/white-female-torn-from-vehicle-stomped-in-street-by-blm-during-riot-in-york-pennsylvania/#:~:text=The%20march%20took%20a%20violent%20turn%20when%20a,on%20the%20vehicle%20and%20shattering%20the%20rear%20window.
https://news.yahoo.com/driver-pulled-truck-beaten-black-144628849.html
https://www.westernjournal.com/blm-rioter-shoots-suv-driver-tries-escape-angry-mob-surrounding-vehicle/
(3)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google