Travesty of Justice: Ian Cranston Found Guilty of Manslaughter for Shooting Assailant in Self-DefenseChris Menahan
Nov. 17, 2022
Israel Introduces Bill to Outlaw Teaching The Gospel of Jesus Christ, Sentence Violators to Prison
Fox News Host: "I Love A Good Drag Show"
WashPost: Experienced Ukrainian Soldiers 'Are All Already Dead or Wounded'
Israeli Firms Transferred $1 Billion Out of Silicon Valley Bank to Israel Before Seizure by Feds
Trump Says 'Corrupt And Highly Political' Manhattan D.A. is Going to Have Him Arrested Next Week
Ian Cranston was found guilty of first-degree manslaughter on Wednesday for shooting a black assailant in self-defense in a case that never should have even gone to court.
From Oregon Public Broadcasting, "Jury convicts Ian Cranston of manslaughter in Bend nightclub shooting":
A Deschutes County jury Wednesday found Ian Cranston guilty of first-degree manslaughter, more than a year after he shot and killed Barry Washington, Jr., an unarmed Black man, outside a bar in downtown Bend.
The conviction came after a two-week trial, in which attorneys pored over video of the shooting. With much of the incident captured on video, the case hinged on whether jurors thought Cranston acted in self-defense and feared for his safety at the time.Cranston never would have been charged if he was black or if the man he shot was white.
Far-left Deschutes County District Attorney John Hummel lied about what took place in order to charge him.
The jury was apparently convinced that they had to charge Cranston with something (he's guilty after all because he's white and Washington was black so there must have been some vague undercurrent of racism) so they hit him with lesser charges of manslaughter.
State prosecutors argued he was guilty of murder because he took a drag from his cigarette after shooting Washington, which they said was like a scene from a Clint Eastwood movie:
Attorneys on both sides said Cranston and Washington got into an argument in September 2021 after Washington flirted with Cranston's fiancée, which eventually led to punches being thrown. The interpretations of what led to those punches and the events that followed have divided the two sides throughout the trial.I guess Cranston's attorneys needed to counter this nonsense by citing a line about self-defense from Harry Potter?
Prosecutors also asked Cranston about his history owning firearms, and why he chose to bring a concealed weapon to a bar that night when he would be drinking. The defense has noted Oregon law doesn't forbid drinking while carrying a firearm.They tried this same line of bullshit in the Kyle Rittenhouse case -- i.e. you must be guilty because you chose to carry a gun in self-defense -- but he got a smarter and less biased jury that saw right through it.
Cranston's defense team, led by attorney Kevin Sali, insisted he acted in self defense that night, particularly focusing on alleged injuries Cranston received after Washington punched him twice in the head. Sali said Cranston had no way of knowing how severe another punch could've been.
Sali also repeatedly referred to the size difference between Washington and Cranston, pointing out that his client weighs less and was much shorter than Washington. Prosecutors mentioned at various points that Cranston lost 60 pounds between the shooting and the start of the trial, and was much closer to Washington's weight at the time of the killing.The video is clear as day. You can see Washington was on the attack when Cranston shot him.
If the races were reversed, Cranston never would have even been charged.
The reverse did happen last year when Devon Dontray Dunham was found not guilty of murder in the shooting death of unarmed former volunteer fire chief Ernest Martin Stevens, 77, despite his confession and 19 witnesses taking the stand against him.
According to Dunham's lawyer, an armed Dunham "wanted a ride" from Stevens and approached him while he was sitting in his Ford F-150 in a parking lot "but felt threatened" by him and saw him "reach for something" so he decided to unload all 8 rounds of his 9 mm handgun into Stevens' truck before running away.
Dunham struck Stevens with four bullets that hit his jaw, left arm, back and chest and fatally injured his heart and lung.
Stevens was unarmed.
Dunham initially lied to police and "denied knowing anything about the shooting" and "said he wasn't in the city at the time" before confessing and claiming he "wasn't trying to hurt him" when he unloaded into his car.
Nonetheless, Dunham was acquitted because his lawyer made vague insinuations that racism may have been at play. Even though said insinuations were swiftly shut down by the judge, at least one member of the jury appears to have decided that was all they needed to hear and found him not guilty after less than 2 hours of deliberations.
"In South Carolina law, murder is 'the killing of any person with malice aforethought, either express or implied,'" The Island Packet reported. "The prosecutors have to prove the charge 'beyond a reasonable doubt' and all 12 jurors must agree on whether the verdict is guilty or not guilty."
In Olde America, your guilt was determined by your own actions and the evidence presented in court. In the New America™, your guilt is determined by your skin color and your ancestors.
Follow InformationLiberation on Twitter, Facebook, Gab, Minds and Telegram.