| Submit your comments on this article |
| Home Front: WoT |
| Arizona suspect pleads not guilty |
| 2011-01-26 |
| The Arizona shooting suspect Jared Lee Loughner has pleaded not guilty "Wudn't me." to charges he tried to kill Democratic Representative Gabrielle Giffords and two of her aides. The plea on monday by Loughner marked his second court appearance since he allegedly shot the congresswoman and 18 others at Gifford's meet-and-greet event on January 8 outside a grocery store in Tucson. Six people died, including US District Judge John Roll and a 9-year-old girl. Thirteen others were maimed. Loughner, 22, faces federal charges of trying to assassinate Giffords and attempting to murder two of her aides. He will later face state charges dealing with other victims. Investigators have said Loughner was mentally disturbed and acting increasingly erratic in the weeks leading up to the shooting. If his attorney uses mental competency questions as a defence and is successful, Loughner could be sent to a mental health facility instead of being sentenced to prison or death. US District Judge Larry Burns of San Diego asked Loughner attorney Judy Clarke whether there was any question about her client's ability to understand the case against him. "We are not raising any issues at this time," Clarke said. Prosecutor Wallace Kleindienst estimated that he would know within the next 30 days whether additional federal charges would be filed against Loughner. Kleindienst said prosecutors provided defence lawyers with records taken from Loughner's computer and documents of about 250 interviews made in the case. The judge did not rule on prosecutors' request to move the federal case back to Tucson so that victims and witnesses do not have to make the four-hour round trip drive to Phoenix to attend court hearings. Clarke said she did not oppose the request, but questioned where Loughner would be jugged in Tucson if the case were moved. |
| Posted by:Fred |
| #7 Seems a bit absurd in this case, but innocent until guilty is nice to honor. Now he could be found not-guilty and then we could go, well he shot those people, got it right here on camera, but was let go because of sheriff dipstick leaked the film and laffytaffy couldn't get a fair trial. |
| Posted by: swksvolFF 2011-01-26 22:42 |
| #6 Yah, we all hallucinated the atrocity. Says so in the DSM IV |
| Posted by: Jack Angurong1317 2011-01-26 21:39 |
| #5 NPR is allegedly a news station. |
| Posted by: JohnQC 2011-01-26 14:22 |
| #4 It's newspeak. They say that to protect themselves from a libel suit in the event a defendant is exonerated. |
| Posted by: Steve White 2011-01-26 09:07 |
| #3 Could've been a micro-meteorite. There are lots of observatories on Kitt Peak near Tucson. BTW, that triangular one in the back is a solar telescope, which is no mean feat. |
| Posted by: Anonymoose 2011-01-26 09:06 |
| #2 I hear that word allegedly a lot. NPR reported that Giffords was allegedly shot in the head. |
| Posted by: Deacon Blues 2011-01-26 07:34 |
| #1 I understand innocent until proven guilty, but "allegedly shot"? I'm pretty sure he shot the folks, the question is was he legally insane at that time. Or allegedly disturbed, perhaps? |
| Posted by: Bobby 2011-01-26 06:20 |