Shannon Brandt, ring any bells?

[another 505 sailor]

Brandt ran Ellington down and killed him because he believed he was a Republican. That was his stated motivation.
Ellington's political affiliation is beside the point and the lack of corroboration for Brandt's stated motivation is irrelevant.

The mother said god told her to drown her children. Do we believe her?

 

[Bus Driver]

Brandt ran Ellington down and killed him because he believed he was a Republican. That was his stated motivation.
Ellington's political affiliation is beside the point and the lack of corroboration for Brandt's stated motivation is irrelevant.

I asked you for evidence to support his claim (and your insistence he killed Mr. Ellingson "because he was a Republican").

So far, you have offered no evidence to support his claim.

Kinda like the defeated ex-President is unable to offer any evidence to back his claim of a stolen election.

You are as bad as that guy.

 

[Grrr...]

Why is anyone even arguing exactly why a lunatic did a crazy thing?

 

[Olsonist]

@Dog 2.0 really likes this drunk murderer with the DUI prior. Why is that?

 

[Mike in Seattle]

Based on the fact there exists no evidence to support his claim, I'd say he lied in an attempt to justify killing someone.

Agreement


, if he had only called Ellington a " faggoty commie leftista"

,, then there would be reason for outrage.

 

[Dog 2.0]

I asked you for evidence to support his claim (and your insistence he killed Mr. Ellingson "because he was a Republican").

So far, you have offered no evidence to support his claim.

Kinda like the defeated ex-President is unable to offer any evidence to back his claim of a stolen election.

You are as bad as that guy.

Why do we need more evidence than the perp's admission and the dead kid?

 

[Raz'r]

Brandt ran Ellington down and killed him because he believed he was a Republican. That was his stated motivation.
Ellington's political affiliation is beside the point and the lack of corroboration for Brandt's stated motivation is irrelevant.

So, SYG defense?

 

[Olsonist]

Why do we need more evidence than the perp's admission and the dead kid?

cuz your boy the drunk murderer with the DUI prior was drunk at the time.
And then it turns out there is no more evidence.

Can we help you with anything else?

 

[Raz'r]

Agreement


, if he had only called Ellington a " faggoty commie leftista"

,, then there would be reason for outrage.

Drink kills someone’s, tried to justify it in the strangest way possible. You guys are gullible.

 

[Dog 2.0]

Drink kills someone’s, tried to justify it in the strangest way possible. You guys are gullible.

What evidence do you have to support your theory?

 

[Steam Flyer]

What evidence do you have to support your theory?

Dog2 has learnt a new sentence!

 

[Bus Driver]

Why do we need more evidence than the perp's admission and the dead kid?

It seems like a reasonable assumption he is trying to excuse the killing of Mr. Ellingson though a SYG defense.

You appear to see that as a reasonable assumption. South Park did a good job illustrating the absurdity of your position.

 

[Raz'r]

What evidence do you have to support your theory?

What Bus said. Why would you give a killer a free pass?

 

[Dog 2.0]

It seems like a reasonable assumption he is trying to excuse the killing of Mr. Ellingson though a SYG defense.

You appear to see that as a reasonable assumption. South Park did a good job illustrating the absurdity of your position.

Are you really now down to offering seemingly reasonable assumptions? What evidence do you have that makes your assumption seem reasonable?

 

[Bus Driver]

Are you really now down to offering seemingly reasonable assumptions? What evidence do you have that makes your assumption seem reasonable?

Like you are capable of grasping a reasonable assumption.

Mr. Brandt killed another human being. He is doing what he can to excuse that killing.

You are on board with it, because you thought the dead guy was killed "because he was a Republican".

 

[Dog 2.0]

Like you are capable of grasping a reasonable assumption.

Mr. Brandt killed another human being. He is doing what he can to excuse that killing.

You are on board with it, because you thought the dead guy was killed "because he was a Republican".

Or the perp thought he was a Republican. That is what the actual evidence indicates.
Seemingly reasonable convenient assumptions don't enter into it.

 

[Deleted member 149385]

Or the perp thought he was a Republican. That is what the actual evidence indicates.
Seemingly reasonable convenient assumptions don't enter into it.

His motive is questionable for doing that. But he’s trying - I’ll give him that.

 

[Olsonist]

Yeah, the drunk perp with the DUI prior said something no one else agrees with.

 

[Bus Driver]

Or the perp thought he was a Republican. That is what the actual evidence indicates.
Seemingly reasonable convenient assumptions don't enter into it.

We have a self-serving statement from a guy who killed someone.

What we don't have is any evidence to corroborate that statement.

But, you be you and try to make it a political act, just like Mr. Brandt.

I look forward to Mr. Brandt's trial. I am sure he will be able to provide evidence to corroborate his claim. By then, you will have vanished from this thread and be off into other bullshit arguments.

 

[Dog 2.0]

Yeah, the drunk perp with the DUI prior said something no one else agrees with disagrees with.