Comments by "Old Guy Gaming Network" (@CRAZYHORSE19682003) on "Law&Crime Network" channel.

  1. Here are some FACTS about this case. An appeals court ruled that the confession as well as more than 20 phone calls from prison were inadmissible as evidence in his third trial. So in order to get an innocent verdict they had to exclude almost all the evidence. The recordings from prison showed not only Villegas admitting to the crime, but also a conspiracy to tamper with witnesses expected to testify in the third trial. So trying to tamper with witnesses who were scheduled to testify at your trial is not something an innocent man does. Admitting to friends that you killed those two kids....something an innocent man doesn't do. Villegas knew and wanted Mimbela to “bribe” witnesses in order to obtain favorable testimony. Mimbela offered one witness a $50,000 “reward” and offered a job to another witness. He also allegedly took witnesses to a Dallas Cowboys game and a boxing match in Los Angeles. So all of you who think this was a good thing....congrats you are happy a man got away with murdering TWO people and is back on the streets.
    13
  2.  @pascalenator  I am not invested in the case at all, I came across the video while surfing Youtube. Like all things that interest me I spent an hour or so researching the background and of the case. Why it was controversial, and the particulars behind the case. The only reason he was found innocent is because a judge refused to allow almost all the evidence against him in court. Yes police are going to come at you hard in the interview room, that is their job. Yes the D.A. is going to look to charge someone, that is their job. What irritated me about the comments in this thread was people IGNORING all the facts of the case and automatically assuming it was some sort of racial bias or corrupt policing that landed Mr. Villegas in jail, not the fact that he CONFESSED to the killings. Not because in recorded phone calls from prison he admitted to killing those two men to friends and family members. Not because he worked with friends on the outside to tamper with witnesses who would be testifying in his trial.
    7
  3.  @pascalenator  And here we have our first racist commenting. Why did you have to inject race into the discussion? Race has nothing to do with it, my brother. NOBODY is going to admit to murdering two people to the police if they didn't do it....NOBODY. Nobody is going to admit to their friends that they killed two people if they didn't do it. Nobody is going to try and tamper with witnesses before their trial if they didn't do it. Since you brought race into the issue, what is your evidence of racial bias and corruption that led to Mr. Villegas conviction?
    5
  4. How about this, if you didn't murder two people DON'T CONFESS TO MURDERING THEM TO THE COPS!!!! You act like his life was taken away for no reason....put your self in the investigating officers shoes. You have two dead bodies and a suspect in custody that admits to killing them. What do you do?
    2
  5.  @BloodySoup74  Here are some FACTS about this case. An appeals court ruled that the confession as well as more than 20 phone calls from prison were inadmissible as evidence in his third trial. So in order to get an innocent verdict they had to exclude almost all the evidence. The recordings from prison showed not only Villegas admitting to the crime, but also a conspiracy to tamper with witnesses expected to testify in the third trial. So trying to tamper with witnesses who were scheduled to testify at your trial is not something an innocent man does. Admitting to friends that you killed those two kids....something an innocent man doesn't do. Villegas knew and wanted Mimbela to “bribe” witnesses in order to obtain favorable testimony. Mimbela offered one witness a $50,000 “reward” and offered a job to another witness. He also allegedly took witnesses to a Dallas Cowboys game and a boxing match in Los Angeles. So all of you who think this was a good thing....congrats you are happy a man got away with murdering TWO people and is back on the streets.
    2
  6. They were on the phone with the police when he was at the door!
    1
  7. LOL I can tell you have probably never fired a gun. I have seen people shot six and seven times and still be fully functional.
    1
  8. That is pure speculation on your part.
    1
  9. As soon as I read the title of the video I knew who the shooter was going to be.
    1
  10. Why do you think that?
    1
  11. Just call it a retro active abortion and let them go.
    1
  12.  @katyfolk3433  Yeah shooting away from him would have worked.....the father warned him he had a gun. It is funny how in England law abiding citizens can't have guns but the criminals have them.
    1
  13.  @TheTruthiest  I wish I could see what other evidence the police had. Was there any forensic evidence linking him to the two murders or was the case purely built on the confession.
    1
  14. Can we STOP using the phrase OnlyFans model use the more accurate NetWhore moniker.
    1
  15.  @RPhTom  Nothing is perfect so a 98% success rate is outstanding. I would like to know what evidence they had on him besides the confession.
    1
  16. If I was the benevolent supreme dictator for life I would decriminalize possession of small amounts and the usage of ALL drugs. Addiction should not be considered a crime. What I would do though is make DEALING illegal narcotics punishable by the death penalty.
    1
  17. If I were him I would sleep like a baby that night knowing he was taking the room temperature challenge at the morgue.
    1
  18. NOBODY is going to confess to a crime they didn't commit, especially one as serious as murder. DO you really expect me to believe that he admitted to killing TWO PEOPLE because a police officer was hard on him in an interrogation room?
    1
  19. I have not, do you recommend it?
    1
  20. Show your statistics to back up your claim or stfu.
    1
  21. The only people who say that are those IGNORANT of firearms. There is no such thing as shooting to disarm. If you are in a situation where you HAVE to use a firearm you shoot to kill.
    1
  22. They were on the phone with police the entire time.
    1
  23.  @petedog9581  Nothing, I was just correcting your statement where you said they had no time to call the police when in fact they did have time and the police STILL did not arrive in time. If you ask ANY police officer they will tell you that they are NOT there to protect you. They are there to seek justice AFTER a crime has been committed.
    1
  24. Would you do CPR on someone who could be HIV positive or have HEP C? Not me.
    1
  25. He didn't deserve it but it was a 100% JUSTIFIED room temperature challenge.
    1
  26. Police should carry net guns for when they have to catch animals.
    1
  27. PLEASE, it isn't just males. I have seen more than my fair share of CRAZY women who think they OWN their boyfriend or husband.
    1
  28. How does a building that size NOT have a sprinkler system?
    1
  29. Would you render assistance to someone with the potential of having HIV, HEP C, etc without the proper safety equipment?
    1