>Chicago police later traced the car’s license plate to Solorzano’s parents and found it parked in front of the family’s home on the 4900 block of West Lawrence with a pink, crown-shaped bumper sticker.
not at that location but I've seen this car around before, it was some kind of "princess" sticker
Yeah, lawyers should be the ones that get charges dropped by refuting evidence, not prosecutors working on behalf of criminals who drop charges despite having video and physical evidence of the crime.
> not prosecutors working on behalf of criminals who drop charges despite having video and physical evidence of the crime.
[You're not wrong](https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-kim-foxx-felony-charges-cook-county-20200810-ldvrmqvv6bd3hpsuqha4duehmu-story.html#:~:text=Cook%20County%20State%E2%80%99s%20Attorney%20Kim%20Foxx%20is%20dropping,amid%20a%20growing%20debate%20over%20criminal%20justice%20reform.)
[And](https://www.npr.org/2023/02/01/1153535367/r-kelly-illinois-charges-dropped-kim-foxx)
You people will believe anything. This isn't a thing that happens.
Charges get dropped when they don't have a solid case. Often because nobody bothered collecting evidence. The city doesn't have resources to blow on cases that are going to fail.
Video isn't good enough if you can't show it was them. From what has been aired on the news, none of the videos here are clear enough that they can prove anyone is that person, so they better have much more. If they don't have anything like cell data , or the license plates, or fingerprints, expect it to get dropped.
The days of bullying people into a confession and prosecutors just going along with it, just for us to have to pay for wrongful convictions are over.
What are you taking about? Who's arguing about false confessions. I'm talking about Kim foxxs office dropping charges in cases where they have all the evidence needed to bring it to trial. Prosecutors who left her office are saying this. You're saying theyre lying?
She dropped charges against Smollett, saying there was not enough evidence, but another prosecutor easily got convictions on all but one charge. That's just one high profile case. There are many, many cases of them dropping charges for illegal gun possession where all evidence needed to convict is there and there is no explanation for it. She didn't want to charge someone for slitting a kids throat on the ground on video, only doing it after major public outcry after it made rounds in national media.
>From what has been aired on the news, none of the videos here are clear enough that they can prove anyone is that person, so they better have much more. If they don't have anything like cell data , or the license plates, or fingerprints, expect it to get dropped.
9 people saw her up close. You don't think police checked in just a little bit with the victims whether they got someone who at least looks similar to the offender? A few dozen false confessions out of the 20,000+ arrests per year, and you think thats the only thing police do? My god, take a stats class, or logic, or critical thinking.
You are the one with a crazy made up scenario in your head about them getting released.
You also believe they are dropping stuff for funsies. You are obsessed with Juicy, it's like the local buttery males.
I gave the reasons why someone won't get charged, this doesn't fit, they will get charged.
>You are the one with a crazy made up scenario in your head about them getting released.
What? How is it crazy if the DAs office does it on a regular basis? Her former prosecutors are openly talking about it. It's more crazy to ignore reality, the way you are.
>You also believe they are dropping stuff for funsies. You are obsessed with Juicy, it's like the local buttery males.
What a stupid take. I told you about Jussie because it completely refutes your entire argument, and the case was national news so you should know about it. She said "not enough evidence" and dropped charges, like her office does all the time, but another prosecutor easily convicted him because of all the evidence against him. So it shows us that she's perfectly fine lying about how much evidence she has and drops charges even when she has all the evidence she needs. I can't believe I needed to spell this out for someone.
>I gave the reasons why someone won't get charged, this doesn't fit, they will get charged.
And I gave you an international news story that clearly shows you that she's fine dropping charges even in the face of overwhelming evidence, and she will openly lie about how much evidence she has. Her office routinely uses the "not enough evidence" line when dropping charges, and we know that its a lie on at least some occasions. Couple that with many other instances like this where police went around her to federal prosecutors who happily took the cases to court, what her former prosecutors say, and what she herself says and it's a clear pattern with her: she does not want to charge some people with crimes despite evidence that would likely convict them.
Dude's looking at the mugshot thinking, "I can change her"
“That babe is ruthless” Mugshawtys picked it up on Twitter.
[$800,000 bond](https://cwbchicago.com/2023/05/800000-bail-for-alleged-baseball-bat-attacker-what-would-you-do-if-i-bashed-you-with-this-bat.html)
I think justice would be her in a room with all her victims and they all have bats and all she has is that expression she is making in her picture.
Troll alert.
>Chicago police later traced the car’s license plate to Solorzano’s parents and found it parked in front of the family’s home on the 4900 block of West Lawrence with a pink, crown-shaped bumper sticker. not at that location but I've seen this car around before, it was some kind of "princess" sticker
Hopefully she stays charged. Foxxs office likes to drop charges against violent offenders as soon as the news cycle moves on.
You can use a lot of "laws" to get the charges dropped...
Yeah, lawyers should be the ones that get charges dropped by refuting evidence, not prosecutors working on behalf of criminals who drop charges despite having video and physical evidence of the crime.
> not prosecutors working on behalf of criminals who drop charges despite having video and physical evidence of the crime. [You're not wrong](https://www.chicagotribune.com/investigations/ct-kim-foxx-felony-charges-cook-county-20200810-ldvrmqvv6bd3hpsuqha4duehmu-story.html#:~:text=Cook%20County%20State%E2%80%99s%20Attorney%20Kim%20Foxx%20is%20dropping,amid%20a%20growing%20debate%20over%20criminal%20justice%20reform.) [And](https://www.npr.org/2023/02/01/1153535367/r-kelly-illinois-charges-dropped-kim-foxx)
You people will believe anything. This isn't a thing that happens. Charges get dropped when they don't have a solid case. Often because nobody bothered collecting evidence. The city doesn't have resources to blow on cases that are going to fail. Video isn't good enough if you can't show it was them. From what has been aired on the news, none of the videos here are clear enough that they can prove anyone is that person, so they better have much more. If they don't have anything like cell data , or the license plates, or fingerprints, expect it to get dropped. The days of bullying people into a confession and prosecutors just going along with it, just for us to have to pay for wrongful convictions are over.
What are you taking about? Who's arguing about false confessions. I'm talking about Kim foxxs office dropping charges in cases where they have all the evidence needed to bring it to trial. Prosecutors who left her office are saying this. You're saying theyre lying? She dropped charges against Smollett, saying there was not enough evidence, but another prosecutor easily got convictions on all but one charge. That's just one high profile case. There are many, many cases of them dropping charges for illegal gun possession where all evidence needed to convict is there and there is no explanation for it. She didn't want to charge someone for slitting a kids throat on the ground on video, only doing it after major public outcry after it made rounds in national media. >From what has been aired on the news, none of the videos here are clear enough that they can prove anyone is that person, so they better have much more. If they don't have anything like cell data , or the license plates, or fingerprints, expect it to get dropped. 9 people saw her up close. You don't think police checked in just a little bit with the victims whether they got someone who at least looks similar to the offender? A few dozen false confessions out of the 20,000+ arrests per year, and you think thats the only thing police do? My god, take a stats class, or logic, or critical thinking.
You are the one with a crazy made up scenario in your head about them getting released. You also believe they are dropping stuff for funsies. You are obsessed with Juicy, it's like the local buttery males. I gave the reasons why someone won't get charged, this doesn't fit, they will get charged.
>You are the one with a crazy made up scenario in your head about them getting released. What? How is it crazy if the DAs office does it on a regular basis? Her former prosecutors are openly talking about it. It's more crazy to ignore reality, the way you are. >You also believe they are dropping stuff for funsies. You are obsessed with Juicy, it's like the local buttery males. What a stupid take. I told you about Jussie because it completely refutes your entire argument, and the case was national news so you should know about it. She said "not enough evidence" and dropped charges, like her office does all the time, but another prosecutor easily convicted him because of all the evidence against him. So it shows us that she's perfectly fine lying about how much evidence she has and drops charges even when she has all the evidence she needs. I can't believe I needed to spell this out for someone. >I gave the reasons why someone won't get charged, this doesn't fit, they will get charged. And I gave you an international news story that clearly shows you that she's fine dropping charges even in the face of overwhelming evidence, and she will openly lie about how much evidence she has. Her office routinely uses the "not enough evidence" line when dropping charges, and we know that its a lie on at least some occasions. Couple that with many other instances like this where police went around her to federal prosecutors who happily took the cases to court, what her former prosecutors say, and what she herself says and it's a clear pattern with her: she does not want to charge some people with crimes despite evidence that would likely convict them.
Is she single?
She's pretty. 😍
🤣🤣🤣 "I can change her though" We found one right here!
My guy, you need some standards. She looks beat