Doesn't make it less of a crime, but thanks for the babble....

You simply cannot hit someone from behind that is not posing a threat to you.

Kid in Laffy is on trial for Murder 1 right now....he woke up to find kids burglarizing his vehicle. Grabbed a pistol and ran outside and shot at the vehicle as it moved AWAY from him....got extremely unlucky and hit one in the head......so it's murder....now fast forward to Hill..

If the guy he punched would have died from the punch, Hill would be charged with manslaughter or negligent homicide at least...Do you really think it would matter if the N word was said by the guy on the ground and or walking away?

NO!...So that is why Hill is charged. SO all you guys taking how it was in the old days, guys fight, yada yada yada, etc. really need to ease up...All things in life are more closely watched now, so too bad for those who get caught on video. No matter what the guy walking away said, if Hill felt threatened, he could have turned and ran. I've heard the young man can move pretty quickly when trying to get away from large fast enemies.

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by 1984Tiger

North Carolina

Member since Apr 2006

7285 posts

Posted on 5/3/13 at 6:37 pm to the LSUSaint

quote:
You simply cannot hit someone from behind that is not posing a threat to you.

So you've seen the video, or are you basing your assumptions off what the media chooses to report? Because my understanding is that the media hasn't seen the video either, yet they're making statements like they're fact. Who are they to say whether the 'victim' still posed a threat based off a 15 second video clip (that they haven't seen)?

2 ...

Report Post

Posted by Celtic Tiger

Lake Charles

Member since Feb 2005

615 posts

Posted on 5/4/13 at 12:49 am to the LSUSaint

Let's see

quote:
Doesn't make it less of a crime, but thanks for the babble....

Please point to me any legal analysis in my post. I'll wait on the edge of my seat for that. Since you clearly missed the point, it was more about grand standing fans who pretend they're perfect and have never jaywalked or acted foolish as a 20 year old.

But you want legal analysis, here's some. Given the facts you gave in the lafayette case as complete, that kid is guilty. Great, know what that means to this conversation? Not a damn thing. Guess what? I can create all kind of irrelevant hypotheticals too, but I won't (believe me, part of me wants to). The facts of this case are the facts of this case and of no other. Period.

Everyone knows "why he was charged" and no one is saying he made the best decision. But you say with great certainty he hit the guy from behind when all reports today said in the side of the head, or that he knew the second hitter when everything at this point from the cops and attorneys says otherwise, you either don't know or are willfully ignoring facts to fit your preconceived narrative. Why don't all you guys just wait for all the facts before jumping to the worst possible conclusion about a guy you were probably screaming your arse off for 5 months ago. Damn. It's ridiculous. But thanks for the babble.

1 ...

Report Post

Tiger Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board