- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Score Board
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- SEC Score Board
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Deputies arrest 4 in LSU student Madison Brooks case
Posted on 1/24/23 at 6:59 pm to R11
Posted on 1/24/23 at 6:59 pm to R11
quote:screw a hot chick in the back of your friend’s car, with your friends watching/recording, and passing her around?
These dudes did what most guys go to bars looking to do.
0
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:00 pm to R11
quote:
Fact is had the young lady not died none of you would be this upset about what happened in the car.
You are absolutely wrong. In fact, I have been on the record stating that I dont think there is a manslaughter case. My focus is 100% on the events leading up to and the rape inside the vehicle.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:00 pm to Deactived
quote:
Me asking the reason for putting the addresses to somehow making sure these guys sleep well in their homes
I think you misread the post you responded to
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:01 pm to JAMAC2001
quote:
Any decent human being would not have done what they did.
Any decent human being would have called the police to assist her and ensure she got home safely after seeing her falling down drunk and lost. Or bring her to a police station, hospital, fire station, etc. Lots of things other than put her in your car, frick her and leave her on the side of the road to be run over.
What in the actual hell is wrong with people to even try and argue she consented?
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:03 pm to RedPop4
Daily Mail - one of the top newspapers internationally - has as its top story this:
LINK
(Didn't know this but FWIW Daily Mail is the most popular online newspaper in the world per slate.)
"Dead white girl" stories are always headlines. Likely an NBC Dateline already in the works.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:03 pm to dewster
If they videoed the incident there should also be charges under this statute.
§283. Video voyeurism; penalties
A. Video voyeurism is any of the following:
(1) The use of any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device, or an unmanned aircraft system equipped with any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device, for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping a person where that person has not consented to the specific instance of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping and either:
(a) It is for a lewd or lascivious purpose.
(b) The observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is as described in Paragraph (B)(3) of this Section and occurs in a place where an identifiable person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
(2) The transfer of an image obtained by activity described in Paragraph (1) of this Subsection by live or recorded telephone message, electronic mail, the Internet, or a commercial online service.
B.(1) Except as provided in Paragraphs (3) and (4) of this Subsection, whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism shall, upon a first conviction thereof, be fined not more than two thousand dollars or imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than two years, or both.
(2) On a second or subsequent conviction, the offender shall be fined not more than two thousand dollars and imprisoned at hard labor for not less than six months nor more than three years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
(3) Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism when the observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is of any vaginal or anal sexual intercourse, actual or simulated sexual intercourse, masturbation, any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola or of any portion of the pubic hair, anus, cleft of the buttocks, vulva, or genitals shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars and be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than one year or more than five years, without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
(4) Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism when the observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is of any child under the age of seventeen with the intention of arousing or gratifying the sexual desires of the offender shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars and be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than two years or more than ten years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
C. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the transference of such images by a telephone company, cable television company, or any of its affiliates, an Internet provider, or commercial online service provider, or to the carrying, broadcasting, or performing of related activities in providing telephone, cable television, Internet, or commercial online services.
D. After the institution of prosecution, access to and the disposition of any material seized as evidence of this offense shall be in accordance with R.S. 46:1845.
E. Any evidence resulting from the commission of video voyeurism shall be contraband.
F. A violation of the provisions of this Section shall be considered a sex offense as defined in R.S. 15:541. Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism shall be required to register as a sex offender as provided for in Chapter 3-B of Title 15 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950.
G. For purposes of this Section, "unmanned aircraft system" means an unmanned, powered aircraft that does not carry a human operator, can be autonomous or remotely piloted or operated, and can be expendable or recoverable.
H. This Section shall not apply to any bona fide news or public interest broadcast, website, video, report, or event and shall not be construed to affect the rights of any news-gathering organization.
§283. Video voyeurism; penalties
A. Video voyeurism is any of the following:
(1) The use of any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device, or an unmanned aircraft system equipped with any camera, videotape, photo-optical, photo-electric, or any other image recording device, for the purpose of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping a person where that person has not consented to the specific instance of observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping and either:
(a) It is for a lewd or lascivious purpose.
(b) The observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is as described in Paragraph (B)(3) of this Section and occurs in a place where an identifiable person has a reasonable expectation of privacy.
(2) The transfer of an image obtained by activity described in Paragraph (1) of this Subsection by live or recorded telephone message, electronic mail, the Internet, or a commercial online service.
B.(1) Except as provided in Paragraphs (3) and (4) of this Subsection, whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism shall, upon a first conviction thereof, be fined not more than two thousand dollars or imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than two years, or both.
(2) On a second or subsequent conviction, the offender shall be fined not more than two thousand dollars and imprisoned at hard labor for not less than six months nor more than three years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
(3) Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism when the observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is of any vaginal or anal sexual intercourse, actual or simulated sexual intercourse, masturbation, any portion of the female breast below the top of the areola or of any portion of the pubic hair, anus, cleft of the buttocks, vulva, or genitals shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars and be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than one year or more than five years, without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
(4) Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism when the observing, viewing, photographing, filming, or videotaping is of any child under the age of seventeen with the intention of arousing or gratifying the sexual desires of the offender shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars and be imprisoned at hard labor for not less than two years or more than ten years without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence.
C. The provisions of this Section shall not apply to the transference of such images by a telephone company, cable television company, or any of its affiliates, an Internet provider, or commercial online service provider, or to the carrying, broadcasting, or performing of related activities in providing telephone, cable television, Internet, or commercial online services.
D. After the institution of prosecution, access to and the disposition of any material seized as evidence of this offense shall be in accordance with R.S. 46:1845.
E. Any evidence resulting from the commission of video voyeurism shall be contraband.
F. A violation of the provisions of this Section shall be considered a sex offense as defined in R.S. 15:541. Whoever commits the crime of video voyeurism shall be required to register as a sex offender as provided for in Chapter 3-B of Title 15 of the Louisiana Revised Statutes of 1950.
G. For purposes of this Section, "unmanned aircraft system" means an unmanned, powered aircraft that does not carry a human operator, can be autonomous or remotely piloted or operated, and can be expendable or recoverable.
H. This Section shall not apply to any bona fide news or public interest broadcast, website, video, report, or event and shall not be construed to affect the rights of any news-gathering organization.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:04 pm to LSUFAITHFUL
It's about time for us to cull the herd.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:05 pm to R11
quote:
Fact is …many here have some same thing these dudes did but only difference was the girl didn’t get run over and killed. I’ll admit I have had plenty drunk sex with chicks when I was younger.
Have you met deltaland? I feel like you guys would get along.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:06 pm to Proximo
quote:
they asked her multiple (5+) times each to have sex with no response
The affidavit you posted reads she did consent, albeit after being asked 5 times.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:07 pm to Mr Clean
quote:This bro......girl I was dear friends with growing up, was a virgin till soph year of college and well...... one frat star fed her tequila till she couldn't even stand.....but he paid a pretty heavy toll... BTW that young soph RB in NO... oh my...
quote:
Fact is had the young lady not died none of you would be this upset about what happened in the car.
Nah, a lot of people would be just as pissed, thinking about how she would be scarred for life
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:09 pm to R11
quote:
Fact is …many here have some same thing these dudes did but only difference was the girl didn’t get run over and killed.
I’ll admit I have had plenty drunk sex with chicks when I was younger.
I've never had sex with a girl who was too drunk to know she was fricking me. Those guys are trash for that. Irredeemable action.
This post was edited on 1/24/23 at 7:10 pm
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:09 pm to GRIZZ
That’s really my point. They claim she said yes to the first guy only after 5+ times and the second after multiple
That isn’t consent even if they claim she said yes. She wasn’t coherent enough to respond
That isn’t consent even if they claim she said yes. She wasn’t coherent enough to respond
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:10 pm to Proximo
Agreed!
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:12 pm to JerseyJohn
I posted video voyeurism and pointed out it applies also to anyone they sent the video to as well who watched it.
I assume the police seized the phones as evidence but there was a statement from Washington's attorney that he would be providing the evidence (video) to the DA's office thinking it helped his client.
Seems like he's handing over evidence of a crime (video voyeurism!).
I'm going to focus on posting news stories, maps, analysis and won't be entering into arguments.
I won't be PMing anyone as well as that seems like 'ban bait.'
Thanks.
The national and international (Daily Mail has 43 million readers per day online) damage to LSU's reputation here is sad.
I assume the police seized the phones as evidence but there was a statement from Washington's attorney that he would be providing the evidence (video) to the DA's office thinking it helped his client.
Seems like he's handing over evidence of a crime (video voyeurism!).
I'm going to focus on posting news stories, maps, analysis and won't be entering into arguments.
I won't be PMing anyone as well as that seems like 'ban bait.'
Thanks.
The national and international (Daily Mail has 43 million readers per day online) damage to LSU's reputation here is sad.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:13 pm to LSUFAITHFUL
What about if they were impaired too?
Why is it ok to play that card as it involves one of the persons involved and not the other?
Pretty sure most people here would admit (at least to yourself) you’ve done things you regret and wish you could take back while under the influence.
Not to mention two of these dudes were in fricking high school? Come on man.
Why is it ok to play that card as it involves one of the persons involved and not the other?
Pretty sure most people here would admit (at least to yourself) you’ve done things you regret and wish you could take back while under the influence.
Not to mention two of these dudes were in fricking high school? Come on man.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:15 pm to choupiquesushi
The girl was 19 and she was falling down drunk.
Anyone who would target a girl in that condition is a rapist.
They drove her two minutes from the bar and began having sex with her.
The WAFB comments on Facebook have been interesting to track. Lot of hostility toward the bar but surprisingly toward the teen victim here.
Anyone who would target a girl in that condition is a rapist.
They drove her two minutes from the bar and began having sex with her.
The WAFB comments on Facebook have been interesting to track. Lot of hostility toward the bar but surprisingly toward the teen victim here.
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:15 pm to R11
quote:
What about if they were impaired too? Why is it ok to play that card as it involves one of the persons involved and not the other?
Because they knew or should have known of her incapacity
Read the law jackass
This post was edited on 1/24/23 at 7:16 pm
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:16 pm to R11
quote:Yeah bruh you might want to delete this. Many here have not in fact done what these guys did. Might want to hire a lawyer if you and your buddies took turns on girls so drunk they could hardly function
I’m gonna play devils advocate
These dudes did what most guys go to bars looking to do.
Hook up with some hot drunk chick.
I’m pretty sure everybody here plus these boys wished the girl didn’t get run over and killed.
They didn’t force liquor down her throat. She could have had same thing happen to her without the boys involvement.
If in fact they drugged her up that’s obviously a different story.
However, how I read the report was she willingly left with them and was leading/flirting the 17 yr old old.
Fact is …many here have some same thing these dudes did but only difference was the girl didn’t get run over and killed.
I’ll admit I have had plenty drunk sex with chicks when I was younger.
This post was edited on 1/24/23 at 7:18 pm
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:16 pm to R11
quote:
What about if they were impaired too?
Why is it ok to play that card as it involves one of the persons involved and not the other?
I advised you to read the linked affidavit already. Clearly you haven't to still be making this dumbass argument. Are you just trolling or just admitting to being a true piece of shite?
Posted on 1/24/23 at 7:17 pm to R11
quote:Yeah one of my navy buddies killed two guys on a motorcycle and did time for it blew a .1999
Pretty sure most people here would admit (at least to yourself) you’ve done things you regret and wish you could take back while under the influence.
Not to mention two of these dudes were in fricking high school? Come on man.
who wants to frick an unresponsive girl.
Page 90 of 419
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News