- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- 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: A-hole driver charged with aggravated assault (UPDATE) (double line enforcer)
Posted on 10/20/15 at 8:51 am to Artie Rome
Posted on 10/20/15 at 8:51 am to Artie Rome
Man if I was younger I would love to "negro knock" his door and watch his reactions (hiding from afar, out of shotgun range)
Posted on 10/20/15 at 8:53 am to LSUGlory16
quote:
Man if I was younger I would love to "negro knock" his door and watch his reactions (hiding from afar, out of shotgun range)
"He called the shite, poop"
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:00 am to Napoleon
I have a question, that sort of indirectly involves this case...let's assume that the car was driving slower, and he was in fact attempting to make a left turn, would he be in the wrong for clipping the bike? I get that the bike had illegally passed in a no passing zone...but, he still gained possession of the lane first, and in Louisiana, if you're making a left turn and cause a collision with a vehicle passing to the left you are the guilty party, if it's deemed that the passing vehicle has possession of the lane first.
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:03 am to Napoleon
Glad to hear he was charged and to see the biker was cited. Now we can all move on to the next daily tragedy.
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:11 am to LSUsmartass
quote:
I have a question, that sort of indirectly involves this case...let's assume that the car was driving slower, and he was in fact attempting to make a left turn, would he be in the wrong for clipping the bike? I get that the bike had illegally passed in a no passing zone...but, he still gained possession of the lane first, and in Louisiana, if you're making a left turn and cause a collision with a vehicle passing to the left you are the guilty party, if it's deemed that the passing vehicle has possession of the lane first.
Is that really the law in LA? If so, wow. Really dumb. I mean I understand its concept, but can you really see behind you fully while mostly worrying about oncoming traffic first and foremost? If some idiot on a bike, like in the video, did that, I do not understand how it would be the driver taking the left turns fault at all.
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:20 am to LSUsmartass
quote:
and in Louisiana, if you're making a left turn and cause a collision with a vehicle passing to the left you are the guilty party, if it's deemed that the passing vehicle has possession of the lane first.
That is only the case where passing is legal, which is not the situation here.
Also, glad the old man got charged. It was clear he intentionally swerved to block or hit the biker.
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:23 am to Napoleon
quote:
prosecution to try and get.
Just because Artie started it. Sorry.
"...try to get."
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:26 am to mkibod1
quote:
Is that really the law in LA? If so, wow. Really dumb. I mean I understand its concept, but can you really see behind you fully while mostly worrying about oncoming traffic first and foremost? If some idiot on a bike, like in the video, did that, I do not understand how it would be the driver taking the left turns fault at all.
If they are passing you legally, and you hit them turning left, it most certainly is your fault - why wouldn't it be? Even if you have your blinker on and the car is right behind you, if they have possession of the left lane during a legal pass, you cannot turn into them.
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:33 am to Napoleon
quote:
and driving with an invalid license.
This should nullify everything to begin with.
Dude shouldn't have been on the road period. Dude shouldn't have been disobeying the laws of the road period. Clearly is unable to operate a vehicle appropriately shown by no license and the video evidence.
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:35 am to Napoleon
Hopefully he is acquitted. BS charge.
The biker has no fault in this?
The biker has no fault in this?
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:37 am to Mr.Perfect
quote:
The biker has no fault in this?
What does that have to do with a criminal charge?
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:37 am to LateArrivalforLSU
I hope he sees the inside of a jail.
I have a feeling he we only get community service, a driving license suspension, anger management classes, and a fine.
I have a feeling he we only get community service, a driving license suspension, anger management classes, and a fine.
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:49 am to Napoleon
5' 4 1/2" little man syndrome vs biker syndrome. Put them in Thunderdome
Posted on 10/20/15 at 9:59 am to Artie Rome
Well if the biker didn't do what he did, there would have been no accident
Posted on 10/20/15 at 10:49 am to Napoleon
Seems like the following would be the appropriate charges in Louisiana. Note the boyfriend/victim did not suffer serious injuries but the girlfriend did. An overzealous prosecutor (see Florida) would likely go for attempted 2nd degree murder. I think 1 count of aggravated 2nd degree battery and 1 count of aggravated battery would be the most appropriate charges. I can't stand when other jurisdictions use assault to define what is a battery. Assault= a reasonable apprehension of imminent harm. Battery= the actual touching/contact which causes harm. This is clearly a battery.
LA RS-§34.7. Aggravated second degree battery
A. Aggravated second degree battery is a battery committed with a dangerous weapon when the offender intentionally inflicts serious bodily injury.
B. For purposes of this Section, the following words shall have the following meanings:
[omitted]
(3) "Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury which involves unconsciousness, extreme physical pain or protracted and obvious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty, or a substantial risk of death.
C. Whoever commits the crime of aggravated second degree battery shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars or imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than fifteen years, or both. At least one year of the sentence imposed shall be served without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence if the offender knew or should have known that the victim is an active member of the United States Armed Forces or is a disabled veteran and the aggravated second degree battery was committed because of that status.
- Not going to cite 2nd Degree Murder but all that is necessary is "the specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm". This would be the most difficult to prove but I think it's reasonable to believe he intended to inflict great bodily harm. Get a few bikers on the jury and you probably get a conviction for attempted second degree murder.
LA RS-§27. Attempt; penalties; attempt on peace officer; enhanced penalties
A. Any person who, having a specific intent to commit a crime, does or omits an act for the purpose of and tending directly toward the accomplishing of his object is guilty of an attempt to commit the offense intended; and it shall be immaterial whether, under the circumstances, he would have actually accomplished his purpose.
The people that believe the old man should not be charged because the biker broke the law are the most ridiculous people in this thread. If a drunk driver swerves out of his lane hitting and killing someone in the opposite lane who was speeding, let's say he was going 80 mph in a 70 mph speed zone, then the drunk driver should not get charged with any crime according to y'all. Get your heads out of your asses because that makes no sense! Now in the civil suit that will definitely be a factor in determining/allocating fault, but that won't affect the criminal charges.
LA RS-§34.7. Aggravated second degree battery
A. Aggravated second degree battery is a battery committed with a dangerous weapon when the offender intentionally inflicts serious bodily injury.
B. For purposes of this Section, the following words shall have the following meanings:
[omitted]
(3) "Serious bodily injury" means bodily injury which involves unconsciousness, extreme physical pain or protracted and obvious disfigurement, or protracted loss or impairment of the function of a bodily member, organ, or mental faculty, or a substantial risk of death.
C. Whoever commits the crime of aggravated second degree battery shall be fined not more than ten thousand dollars or imprisoned, with or without hard labor, for not more than fifteen years, or both. At least one year of the sentence imposed shall be served without benefit of parole, probation, or suspension of sentence if the offender knew or should have known that the victim is an active member of the United States Armed Forces or is a disabled veteran and the aggravated second degree battery was committed because of that status.
- Not going to cite 2nd Degree Murder but all that is necessary is "the specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm". This would be the most difficult to prove but I think it's reasonable to believe he intended to inflict great bodily harm. Get a few bikers on the jury and you probably get a conviction for attempted second degree murder.
LA RS-§27. Attempt; penalties; attempt on peace officer; enhanced penalties
A. Any person who, having a specific intent to commit a crime, does or omits an act for the purpose of and tending directly toward the accomplishing of his object is guilty of an attempt to commit the offense intended; and it shall be immaterial whether, under the circumstances, he would have actually accomplished his purpose.
The people that believe the old man should not be charged because the biker broke the law are the most ridiculous people in this thread. If a drunk driver swerves out of his lane hitting and killing someone in the opposite lane who was speeding, let's say he was going 80 mph in a 70 mph speed zone, then the drunk driver should not get charged with any crime according to y'all. Get your heads out of your asses because that makes no sense! Now in the civil suit that will definitely be a factor in determining/allocating fault, but that won't affect the criminal charges.
This post was edited on 10/20/15 at 10:50 am
Posted on 10/20/15 at 10:49 am to Mr.Perfect
quote:
Well if the biker didn't do what he did, there would have been no accident
And if the a-hole old man wouldn't of intentionally swerved his car at the biker he wouldn't of been charged with aggravated assault. See how this works?
Posted on 10/20/15 at 10:52 am to Napoleon
quote:
quote: Where´s the dude who says it was attempted murder? Where's the people who said no crime was committed?
Where ARE the people, not "where's".
Posted on 10/20/15 at 10:55 am to BTiger0306
quote:
"the specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm".
Meh. He was driving a vehicle, and this was a split second action/reaction. That, coupled with his age, and the disassociation between the danger of the weapon (the automobile) and a potentially nefarious outcome, would make that conviction all but impossible.
This post was edited on 10/20/15 at 10:57 am
Posted on 10/20/15 at 10:59 am to Dandy Lion
Who here does not believe that a car could inflict great bodily harm against a motorcycle? I'd argue that since he is older he should have a better grasp of the danger an automobile poses to a motorcyclist than a younger person would. He is a more experienced driver who should know better. Age is not an excuse here. Intent can be formed in a matter of seconds. All he had to think is, "I'm about to teach this cat on the bike a lesson real quick." Now proving that would be difficult but I said it would not surprise me to see an overzealous prosecutor seek those charges.
This post was edited on 10/20/15 at 11:02 am
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News