re: Damn. People really bought into that 5 second video that his attorney released lmao

Your red light hypothetical is horrifically dis analogous. It’s more like, if a driver runs a red light and that somehow results in a collision between two other cars at a separate intersection a little bit later because one car swerved into oncoming traffic because it was following too closely. Sure, you have cause and effect but you don’t have reasonable foreseeability.

quote:

---

Your red light hypothetical is horrifically dis analogous. It’s more like, if a driver runs a red light and that somehow results in a collision between two other cars at a separate intersection a little bit later because one car swerved into oncoming traffic because it was following too closely. Sure, you have cause and effect but you don’t have reasonable foreseeability.

---

None of this even remotely makes sense. Lacy's actions directly resulted in two cars leaving their lane of traffic, one of which struck another vehicle.

My hypothetical is on point.

quote:

---

it’s ridiculous for the driver of the white vehicle to not have charges greater than that of Lacy

---

Did you even watch and listen to this?

It’s not on point. You’re not recognizing the fact that causation does not equal responsibility nor that causation can involve intervening negligence that is not foreseeable.

quote:

---

The oncoming charger caused a truck to slam on it's brakes which caused the Kia to swerve into oncoming traffic



Same. Thing.

---

Except the person driving the truck that the woman supposedly swerved to miss said he didn't slam on the brakes. She was driving fast and not paying attention, and swerved into oncoming traffic at the last minute to avoid rear-ending the truck

quote:

---

Damn. People really bought into that 5 second video that his attorney released lmao

---

I think it's pretty ironic that you would start a thread and end the title with "lmao" pertaining to any topic in which two people ended up losing their lives. You never ever try to avoid an accident by going into oncoming traffic. Either hit the vehicle in front of you and get the ticket for following to closely or hit the shoulder, ditch etc, but never go into oncoming traffic.

Lacy broke some laws but never in a million years would they come close to a conviction with homicides or manslaughter.

Most of the people involved seem like older people who aren’t great reactive drivers. I’m sure the gold truck guy was nervous seeing the car but seems a little dramatic to do what he did, then 100% the lady wasn’t paying attention/tailgating the gold truck and didn’t have time to react. You are always responsible for your own car and own driving.

If the lady had not swerved, and she had hit the gold truck in the rear….10000% she would have been at fault. But because she swerved and hit someone head on she has no blame? Stop

Again, it could leave off half of the discussion that goes against the lawyers point of view....kinda like when he clipped half the video and slowed it down to help his point of view previously

quote:

---

their official statement and report the LSP say the white vehicle serves to avoid being hit by the oncoming dodge charger

Those are not the same thing, at all . One puts the entirety of the event on the dodge charger instead of properly saying what actually happens . That isn’t by accident either

---

Even though this is true and the LSP obviously slanted the report, whether intentional or not, the 1st egregious act doesn't excuse the other egregious act which was Lacy driving recklessly. The old adage "2 wrongs dont make a right". Lacy 100% was culpable in the chain of events. His actions started the entire wheel turning. To refute that is disingenuous no matter your opinion of the police in this case. Lacy has not been absolved of guilt. And he shouldn't be whether dead or alive.

No one’s disagreeing on that. That point is just not worth anything. The Big Bang has caused every crime that’s ever been committed. That doesn’t make it culpable lol.