- 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: LSP release Lacy info in reference to Lacy attorney misinformation
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:29 am to Turbeauxdog
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:29 am to Turbeauxdog
quote:
It seems like you are agreeing that the woman should have had no problem stopping in her lane if not for her negligence.
maybe.. unsure.. but what I am definitely saying is lots of people keep saying the gold truck driver says he did not brake hard, when that is not what he said
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:29 am to UpToPar
The Lacy apologists are assuming EVERYTHING about the lady: Reckless driving, speeding, distracted, following too close... nothing in the evidence says this, but its assumed. But the actual witness statements and video of Lacy breaking the law and causing the accident is met with a tidal wave of bizarre mistrust. Its so pointless. Now I get to watch my town get eaten alive by psycho protestors because of this shite.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:30 am to RB10
there's a handful of very deliberate and wilfully ignorant people. You never know if someone is defending someone cause of race, or cause muh LSU or is misguided compassion cause Lacy ended up killing himself.
No matter, things are what they are.
No matter, things are what they are.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:30 am to RB10
quote:
I’ve told you twice, it’s time you extract yourself from this conversation.
So thoughtful of you to not actually provide a counter argument and keep repeating yourself.
This post was edited on 10/7/25 at 9:33 am
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:30 am to Mickey Goldmill
quote:Or maybe she was behind the truck and didn’t have the same field of view that the truck had. Once he swerved she did and most likely made a decision, wrong decision obviously but her decision was made solely because of Lacy’s erratic and reckless driving.
Not at all. Gold truck was able to avoid any crash because he was driving alert and under the speed limit unlike the lady behind him who was speeding and distracted.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:32 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
how the frick can she be following him too closely AND speeding, if he were driving the speed limit? Idiot.
Following too closely right before the impact, not the whole time she was speeding.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:33 am to John_V
This is comedy hour material. The LSP releases footage of the officer arriving on-scene and witnesses telling AND RE-TELLING what happened.
"He went right between them. He cut someone them off, that car, no someone else". From the military to working 25 years at a Federal Penitentiary, one thing I can guarantee is witnesses can be at the incident and tell different stories. You have to do the investigative work to figure out the facts. Many people can't slow their brain down and accurately remember and report what they witnessed. We had MANY officers that couldn't work in the Control Center because when an emergency occurred, they would panic.
You stated how the gold truck driver said the charger was coming head-on. The problem with that is was it head-on where you felt you were going to be crashed into, OR was it head-on as in at some point you observed the charger from afar in your lane of traffic?
Little details matter. There's no disputing Lacy illegally passed multiple cars. However, if you listen to the audio in real-time, Lacy was FULLY IN HIS CORRECT LANE OF TRAFFIC BEFORE YOU HEARD THE CRASH.
Therefore, the female driver had to swerve into on-coming traffic AFTER Lacy was back in his lane.
Is it possible that her "following too closely" played a role? Why was she cited for that and then the citation done away with? The data box from her vehicle confirmed that she indeed was following too closely.
"He went right between them. He cut someone them off, that car, no someone else". From the military to working 25 years at a Federal Penitentiary, one thing I can guarantee is witnesses can be at the incident and tell different stories. You have to do the investigative work to figure out the facts. Many people can't slow their brain down and accurately remember and report what they witnessed. We had MANY officers that couldn't work in the Control Center because when an emergency occurred, they would panic.
You stated how the gold truck driver said the charger was coming head-on. The problem with that is was it head-on where you felt you were going to be crashed into, OR was it head-on as in at some point you observed the charger from afar in your lane of traffic?
Little details matter. There's no disputing Lacy illegally passed multiple cars. However, if you listen to the audio in real-time, Lacy was FULLY IN HIS CORRECT LANE OF TRAFFIC BEFORE YOU HEARD THE CRASH.
Therefore, the female driver had to swerve into on-coming traffic AFTER Lacy was back in his lane.
Is it possible that her "following too closely" played a role? Why was she cited for that and then the citation done away with? The data box from her vehicle confirmed that she indeed was following too closely.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:33 am to Vacherie Saint
I'm just trying to figure out what's been confirmed and what is being assumed. It's been stated multiple times in this thread that the lady admitted to speeding, following too close, and being distracted, but I haven't seen anyone post anything confirming this.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:35 am to Geauxgurt
quote:
So thoughtful of you to not actually provide a counter argument and keep repeating yourself.
There’s been plenty of counter argument. None of this happens without Lacy’s actions. That places at least partial blame on him at minimum. The rest of the argument is how much blame does the lady bear?
But lacy is not 100% faultless like the lawyers doctored videos showed.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:35 am to SammyTiger
quote:
idk why people are so willing to dismiss the fact that she picked hitting a car head in over hitting her brakes to avoid a good truck I cant even see in any of the videos.
When people panic, they don't really think everything through. Would she have panicked if Lacy wasn't anywhere near Lafourche Parish that day? There is your answer.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:36 am to ellis197575
quote:
Lacy was FULLY IN HIS CORRECT LANE OF TRAFFIC BEFORE YOU HEARD THE CRASH.
Being in the incorrect lane driving 70 mph caused a sequence of events that takes moments of time before you hear an audible crash.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:37 am to Geauxgurt
quote:
So thoughtful of you to not actually provide a counter argument and keep repeating yourself.
I’ve provided plenty of counters to the more rational viewpoints. Why would I respond to your illogical ranting outside of suggesting you take a step back from the topic?
This post was edited on 10/7/25 at 9:39 am
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:39 am to zuluboudreaux
Whelp, it sure does look like Lacy was in the wrong here. Hate it, because I was really optimistic that he had been vindicated but now that I know more of the story, he definitely caused that accident.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:40 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
The Lacy apologists are assuming EVERYTHING about the lady: Reckless driving, speeding, distracted, following too close... nothing in the evidence says this, but its assumed
You mean no evidence other than the box data from the car.
I know most people don’t deal with it all the time so they don’t know, but your computer in your car records all this data. They know her exact speed, if/when she hit the brakes, what speed impact occurred, etc. They have all that data and it was already presented.
Without going and looking at the exact numbers she was traveling over 45MPH in a 35 MPH zone and was overtaking a gold truck that his black box said was only doing around 28MPH.
If she was 75 feet behind the gold truck traveling at 45MPH she would have ran into the back of the gold truck within 3.01 seconds. (If she was closer or traveling a little faster it would be even less). She said she was eating her funyons and playing with her radio. That’s a couple of seconds right there.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:40 am to ellis197575
You my friend win post of the day!!
Everything you just typed makes total sense to this accident.
Everything you just typed makes total sense to this accident.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:41 am to zuluboudreaux
The poor kid died tragically. His lawyer is a ghoul and this tennis match over finger pointing is also ghoulish.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:41 am to slinger1317
49 in a 40 isn't that aggressive but 60+ in a 40 passing 3 cars and a flatbed on a double yellow line is certainly aggressive some might say reckless.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:41 am to UpToPar
Im not sure about that, although you can hear him locking up his brakes to veer back into the southbound lane, and considering he was passing 4 vehicles, speeding is likely.
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:42 am to BigBinBR
quote:
You mean no evidence other than the box data from the car.
I know most people don’t deal with it all the time so they don’t know, but your computer in your car records all this data. They know her exact speed, if/when she hit the brakes, what speed impact occurred, etc. They have all that data and it was already presented.
Where is that data?
Posted on 10/7/25 at 9:43 am to BugAC
Would she have panicked if she was following the truck at a safe distance?
There is your answer.
or a better question: would she have hit lacy if she didn’t swerve into oncoming traffic?
Not based on the video i’ve seen.
There is your answer.
or a better question: would she have hit lacy if she didn’t swerve into oncoming traffic?
Not based on the video i’ve seen.
Popular
Back to top


0






