- 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 10/8/25 at 8:57 am to BillyBobfan24_7
Posted on 10/8/25 at 8:57 am to BillyBobfan24_7
quote:No! Because the gold truck isn't pulling over without Lacy coming at him and both the gold truck and funyuns just keep on proceeding forward on their merry way.
Sounds like the accident happens regardless if Lacy was there or not.
0
Posted on 10/8/25 at 8:57 am to ApexTiger
He initially swerved right, partially onto the side of the highway, presumably forcing Funyuns to swerve slightly left to avoid a rear end collision. If you watch the video, you can see he doesn’t make it into the parking lot until a split second after the collision. You can also see the cloud of dust he kicks up from being partially off the highway.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:00 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
how can Ory contend that the gold truck was only driving 28MPH while being tailgated by a Kia traveling 49 without a collision occurring between the two
Because she chose to hit the vehicle of the person she killed instead.
If you are driving behind someone and one of their tires fall off you should still have room to stop without hitting anyone.
If you dont then you broke statute 32:81
A. The driver of a motor vehicle shall not follow another vehicle more closely than is reasonable and prudent, having due regard for the speed of such vehicle and the traffic upon and the condition of the highway
This post was edited on 10/8/25 at 9:02 am
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:04 am to Lester Earl
quote:
Im not sure you actually understand what happened.
I know you have no clue what happened. You have proven that.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:04 am to sgallo3
That’s fine, but again, there’s no objective metric for this in Louisiana law. An officer would have to have witnessed this and rendered a judgment call. This is likely why her initial citation for following too close was rescinded and changed to illegal lane change.
There’s no prosecutable case to prove that violation.
There’s no prosecutable case to prove that violation.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:06 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
He initially swerved right, partially onto the side of the highway, presumably forcing Funyuns to swerve slightly left to avoid a rear end collision. If you watch the video, you can see he doesn’t make it into the parking lot until a split second after the collision. You can also see the cloud of dust he kicks up from being partially off the highway.
thanks for that detail, I will check it out again
so he basically left the scene shortly after giving the 18 wheeler his cell number?
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:07 am to ApexTiger
I think so.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:08 am to Chad504boy
The part many are missing is the data from the vehicle boxes.
The gold truck driver pulled off the road without "slamming on his brakes" (according to his own statement). The data from his vehicle shows he was travelling at a rate of 28 MPH.
The female driver behind was travelling at a speed of 49 MPH, according to the data from her vehicle's box. She is following .5 seconds behind the gold truck. Do you know how close that is while traveling almost 50 mph?
She stated the gold truck stepped on his brakes, then braked hard. She also states that she "tried to make it to the Dollar store parking lot".
She was following much too close, at too high rate of speed, and when the gold truck braked and pulled over, she MORE THAN LIKELY attempted to either swerve around him OR she tried to cut across traffic and make it into the parking lot of the Dollar Store.
Nobody and I MEAN NOBODY opts to swerve into on-coming traffic (head-on collision) over swerving off the road into another vehicle or a fixed object.....UNLESS you aren't paying attention and are distracted by something else and all of sudden panic when you look up.
Couple that with the officer initially citing her for following too closely, the gold truck driver saying on video " she caused that accident", and the officer "coaching" the witness as to what he should include in his statement.
The black guy at the scene told multiple accounts of what happened all while standing there and talking. I don't think he was being dishonest or anything of the sort. I just know that witnesses oftentimes get tunnel vision or aren't trained to accurately remember the details in an emergency situation. It takes some training to do. I've showed up to emergency situations with witnesses that were definitely present during the entire incident and get multiple stories from multiple people, as well as conflicting information from the same witness.
It takes an amazing amount of will-power to swerve into a head-on collision to avoid rear-ending a vehicle OR hitting a telephone pole but that's the story many on here choose to believe. That's fine, we all just will never see this the same, and that's ok.
The gold truck driver pulled off the road without "slamming on his brakes" (according to his own statement). The data from his vehicle shows he was travelling at a rate of 28 MPH.
The female driver behind was travelling at a speed of 49 MPH, according to the data from her vehicle's box. She is following .5 seconds behind the gold truck. Do you know how close that is while traveling almost 50 mph?
She stated the gold truck stepped on his brakes, then braked hard. She also states that she "tried to make it to the Dollar store parking lot".
She was following much too close, at too high rate of speed, and when the gold truck braked and pulled over, she MORE THAN LIKELY attempted to either swerve around him OR she tried to cut across traffic and make it into the parking lot of the Dollar Store.
Nobody and I MEAN NOBODY opts to swerve into on-coming traffic (head-on collision) over swerving off the road into another vehicle or a fixed object.....UNLESS you aren't paying attention and are distracted by something else and all of sudden panic when you look up.
Couple that with the officer initially citing her for following too closely, the gold truck driver saying on video " she caused that accident", and the officer "coaching" the witness as to what he should include in his statement.
The black guy at the scene told multiple accounts of what happened all while standing there and talking. I don't think he was being dishonest or anything of the sort. I just know that witnesses oftentimes get tunnel vision or aren't trained to accurately remember the details in an emergency situation. It takes some training to do. I've showed up to emergency situations with witnesses that were definitely present during the entire incident and get multiple stories from multiple people, as well as conflicting information from the same witness.
It takes an amazing amount of will-power to swerve into a head-on collision to avoid rear-ending a vehicle OR hitting a telephone pole but that's the story many on here choose to believe. That's fine, we all just will never see this the same, and that's ok.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:09 am to GeauxTigers1410
quote:
Everybody needs to stop pretending to be lawyers. He caused the accident.
That’s not how any of this works genius. Why don’t you stop pretending to be a lawyer and admit he didn’t cause the accident?
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:10 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
So there’s contradictions everywhere. If Lacy was back in his lane “nowhere near the accident”, why did the gold truck bail?
I’m not on the “Lacy was nowhere near the accident” train but you’re being at least a little dishonest with this take. You don’t see the gold truck leave the road until after the wreck occurs.
quote:
And if he bailed unnecessarily, why was he not cited like Lacy and Funyuns?
First off as far as I’m aware there’s no law against braking and turning into a parking lot.
Second, even if he had done something extreme that ordinarily violates traffic laws, he would be justified in doing so because he’s facing a vehicle coming head-on in his lane of traffic. That’s a truly unforeseeable emergency.
The point is that someone braking hard in front of you is not an unforeseeable emergency. It happens all the time, for a multitude of different reasons. Unlike gold truck’s predicament, it’s something you’re expected to be prepared for when you get behind the wheel.
quote:
The moral of the story here, don’t trust your soul to no backwoods southern lawyer.
Do you have history with the lawyer or something?
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:12 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
And if he bailed unnecessarily, why was he not cited like Lacy and Funyuns?
Why would that ever warrant a ticket? Turning into a car wash/parking lot??
Not being ugly either.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:14 am to ellis197575
Just to clarify… the black box thing is getting mischaracterized. There was some sort of device or driver app on the Kia showing a speed of 49mph. The site of the crash is a transition point from a 50MPH zone to a 40, so that tracks.
There was no other “black box” info shared. Ory used the video clip of the truck turning into the parking lot to calculate a speed estimate based on time over distance. Hence the 28mph. But the clip only shows him entering the parking lot, not his speed prior to braking. And he did brake. He only said he didn’t skid- another bit of confusion being repeated.
This makes sense since a tailgating driver going nearly twice the speed of the driver in front would have certainly rear ended him, but that obviously didn’t happen.
There was no other “black box” info shared. Ory used the video clip of the truck turning into the parking lot to calculate a speed estimate based on time over distance. Hence the 28mph. But the clip only shows him entering the parking lot, not his speed prior to braking. And he did brake. He only said he didn’t skid- another bit of confusion being repeated.
This makes sense since a tailgating driver going nearly twice the speed of the driver in front would have certainly rear ended him, but that obviously didn’t happen.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:16 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
a tailgating driver going nearly twice the speed of the driver in front would have certainly rear ended him, but that obviously didn’t happen
Because she hit the other car instead, not because she wasn't goin 20 mph faster than the truck.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:17 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Perhaps she was, and her judgement was going around was the more prudent move in the moment.
Well was it more reasonable to go around? What happened? The standard your held to is a reasonable driver not just what you deem reasonable in the moment.
Her options were Stop (if she could) or swerve into oncoming traffic.
quote:
But you CAN prove that the Charger triggered the chain of events.
But there is a break in the chain.
quote:
Without an objective standard to compare to gathered evidence, or a LEO to witness and assess the conditions and render judgment in real time, this is ultimately just your opinion. Completely unprovable and useless in a court of law. This is almost certainly why her citation was revised.
You understand Court prove this all the time. Your argument is that the law is essentially meaningless and that’s just not true be get cited for following too close all the time. The Courts resume you’re at fault if your rear end someone. You avoid that fault by being able to stop.
This isn’t judged in a bubble. the outcome is considered. the outcome here is that she hit another car head on.
quote:
This is almost certainly why her citation was revised.
Again, that’s the LSP’s nonsense
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:17 am to ApexTiger
quote:
so he basically left the scene shortly after giving the 18 wheeler his cell number?
Truck driver in the astros shirt said something about the gold truck guy going to the er — read/heard elsewhere (maybe video with the gold truck guy) his wife has a cancer treatment that day??
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:17 am to tiger91
Im making a point. Veering off of a road and entering a street or parking lot at an excessive rate of speed (in the absence of an evasive act) would normally be a traffic violation.
His attempt to evade Lacy was why he wasn’t cited. Which sours Orys claim that Lacy was already back in the southbound lane “no where near” the accident.
His attempt to evade Lacy was why he wasn’t cited. Which sours Orys claim that Lacy was already back in the southbound lane “no where near” the accident.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:18 am to ellis197575
quote:
Nobody and I MEAN NOBODY opts to swerve into on-coming traffic (head-on collision) over swerving off the road into another vehicle or a fixed object.....UNLESS you aren't paying attention and are distracted by something else and all of sudden panic when you look up.
This.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:19 am to sgallo3
quote:But the catalyst to the whole event was Kyren, not a tire falling off.
If you are driving behind someone and one of their tires fall off you should still have room to stop without hitting anyone.
So what does the law say about that?
This post was edited on 10/8/25 at 9:26 am
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:19 am to sgallo3
This was Orys claim BEFORE anyone reacted to Lacy. That’s (one of) the problem with his story
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:19 am to ellis197575
quote:
The data from his vehicle shows he was travelling at a rate of 28 MPH.
wrong.
Page 44 of 60
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News