- 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 9:20 am to ApexTiger
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:20 am to ApexTiger
quote:Supposedly he left to get to a cancer treatment appointment.
so he basically left the scene shortly after giving the 18 wheeler his cell number?
1
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:25 am to Tigers4Lyfe
I think this is right, which is why they had to get his statement at his home and why he wasn’t seen in the body cam footage at the crash site
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:25 am to Vacherie Saint
Well I did not know this? Been driving since I’m 15 (why did they let 15 yo get licenses but I digress) and have never heard, read, been taught that in drivers ed.
And I’m not the one who downvoted you just fyi.
And I’m not the one who downvoted you just fyi.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:26 am to Vacherie Saint
To get to the dollar store like she stated she was trying to do, she would have to cross the left lane? Meaning dollar store was on the left side of the road from where she was?
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:28 am to SammyTiger
quote:
You understand Court prove this all the time.
I imagine they do if there’s objective evidence to prove it.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:31 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
I imagine they do if there’s objective evidence to prove it.
I will say this again, it doesn’t really matter.
if she didn’t have time to stop that’s her fault
If she had time to stop and instead chose to swerve that’s her fault. Objectively l, that was the wrong decision. It wasn’t reasonable or prudent.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:32 am to tiger91
Yes. It’s on the left.
She said on the scene that she swerved left to avoid the gold truck. Perhaps, like the gold truck, she wanted to get off of the highway by bailing off to that parking lot? If so perhaps she never saw the victim initially. If that’s been put out there, I’d like to see it.
It’s an interesting theory.
She said on the scene that she swerved left to avoid the gold truck. Perhaps, like the gold truck, she wanted to get off of the highway by bailing off to that parking lot? If so perhaps she never saw the victim initially. If that’s been put out there, I’d like to see it.
It’s an interesting theory.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:34 am to Vacherie Saint
The objective data is you hitting someone in the rear. When you are following a vehicle you are supposed to do it from a distance where you can react to their maneuvers.
Noone is saying Lacy didn't start the sequence of events. People are saying how the lady in the Kia reacted is what caused someone to die.
If someone pulls a gun and fires shots at me in a ihop parking lot, then I return fire and due to my bad aim/lack of awareness, I take out 4 innocent bystanders. I didnt start the chain of events, but I am responsible for their deaths.
Noone is saying Lacy didn't start the sequence of events. People are saying how the lady in the Kia reacted is what caused someone to die.
If someone pulls a gun and fires shots at me in a ihop parking lot, then I return fire and due to my bad aim/lack of awareness, I take out 4 innocent bystanders. I didnt start the chain of events, but I am responsible for their deaths.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:34 am to SammyTiger
Of course it matters idiot. If you want her held liable for vehicular homicide, you have to prove a legal distinction between an evasive maneuver and separate reckless act. And even then, it doesn’t completely absolve Lacy.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:34 am to Vacherie Saint
That’s what I’m wondering.
Did she not see them or did she see them but think that she had time to get across?
How did she see the green car but not this one that was perhaps closer to her?
Also — I read that the gentleman had a heart attack. I’m curious if it happened at the scene or at the hospital, not that it ultimately matters.
Tragic. All of it.
Did she not see them or did she see them but think that she had time to get across?
How did she see the green car but not this one that was perhaps closer to her?
Also — I read that the gentleman had a heart attack. I’m curious if it happened at the scene or at the hospital, not that it ultimately matters.
Tragic. All of it.
This post was edited on 10/8/25 at 9:38 am
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:36 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
you have to prove a legal distinction between an evasive maneuver and separate reckless act.
The gold truck pulled an evasive maneuver. The kia committed a reckless act.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:39 am to sgallo3
quote:
The objective data is you hitting someone in the rear.
lol, that’s not enough. There’s factors such as braking distance, diminishing reaction times, condition specific factors, driver judgment, etc.
I’ll give you an example. I once rear ended someone who abruptly hit their brakes reacting to a line of braking cars in succession, the first of which slams in her brakes to avoid a pedestrian. No citation was issued.
quote:
Noone is saying Lacy didn't start the sequence of events.
This is exactly what Lacy’s attorney is saying bro. It’s why we are all here.
This post was edited on 10/8/25 at 9:55 am
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:39 am to SammyTiger
quote:
I will say this again, it doesn’t really matter.
if she didn’t have time to stop that’s her fault
If she had time to stop and instead chose to swerve that’s her fault. Objectively l, that was the wrong decision. It wasn’t reasonable or prudent.
NOTHING YOU ARE ARGUING MATTERS A frick ABOUT KYREN LACY AND HIS ACTIONS WHICH AMOUNTED TO NEGLIGENT HOMICIDE. NOTHING MATTERS A frick ABOUT HER PARTIAL AT FAULTS, her actions were NOT CRIMINAL in nature. We have 2 at faults here. Get the frick over it.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:40 am to sgallo3
Again, you have to be able to prove that in court. Especially if you intend to charge her with negligenct homicide.
This isn’t complicated
This isn’t complicated
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:43 am to Chad504boy
Sammy is hands-down the dumbest mfer on this forum. Fun for trolling but not to be taken seriously
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:46 am to sgallo3
quote:Apples to Oranges
If someone pulls a gun and fires shots at me in a ihop parking lot, then I return fire and due to my bad aim/lack of awareness, I take out 4 innocent bystanders. I didnt start the chain of events, but I am responsible for their deaths.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:46 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:
Again, you have to be able to prove that in court.
well, her car was on the wrong side of the line on impact.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:47 am to Tigers4Lyfe
Correct. Traffic law is a completely different animal.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:50 am to SammyTiger
That doesn’t prove that she was following too closely. It only suggests that, in that flash of a moment, she decided veering left was her safest evasive action. Maybe she never saw the victim.
But my understanding is she was cited for the lane violation, so you have a better argument there.
But my understanding is she was cited for the lane violation, so you have a better argument there.
Posted on 10/8/25 at 9:51 am to Vacherie Saint
quote:I'm not a lawyer, police officer, nor even an accident investigator. But I am educated and have common sense. Something that is severely lacking around these parts.
Correct. Traffic law is a completely different animal.
Page 45 of 60
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News