- 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: LSU RB Jeremy Hill Suspended (Updated 4/30 with Nola.com story)
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:19 pm to bam1131
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:19 pm to bam1131
quote:
Actually you should be using the only evidence there is...the video.
The fricking video only captured the last half of the incident. How is this hard to comprehend?
2
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:20 pm to the LSUSaint
quote:
It doesn't matter if he had just raped a kid, when someone is getting up and walking away you CANNOT punch them behind the head. Your action them becomes a crime.
I'm going to acknowledge that this is an extreme example. BUT, if someone just raped a kid and they are getting up to walk away, I'm pretty sure you can punch them and wait on the police to show up. Call it a citizen's arrest.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:20 pm to The Mick
quote:
well, when the judges start ruling on "damn, I don;t care what the law says"...maybe your argument will matter.
I think what he meant was it's relevant to consider heat of the moment. Can we all sit at our computer with time to reflect and know hitting the guy from behind was a bad idea? Yeah. But the court will recognize that you don't have your best judgment in the heat of the moment if potentially the other guy started it and called you the most offensive word in the english language.
quote:
If the guy is walking away, and they punch him from behind (two vs. one) that is NOT GOOD. That is no longer reactionary or defensive, thats aggressive.
And again, in his defense, what he meant by not using the video as a crutch is that unless the video provides clear, convincing, and irrefutable proof that Hill is 100% culpable, then I hope they don't use it to make a decision just because it's all they have. And seeing as how nobody here has seen the video, let's not assume that a cell-phone quality camera, operated by a likely drunk guy, at night, in the middle of a crowd, when the fight was already under way, is the most reliable evidence... maybe it's really clear, maybe it isn't. Interesting that there's no charges yet though
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:21 pm to rcocke2
quote:
According to some people he responded to a racial slur. He had to defend himself by punching this guy in the back of the head.
I was just saying that we don't know that victim didn't initiate it by punching Hill, all we know from the video is Hill doing the punching.
And yeah, it's pretty fricked up for Hill to punch him after he got up. Not defending him there
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:22 pm to dnm3305
ok...its the ONLY EVIDENCE. If it is the ONLY EVIDENCE in court, that's what they are going to roll with. What don't you understand? Besides, if the "victim" was at fault then the witnesses would have told that to the police and he would have been arrested.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:22 pm to Tmacelroy12
You've got to wonder what spurred the video in the first place.
Could have been someone punched hill.
Could have been that the videographer just wanted a video of Jeremy Hill.
Could have been someone punched hill.
Could have been that the videographer just wanted a video of Jeremy Hill.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:22 pm to Tmacelroy12
quote:
I was just saying that we don't know that victim didn't initiate it by punching Hill
I can tell you that did not happen
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:23 pm to TexasTiger1185
quote:
'm going to acknowledge that this is an extreme example. BUT, if someone just raped a kid and they are getting up to walk away, I'm pretty sure you can punch them and wait on the police to show up. Call it a citizen's arrest.
I agree, I was just trying to get the guy to understand JH's actions (as speculated here) represent a totally seperate crime from what happened before the video began.... 
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:23 pm to the LSUSaint
quote:
the LSUSaint
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:23 pm to bam1131
quote:
ok...its the ONLY EVIDENCE. If it is the ONLY EVIDENCE in court, that's what they are going to roll with. What don't you understand? Besides, if the "victim" was at fault then the witnesses would have told that to the police and he would have been arrested.
You realize that witness testimony is also a form of evidence, don't you?
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:25 pm to Tmacelroy12
Yes but I am speaking of physical evidence when referring to the video. And apparently the witnesses have agreed with the video, otherwise they victim would have been arrested as well.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:25 pm to bam1131
quote:
ok...its the ONLY EVIDENCE.
No it's not.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:27 pm to Tmacelroy12
But, if Hill's attny is good, he can discredit every single witness there for being hammered drunk most likely. And that still leaves the video
This post was edited on 4/30/13 at 3:27 pm
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:27 pm to dnm3305
quote:
The fricking video only captured the last half of the incident. How is this hard to comprehend?
We have NO clue why you can't comprehend how the video is exactly what will do Hill in.....if it is true, he sucker-punched a kid behind the head as he was stumbling away and then celebrated with his friend who he is refusing to identify to the authorities!
You do comprehend that they will have video from inside the bar showing if he knows the guy he celebrated with, right? Which will lead to more charges if he doesn't tell them the person's name!
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:27 pm to TexasTiger1185
Or the guy saw a fight breaking out and wanted to record it....I know this is extremely rare but if you check youtube this actually does happen. It's obvious the guy didn't record the first part. Could this be because he was removing the phone from his pocket, unlocking it, and looking for his camera app? Nah this whole thing is a setup....the REC is truly out to get LSU. 
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:28 pm to bam1131
quote:
Yes but I am speaking of physical evidence when referring to the video. And apparently the witnesses have agreed with the video, otherwise they victim would have been arrested as well.
I mean, I can agree to a video that I watch. It's like saying, have you seen that video of the dude breaking his leg, yeah, I saw that video. You aren't proving anything other than the fact that the video is real.
And yes, the video is the only physical evidence, but witness testimony is also pretty convincing if it comes from several different people that convey the same story. Like I said earlier, I don't want the only damning piece of evidence be the video. The full story hasn't been brought to light
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:28 pm to the LSUSaint
I owe you a beer sir..or 10
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:28 pm to The dirtyBEEF
quote:
I think I found the cameraman's facebook..
Why would anyone care about the cameraman?
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:30 pm to Tmacelroy12
quote:
I mean, I can agree to a video that I watch. It's like saying, have you seen that video of the dude breaking his leg, yeah, I saw that video. You aren't proving anything other than the fact that the video is real.
So what you are saying is that the witnesses viewed the video before the cops took their statements? I highly doubt that.
Posted on 4/30/13 at 3:31 pm to RogerTheShrubber
quote:
Why would anyone care about the cameraman?
Because everyone knows he was part of the Master Plan to bring down our 2013 season....Who videos bar room brawls these days??????
Page 47 of 100
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News