- 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: Attorney for Smith family / Attorney for Hayes l Press Conference Recap
Posted on 4/13/16 at 2:56 pm to Red Stick Tigress
Posted on 4/13/16 at 2:56 pm to Red Stick Tigress
you should use the quote button if you are going to copy paste. Or quotation marks.
0
Posted on 4/13/16 at 2:57 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
3)why, in your estimation, did Hayes follow Smith, and not only follow him, but ram the back of Smith's Mercedes with the front of his Humer?
So because of #2 and a questionable driver means it's acceptable for #3 to go down?
I see this behavior all the time
quote:
2)why, after this, did Will Smith pull around the Hummer and speed off, running a red light in haste?
Regardless if it was a fender bender, it doesn't give you the right to rear end someone. Get out and start shooting at them with such rage and recklessness.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 2:58 pm to diat150
quote:
the shot placement on will and the fact the he was slumped in the benz, in my mind, makes me think that will was reaching for something or trying to get back in the benz.
This is meaningless if Hayes pulled out his gun & shot the wife first. Will had every right then to go for his gun to protect he & his wife.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 2:58 pm to Red Stick Tigress
if he shot her first and it can be proven that it wasnt just stray bullets he is done.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 2:58 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
he also said he didnt know why Hayes breaked during the intiial hit and run. lol
Yes. I'm having a hard time giving credibility to the statement of the attorney when it's clear that at least a couple of his statements are misleading/lies.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 2:59 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
It's not far fetched that he just missed Will and hit the wife.
You are the one making assumptions..
quote:
You say he wanted to kill her, why didnt he kill her after he killed Will? Oh, do you think he ran out of bullets?
It was said shot her to "stop" her.. (not kill) Use comprehension Lester. At least try to. If this is how it went down it is to get her out of the way. He obviously had an agenda with Will regardless.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:01 pm to CajunsTigersSaints
My first thought would have been ""Is this a carjacking?" and I would have driven off too.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:01 pm to beauchristopher
quote:
Regardless if it was a fender bender, it doesn't give you the right to rear end someone. Get out and start shooting at them with such rage and recklessness.
He wasn't saying this. They were arguing whether or not Smith hit Hayes car. Your anger for Lester is palpable though.
This post was edited on 4/13/16 at 3:02 pm
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:01 pm to BigBrod81
quote:
This is meaningless if Hayes pulled out his gun & shot the wife first. Will had every right then to go for his gun to protect he & his wife.
yeah, no doubt. thats why any witness testimony or video from the altercation means so much.
we have one witness that claims will was talking about grabbing his gun. he ends up shot up leaning in his vehicle. the idea is that he threatened and then hayes shot him thinking he was coming out with a gun with his back turned. that makes sense to me in a self defense perspective.
if he shot wills wife first and they were both outside of the vehicle, he is done.
if she was trying to stop will from getting the gun and was collateral damage, I can still see self defense.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:02 pm to beauchristopher
quote:
Regardless if it was a fender bender, it doesn't give you the right to rear end someone. Get out and start shooting at them with such rage and recklessness.
Do you remotely think thats what he was replying in questioning the guy that keeps insisting we dont know if contact happened?
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:03 pm to Rocky4LSU
quote:
My first thought would have been ""Is this a carjacking?" and I would have driven off too.
really? you rear end someone at a stoplight and you think you are being car jacked? not to mention the carjacker driving a hummer?
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:03 pm to moneyg
quote:
Yes. I'm having a hard time giving credibility to the statement of the attorney when it's clear that at least a couple of his statements are misleading/lies.
Exactly, if we going to go by everything the Attorney's say then we need to believe the other guy's attorney that was in the hummer that said the passenger said that Hayes saved his life. It goes both ways. The only difference is Hayes' attorney's statements have been proven factual while Smith's attorney hasn't followed anything that non biased witnesses have stated.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:03 pm to diat150
quote:
if he shot her first and it can be proven that it wasnt just stray bullets he is done.
Those shots were not stray bullets. Look at the height difference between Will & his wife. She was purposely shot in her legs. Stray bullets would have hit her in her upper torso or possibly her head. Hayes had to completely change his angle he held the gun from a lower angle to shoot the wife to a higher angle to shoot Will. Now, look at Will was hit. Those wounds were with the intent to kill.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:03 pm to beauchristopher
quote:
it doesn't give you the right to rear end someone. Get out and start shooting at them with such rage and recklessness.
link?
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:04 pm to Ex-Popcorn
quote:
This is not as clear as some think it is
I'm pretty sure that in the state of Louisiana, it is never legal to shoot someone in the back. No matter what, because once their back is turned- its clear that they no longer present an immediate danger to anyone. I personally know a man who served 12 years for shooting an armed robbery suspect in the back, because the guy turned to run just as my friend fired his hand gun. Guy was armed, but since he had his back to my friend, it was no longer self defense.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:06 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Why didnt he finish her off, and then flee, instead of staying around (with the wounded wife right there) and calling the cops?
You are thinking rational for another person who is enraged.
You can't. Perhaps he came back down from his anger and didn't feel like running and a potential to get in even more serious trouble. Perhaps he is so cocky and confident he feels he can get away with, just as others of the past have. That's stone cold killer type of stuff to have no emotion. Even if you felt you were in the right.
If this is how it went down, it sounds like he had no care for the wife.. and wanted Will, period. It doesn't mean he had intentions to just kill everyone and run. He shot the man in the back an insane amount of times. It's like this is what he wanted.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:07 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
dude, come on. It's simple reasoning. The same reason all these dudes were wrong yesterday. This is a message board, not a courtroom. You dont need hard evidence to piece some things together.
says the same guy telling everyone else they don't know what they are talking about. seriously, you are the worst
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:09 pm to lsufan31
quote:
I'm pretty sure that in the state of Louisiana, it is never legal to shoot someone in the back. No matter what, because once their back is turned- its clear that they no longer present an immediate danger to anyone. I personally know a man who served 12 years for shooting an armed robbery suspect in the back, because the guy turned to run just as my friend fired his hand gun. Guy was armed, but since he had his back to my friend, it was no longer self defense.
no this is stupid. if i have a bomb strapped to me but turn around, you cant defend yourself? crazy scenario, but you have to look at the whole situation.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:10 pm to BigBrod81
quote:
Those shots were not stray bullets. Look at the height difference between Will & his wife. She was purposely shot in her legs. Stray bullets would have hit her in her upper torso or possibly her head. Hayes had to completely change his angle he held the gun from a lower angle to shoot the wife to a higher angle to shoot Will. Now, look at Will was hit. Those wounds were with the intent to kill.
who knows. the evidence will come out.
Posted on 4/13/16 at 3:10 pm to Keeble9145
quote:
The only difference is Hayes' attorney's statements have been proven factual
Page 20 of 69
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News