- 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: Grand Jury Takes No Action On Merritt Landry Case
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:40 pm to White Roach
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:40 pm to White Roach
quote:
Are victims called to testify before a Grand Jury? I don't think so, but I'm not sure.
"Victim" is such a strange word in this case. I am not hating on the quoted post, but it seems both parties could legitimately claim to be the perpetrator and the victim in the same case.
1
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:40 pm to M1911
I agree with just about all of that.
Im just guessing what happened. If it happened the way i think it did, I still think Landry has some justification in doing what he did. So I dont know why you say im talking out of my arse. '
I also realize he does have to say some things(whether they happened or not) in order to cover his arse.
Im just guessing what happened. If it happened the way i think it did, I still think Landry has some justification in doing what he did. So I dont know why you say im talking out of my arse. '
I also realize he does have to say some things(whether they happened or not) in order to cover his arse.
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:42 pm to M1911
What's riskier...
1) Staying inside where you can protect your wife and family and calling 911, or
2) Going outside in the dark and confronting the trespasser?
1) Staying inside where you can protect your wife and family and calling 911, or
2) Going outside in the dark and confronting the trespasser?
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:42 pm to M1911
quote:
So cute. Do you even read the stuff you post?
The reason psycho whack jobs like you have to hire very expensive attorneys like me is because you don't know how to read the law. Did you just bold random parts of the statute? Clearly the fine folks at the Orleans Parish DA's office don't agree with your quick take that it's an open and shut case of a justifiable shooting.
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 10:43 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:42 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
So I dont know why you say im talking out of my arse. '
because earlier you said there was a less than 5% chance that this hood rat would have acted like he was reaching for a gun if he was unarmed.
He's a 14 y/o criminal. He doesn't behave in a manner that normal folks consider rational.
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:43 pm to Corkfather
quote:
I also think the balls that some of these kids have is severely underestimated. To say he would have ran or put his hands up is just way off base.
Having been in a situation involving five kids that were probably 12-15, 17, & 19; I know a little about what they're capable of.
In most of these cases, the upper hand is established pretty quickly though.
Landry had the upper hand here. As tragic as your situation ended up being, those guys had the upper hand by catching yall off guard.
Landy had the upper hand here. A)they were on his property B)he had a weapon C)he saw the kid before the kid saw him.
So yea, i think an unarmed 14 year old is going to run or surrender to someone with a weapon. HIs options are severely limited.
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:44 pm to Contender54
quote:
because earlier you said there was a less than 5% chance that this hood rat would have acted like he was reaching for a gun if he was unarmed.
He's a 14 y/o criminal. He doesn't behave in a manner that normal folks consider rational.
no, but he knows when his life is in danger. When you are on someone else's property with a gun pointed at you, and you don't have on? Please. He may not be book smart, but he knows he's fricked.
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 10:45 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:46 pm to Corkfather
Cork, you do know that just because you find all this legal research on the computer doesn't make it correct?
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:47 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
I agree with just about all of that.
Im just guessing what happened. If it happened the way i think it did, I still think Landry has some justification in doing what he did. So I dont know why you say im talking out of my arse. '
I also realize he does have to say some things(whether they happened or not) in order to cover his arse.
Because you have no idea what you are talking about and continue to talk out of your arse.
When your family and property are on the line, all bets are off.
To me, you are pretty much 100% in the wrong when you threaten someone's family in such a way and deserve just about anything bad that comes your way.
Of course, if it was clearly illegal under the law and I was charged with finding him guilty or not according to the law, I would do so. Always be aware of the law and operate within it, even if it's as confusing and ambiguous as today's typical statute.
Although, finding someone guilty strictly according to the law may or may not be necessary. I'd need further clarification on this one.
quote:
“The judge will instruct the jury that it must uphold the law as he gives it. He will be lying. The jury must judge the law as well as the facts. Juries were instituted to protect citizens from the tyranny of the government. It is not the duty of the jury to uphold the law. It is the jury's duty to see that justice is done ... Once on a jury, must I use the law as given by the judge, even if I think it's a bad law, or wrongly applied? The answer is ‘No.’ You are free to vote on the verdict according to your conscience.”
LINK
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 10:54 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:47 pm to White Roach
quote:
What's riskier...
1) Staying inside where you can protect your wife and family and calling 911, or
2) Going outside in the dark and confronting the trespasser?
Depends. NOPD is notoriously slow to respond and severely understaffed, especially in the 8th District, which also patrols the FQ and CBD.
If I were confident that I'd be able to pull the trigger, I'd take the offensive option.
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 10:48 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:48 pm to GaryMyMan
quote:
The reason psycho whack jobs like you have to hire very expensive attorneys like me is because you don't know how to read the law. Did you just bold random parts of the statute? Clearly the fine folks at the Orleans Parish DA's office don't agree with your quick take that it's an open and shut case of a justifiable shooting.
Ah.. the old ad hominem and "I'm just going to say I'm a lawyer and not actually refute any of your claims" attacks.
Priceless. And even cuter.
Keep going. Please.
Seriously though, I hope you aren't a lawyer (and I'm pretty sure you aren't, certainly not an expensive one or I hope you do refunds). Read the shite you post and then try to actually comprehend what it's saying.
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 10:50 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:49 pm to oilmanNO
quote:
Cork, you do know that just because you find all this legal research on the computer doesn't make it correct?
No one has been able to show evidence to the contrary. You're more than welcome to.
I'm just stating the law, the way it's interpreted depends on the people deciding the case.
Oh btw, that other thread that didn't happen... I wound up being right, ain't that some shite. It would never work, but that's not what's important.
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 10:52 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:49 pm to GRTiger
I agree with you on that...
Coulter was the recipient of a GSW to the head and the Grand Jury was hearing evidence on Landry's actions, so technically, Coulter would be presented as the "victim" of the shooting. However, from a societal point of view, this kid was anything but a victim.
Coulter was the recipient of a GSW to the head and the Grand Jury was hearing evidence on Landry's actions, so technically, Coulter would be presented as the "victim" of the shooting. However, from a societal point of view, this kid was anything but a victim.
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:50 pm to M1911
quote:
When your family and property are on the line, all bets are off.
To me, you are pretty much 100% in the wrong when you threaten someone's family in such a way and deserve anything bad that comes your way
yea, you cant read. At all.
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:52 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
yea, you cant read. At all.
lol
That pretty clearly wasn't necessarily aimed at refuting anything you said.
I was just making the point that even if what you think happened (he snuck up on the kid and didn't give him a friendly heads up) actually happened, he's still pretty much in the right under the law as I see it.
I mean, it was 2AM, the place was fenced in, and he was (from what I understand) trying to break in. You don't have to be courteous or make it a fair fight under that scenario.
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 11:15 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:54 pm to M1911
quote:
not actually refute any of your claims" attacks.
That's my point. You posted a statute that contradicts your position that the shooting was lawful and use it as evidence that the shooting was lawful. I can't argue with that.
I don't practice criminal law but I do hope you call one of my colleagues when you inevitably splatter the brains of your UPS driver all over your front porch for making a 9pm delivery.
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 10:56 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:54 pm to M1911
I didnt say he needed to give him a heads up. I said he more than likely didn't.
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:56 pm to White Roach
quote:
What's riskier...
1) Staying inside where you can protect your wife and family and calling 911, or
2) Going outside in the dark and confronting the trespasser?
NOPD... Not Our Problem, Dude.
Either way, who's to say an intruder isn't simply going to start shooting through the walls?
It has certainly happened before and will happen again.
The best option is to neutralize the threat as quickly as possible while not putting your family at risk.
Probably better for an intruder to shoot at you outside than in a room where you are huddled down with your family.
This post was edited on 2/27/14 at 10:57 pm
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:56 pm to Corkfather
Supposedly (I haven't seen it), the surveillance video shows the kids passing on their bikes a couple of times. Coulter jumps the fence. There's a flash, presumably the muzzle flash, after 8 or 10 minutes. NOPD arrives 3 or 4 minutes after that.
I don't know if 911 was called when Landry heard the dog barking and saw someone outside, or after he shot Coulter.
I don't know if 911 was called when Landry heard the dog barking and saw someone outside, or after he shot Coulter.
Posted on 2/27/14 at 10:57 pm to Lester Earl
Dude you are so fricking white. Zero street cred.
Page 9 of 12
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News