- 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: Michael Drejka (florida shooter) charged with manslaughter of Markeis Mcglockton
Posted on 8/13/18 at 10:24 pm to Sentrius
Posted on 8/13/18 at 10:24 pm to Sentrius
quote:If by nothing you mean an entire thread devoted to explaining the basics of law to you, then okay. I don’t know half of what Antonio Moss does about law, but my wife’s an attorney so I’m used to being regularly walked through the basics on a variety of issues. You’re obviously not receptive to that.
So you got nothing.
Good night.
0
Posted on 8/13/18 at 10:31 pm to Sentrius
quote:
This guy didn't magically lose his rights to self defense because of sketchy and shady past behavior.
quote:
Pinellas County sheriff's Detective George Moffett said in court records released Monday that a septic truck driver told him Michael Drejka threatened to shoot him and used racial slurs three months ago when the driver parked in the same handicapped-accessible parking space that victim Markeis McGlockton's family parked in on July 19.
Moffit also said that in 2012, drivers involved in two separate road-rage confrontations with Drejka said he pointed a gun at them. Moffet said that in one of the cases, the teen driver declined to press charges.
In the other, the woman driver left the scene before the officer could get her information. The detective said that in both cases, Drejka denied pointing a gun but one was found in his car.
His past behavior is well beyond shady
Posted on 8/13/18 at 10:36 pm to LSUJML
quote:
His past behavior is well beyond shady
So?
The nature of a right is just that. A right.
A right is something that cannot be taken away, only litigated in a legal proceeding to determine if it's applicable in this case and whether or not he had the right to use deadly force.
And a JURY of his peers will decide that.
Posted on 8/13/18 at 11:15 pm to WJF004
Don't think you deserve to die over a parking spot. But the guy was still going towards him before the gun was pulled out.
Also, wonder why the GF didn't just say, my bad, and move the car?
Also, wonder why the GF didn't just say, my bad, and move the car?
This post was edited on 8/13/18 at 11:16 pm
Posted on 8/14/18 at 7:01 am to Sentrius
quote:
I was merely providing the background of what exactly Antonio Moss was shitting on and expressing a simple opinion that a lawyer with that opinion was very disappointing.
I am not shitting on the original idea. It was absolutely necessary both in 1776 and 1787 and was a great safeguard against monarchical tyranny. However, circumstances change and I am willing to adept reasonable alternatives to changing conditions.
Your attack of my argument isn’t substantive. You are trying to somehow link my argument with a criticism on the Sixth Amendment as adopted in 1791 which it is not.
When we adopted the right to a trial by jury, we didn’t have systems in place that could identify highly competent people that could understand 21st Century arguments.
Posted on 8/14/18 at 7:16 am to Sentrius
quote:
So?
The nature of a right is just that. A right.
A right is something that cannot be taken away, only litigated in a legal proceeding to determine if it's applicable in this case and whether or not he had the right to use deadly force.
The definition of right notwithstanding, his past behavior of confrontation can go to evidence of character - specifically whether he was violent in nature which is relevant when determining a mindset prior to the shot.
Now, whether a judge lets that evidence in is another question.
Posted on 8/14/18 at 7:27 am to StupidBinder
quote:
Someone backing away from you is not an IMMEDIATE threat to you. You don’t get to shoot people just because of what you imagine they might do later on.
right wrong or in between, i believe this will ultimately be the sentiment of the courts
Posted on 8/14/18 at 7:32 am to Antonio Moss
quote:
This thread is a perfect example of why I despise our trial by jury of peers system.
Generally speaking, juries are made up mostly of people who are too stupid to get off the jury.
Posted on 8/14/18 at 7:58 am to dgnx6
quote:
Also, wonder why the GF didn't just say, my bad, and move the car?
Some people just shut down when some psychopath just starts screaming at them.
Lol at people in this thread saying a push is a felony, people punch each other all the time and just get misdemeanors.
Posted on 8/14/18 at 8:03 am to oleyeller
Cool..so I can go yell at your wife and then if you come up and push me away I can kill you?
That's what you are saying?
I'll shoot you and you'll go down saying"it was a good shoot"?
No you're just being a troll
That's what you are saying?
I'll shoot you and you'll go down saying"it was a good shoot"?
No you're just being a troll
This post was edited on 8/14/18 at 8:08 am
Posted on 8/14/18 at 8:10 am to WJF004
I agree with many others, should be charged Guilty without question. Imagine if everyone could shoot someone who pushes them down in life. Society would be even more weak minded which is almost impossible to fathom at this point.
Page 9 of 9
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News