- 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: Will Smith Murder Trial-Guilty of manslaughter and attempted manslaughter
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:30 pm to LNCHBOX
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:30 pm to LNCHBOX
quote:
It's hilarious that you think i'm the only insufferable one
I've tried to be objective. I've said many times Fuller is doing a good job and has shifted my prediction way up.
This guy has made this thread an absolute chore.
1
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:31 pm to Rocky4LSU
Why do you think he shot Racquel smith and no one else outside of Will Smith? Not the 2-3 agitated thugs trying to fight him?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:32 pm to lsupride87
quote:
But yesterday, you inferred differently
No I didn't.
The point is still the exact same. Once the prosecution destroys the self-defense argument, which they have imo, Hayes will need to rehabilitate that and demonstrate that he acted reasonably.
You're thinking to much about burden.
All that has to be shown is: Did he act reasonably? Did he have reasonable fear?
If the answer is no to both then it doesn't matter a whole.
Its the defenses job to try and turn around the damage that the prosecution has done. That's all I meant.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:33 pm to Lester Earl
I agree, LE, but I'm probably biased.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:35 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Fun Bunch
Please explain what you were inferring here, and how you were not incorrect
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:36 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
but my general feeling this far is no way they can have a M2 conviction based on this evidence
Why? Take a look at the statute.
Its not that different in Louisiana. Most states require some form of premeditation but Louisiana does not.
All he needs is specific intent to kill or inflict great bodily harm.
I would say 7 shots in the back is specific intent to kill.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:36 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
Man. I am just not seeing what you're seeing.
Fuller is good and has done a good job overall, and to me drastically increased Hayes chances which I had at 0% pre-trial (now probably at 25% currently), but the O'Neill stuff to me has been laughably transparent.
He tried really really hard to make chicken salad out of chicken shite but O'Niel was that bad.
but you ate up all the chicken shite the state is spoon feeding you with Saints Star power and raquel crying. why not cover that she was a basically worthless witness
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:36 pm to lsupride87
You misunderstand my point.
I was saying that Hayes fearing for his life is not the standard.
I was saying that Hayes REASONABLY fearing for his life is the standard.
His subjective thoughts aren't particularly relevant.
I was saying that Hayes fearing for his life is not the standard.
I was saying that Hayes REASONABLY fearing for his life is the standard.
His subjective thoughts aren't particularly relevant.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:37 pm to Nado Jenkins83
quote:
why not cover that she was a basically worthless witness
She was a sympathy witness. Beyond that she was irrlevant for the most part but sympathy is huge in these cases.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:38 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
I don't think I ever said that. If I did my point was that once the prosecution establishes their case and pistol whips the self defense argument, Hayes/Fuller will need to pull that back and demonstrate that his fear was reasonable.
Maybe I worded it poorly.
This makes complete sense, I agree with it. The burden is on the state, but once the state meets it, it's up to the defense to find a way to tell the jury they haven't. It's a practical and real explanation of what's left.
Like I previously said, I just don't think there's a way to illustrate a reasonable fear at this point without him getting up there.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:38 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:Fair enough.
You misunderstand my point.
I was saying that Hayes fearing for his life is not the standard.
I was saying that Hayes REASONABLY fearing for his life is the standard.
His subjective thoughts aren't particularly relevant.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:39 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
She was a sympathy witness. Beyond that she was irrlevant for the most part but sympathy is huge in these cases.
i still think she was too drunk to remember what really happened. especially when combined with a severe tragedy
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:40 pm to tLSU
quote:I dont feel like the state has presented a case that he did not have a reasonable fear though.
Like I previously said, I just don't think there's a way to illustrate a reasonable fear at this point without him getting up there.
You do?
I really dont think I am being biased when I say nobody has proven shite one way or the other.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:41 pm to Nado Jenkins83
quote:
i still think she was too drunk to remember what really happened. especially when combined with a severe tragedy
Maybe. But prove it.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:41 pm to lsupride87
Anyone have an idea of how many more people the state plans to call to the stand?
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:42 pm to lsupride87
quote:
I dont feel like the state has presented a case that he did not have a reasonable fear though.
Of course they have. Do you have any reason to believe based on testimony so far that Hayes had a reasonable fear of losing his life before he took out a gun?
They don't have to get up there and spell it out. Its clear so far that there was nothing to establish a reasonable fear.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:43 pm to lsupride87
quote:
I dont feel like the state has presented a case that he did not have a reasonable fear though.
You do?
I really dont think I am being biased when I say nobody has proven shite one way or the other.
Right before that sentence he says "The burden is on the state, but once the state meets it, it's up to the defense to find a way to tell the jury they haven't. It's a practical and real explanation of what's left."
I feel like you only read part of peoples' posts and then reply. To me that doesn't say he thinks they met it.
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 1:44 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:44 pm to lsupride87
I promise you the DA will get up there and recap on Closing that his fear was not reasonable because blank blank blank and that he acted unreasonably because of blank blank blank.
It will be up the jury to consider that and see if the burden is met.
It will be up the jury to consider that and see if the burden is met.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:45 pm to Lester Earl
Closest to gun in car, I assume. Also his co-pilot is on other side of hummer with a weapon to cover them if needed.
I said yesterday, he was a fool for emptying his weapon. If he was in fear for his life from all these "attacking, aggressive people", why end up with weapon that can only be used as a club?
I said yesterday, he was a fool for emptying his weapon. If he was in fear for his life from all these "attacking, aggressive people", why end up with weapon that can only be used as a club?
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 1:51 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:45 pm to Fun Bunch
im sure they took some blood before she went into surgery.
you can't operate on someone with thinned blood from drinking.
Page 100 of 248
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News