- 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 12/7/16 at 12:58 pm to TigerFred
Posted on 12/7/16 at 12:58 pm to TigerFred
quote:Exactly. Fun doesn't want to admit he has a side here(we all subconsciously do). So he is trying to play the in a lawyer and smarter than you card
If it is so irrelevant and only case law matters the DA must really suck. If all that testimony is being given without an objection by the DA when only case law matters then there is no chance Hayes gets convicted.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 12:58 pm to TigerFred
quote:
According to your posts the only evidence that matters is Hayes shot Smith
Well that's a pretty insulting post, but I'm not going to get into it with an admin. I don't practice contract law and never have.
And I've never said that.
I've said all of the other stuff that keeps getting oooed and ahhed about is window dressing, look over here stuff. Its mostly irrelevant designed to fool idiots.
The defense has to establish a REASONABLE FEAR that his LIFE was in danger, and that he used the REASONABLE FORCE NECESSARY to preserve his life.
This will be explained to the jury in extremely intimate and painstaking detail, in detailed jury instructions.
Case law reflects what past juries have decided. It is pretty relevant and fairly consistent.
Hayes' defense has to rise to a much, much, much higher level than has been presented.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 12:59 pm to Nado Jenkins83
quote:
tell us again what you saw that night
Have you ever testified?
Opposing counsel tries to confuse and twist what you say.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 12:59 pm to Mr. Hangover
quote:
Can you defend yourself just because someone is potentially arming themselves?
Of course you should be able to, but 1. I have yet to see it be proven he was indeed arming himself. 2. Hayes wasn't obligated to stand there and wait. He could have diffused the situation by leaving. No?
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:00 pm to lsupride87
quote:
want to admit he has a side here(we all subconsciously do).
Which side do you have here? Just curious.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:00 pm to TigerFred
quote:
only case law matters
Who said this? I've never uttered the words "only case law matters". Case law gives us insight into what past juries have done, consistently. Jury INSTRUCTIONS will say "If you believe this, you must find guilty. If you believe this, you must acquit" etc etc and that will be based on the statute and....case law.
I'm just going to withdraw from this before I say something I regret.
Ya'll have fun.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:01 pm to lsuhunt555
I think it is manslaughter, but he will get off
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:01 pm to TigahJay
quote:
He said he was going to get his gun. He was already back in the car with the door open and the gun was within reach between the drivers seat and the console. You don't think that indicates reaching? What do you think he was doing, twiddling his thumbs?
You can go anywheres with this
Do we even know for sure he was shot while IN the car?
Despite eyewitnesses testimony, which has been pretty shoddy since day 1, nobody knows FOR SURE he was even going for his gun. It could have been a number of things.. is it likely he was going for his weapon? Yea absolutely, but he could have been going to get a phone to call the police, actually going to get into his car to try to get everyone to just leave, shite, he could have been getting a drink IDK...
I don't know what happened, just throwing shite at the wall
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:02 pm to lsupride87
Gotcha. So your main gripe here is the charge is too great. Makes sense, and with that said, im not terribly sure why if Manslaughter was an attainable conviction they chose to try him on Murder 2.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:03 pm to diat150
quote:
is bac is so high that even if you cut it 30-40% you can say that it is probable that he made bad judgement due to alcohol.
I'm not arguing for or against "bad judgement due to alcohol" just merely pointing out that BAC readings can be affected by things like... death.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:04 pm to Red Stick Tigress
quote:
Opposing counsel tries to confuse and twist what you say.
I'd be terrible on the stand because I have a fricking terrible memory, especially when it comes to conversations
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:04 pm to Mr. Hangover
quote:
I don't know what happened, just throwing shite at the wall
Thats partially what I am arguing. People here are using the defense's case as church. No one has proven that he was reaching to arm himself.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:05 pm to lsuhunt555
quote:
He could have diffused the situation by leaving. No?
If stand your ground applies here then Hayes doesn't have to retreat.
However, the ability to retreat CAN be used against him as one factor of many.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:05 pm to Mr. Hangover
quote:
Do we even know for sure he was shot while IN the car? Despite eyewitnesses testimony, which has been pretty shoddy since day 1, nobody knows FOR SURE he was even going for his gun. It could have been a number of things.. is it likely he was going for his weapon? Yea absolutely, but he could have been going to get a phone to call the police, actually going to get into his car to try to get everyone to just leave, shite, he could have been getting a drink IDK...
Yes, his body was found in the seat. It's been reported that he told Hayes that he was going to get his gun. IF testimonies show that to be true then he wasn't just trying to leave or call the police.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:05 pm to lsuhunt555
quote:
Of course you should be able to, but 1. I have yet to see it be proven he was indeed arming himself. 2. Hayes wasn't obligated to stand there and wait. He could have diffused the situation by leaving. No?
I wasn't arguing with you, I was genuinely curious... look at one of my previous posts where I talk about WS being by the car
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:06 pm to lsuhunt555
quote:
Gotcha. So your main gripe here is the charge is too great. Makes sense, and with that said, im not terribly sure why if Manslaughter was an attainable conviction they chose to try him on Murder 2.
Those who argue this don't know that Murder 2 in LA has a different definition than most other states and is fine for this case.
If you think its manslaughter, you think its murder 2. There's no difference in the present facts.
He either acted in reasonable self-defense or he didn't.
If he did, you think he gets off. If he didn't, Murder 2 is the charge.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:07 pm to Mr. Hangover
Ramon Antonio Vargas ?@RVargasAdvocate 3m3 minutes ago
J. Fuller has PT say that Racquel Smith would know what Will Smith is capable of. Then, has him explain how RS had her back to C. Hayes ...
Ramon Antonio Vargas ?@RVargasAdvocate 2m2 minutes ago
... during argument. He seems to insinuate Racquel Smith was worried about what her husband is capable of doing in tense moments, not ...
Ramon Antonio Vargas ?@RVargasAdvocate 2m2 minutes ago
... Cardell Hayes. Anyway, they move on to how the Smiths were walking to the car, and the other men kept arguing.
This is stupid logic. If I get into an argument with a stranger my wife won't be concerned about the other person because she has no control over that person. Shell be concerned about me, because she has more control.
J. Fuller has PT say that Racquel Smith would know what Will Smith is capable of. Then, has him explain how RS had her back to C. Hayes ...
Ramon Antonio Vargas ?@RVargasAdvocate 2m2 minutes ago
... during argument. He seems to insinuate Racquel Smith was worried about what her husband is capable of doing in tense moments, not ...
Ramon Antonio Vargas ?@RVargasAdvocate 2m2 minutes ago
... Cardell Hayes. Anyway, they move on to how the Smiths were walking to the car, and the other men kept arguing.
This is stupid logic. If I get into an argument with a stranger my wife won't be concerned about the other person because she has no control over that person. Shell be concerned about me, because she has more control.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:08 pm to Mr. Hangover
quote:
I wasn't arguing with you, I was genuinely curious... look at one of my previous posts where I talk about WS being by the car
Sorry, wasnt really arguing as much as I was asking for someone to confirm my train of thought.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:08 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:Yes, and the coming ballistics evidence from the coroner may make that insurmountable.
Hayes' defense has to rise to a much, much, much higher level than has been presented.
Unless Fuller can walk Smith's pistol out of the glove box, into the street and back between the seat and console, these diversions aren't enough.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 1:09 pm to lsuhunt555
I honestly have no clue what's going on
This is interesting to me
This is interesting to me
Popular
Back to top



1






