- 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 11:03 pm to diat150
Posted on 12/7/16 at 11:03 pm to diat150
quote:
there is no such thing as a registered weapon in louisiana.
Which is why I know hes full of shite and not an actual LA bar attorney. That or worse, hes a flaming liberal who knows nothing of firearms that Anderson Cooper didnt let him know...but is still allowed to practice law.
0
Posted on 12/7/16 at 11:03 pm to diat150
Thanks for the replies. It seems logical to me that the shooter exited his vehicle and tucked the gun in his back waistband. This would be why nobody else claims to have seen a gun while the initial confrontation went down. At some point Smith is made aware of the weapon and says something that infers he is going to go get his own from the car. This would explain why the shooting went down when it did.
This is just how my mind is filling in the gaps and certainly not some great revelation (how and when exactly Smiths wife gets shot I have no idea)
OK back to lurking for me...
This is just how my mind is filling in the gaps and certainly not some great revelation (how and when exactly Smiths wife gets shot I have no idea)
OK back to lurking for me...
Posted on 12/7/16 at 11:09 pm to lsupride87
quote:
He said it all depends on how Hayes presented himself with the gun. Was he using it to threaten Smith, or was he making the argument to please step back in his own defense?
He said the act of having a weapon does not make one the automatic aggressor.
^This is exactly correct. People that live in the city have a different definition of what a firearm is. In their head a firearm is an evil tool of destruction and just its mere presence causes black rain to fall from the sky, mothers to wail, babies to choke and the elderly to meet an early end.
To the rest of us a firearm doesnt cause a great panic. Owning and seeing them all the time in normal fun and friendly uses desensitizes us to them and you view them no different than a hammer or chisel. Its how people ACT when they have a weapon in their hand that raises caution.
I think this is the big disconnect on this topic. To me, if I get in a wreck and person gets out with a firearm and hes otherwise not being threatening Im letting him know its not necessary and we can exchange information. He may be as scared and cautious as you are when you get rear ended at night in Orleans Parish. If approaches me swiftly, angry, screaming and also has a weapon in hand. Then we have a serious problem.
This post was edited on 12/7/16 at 11:13 pm
Posted on 12/7/16 at 11:13 pm to learnthehardway
Think about this.
You're driving down a dark street in New Orleans late at night
Hummer rams you from behind so hard it blows out your back window.
You and your passengers are like "WTF????"
You exit your car and the guy who just rammed tbe frick out of you is just as big if not bigger than you and he's coming at you with a gun.....
Yeah, I'm turning around and going get my gun as well.
You're driving down a dark street in New Orleans late at night
Hummer rams you from behind so hard it blows out your back window.
You and your passengers are like "WTF????"
You exit your car and the guy who just rammed tbe frick out of you is just as big if not bigger than you and he's coming at you with a gun.....
Yeah, I'm turning around and going get my gun as well.
Posted on 12/7/16 at 11:37 pm to Napoleon
quote:
Others do it because they see people do it and think it is intimidating.
Or because roids make you rage. I bet he drives a red Dodge Ram pickup truck with nary a scratch in the bed. Prolly has these too...
Posted on 12/7/16 at 11:42 pm to Fun Bunch
quote:
quote:
Fuller: "And you also said, after taking your shirt off, 'I will fricking kill you n****' Those are the words you used, right?"
"No"
quote:
How does the prosecution not object to that question?
WTF? Why would the prosecution object to that?
Definitely not a lawyer. But you play one on Tiger Rant, so like, thats cool.
This post was edited on 12/7/16 at 11:42 pm
Posted on 12/7/16 at 11:46 pm to ForeverLSU02
quote:
Anyone else think of Riff Raff when envisioning Richard?
Hell yes.
Richard Hernandez
Posted on 12/7/16 at 11:48 pm to tgrbaitn08
quote:
Will Smith Murder Trial--Day 2 by tgrbaitn08 Think about this. You're driving down a dark street in New Orleans late at night Hummer rams you from behind so hard it blows out your back window. You and your passengers are like "WTF????" You exit your car and the guy who just rammed tbe frick out of you is just as big if not bigger than you and he's coming at you with a gun..... Yeah, I'm turning around and going get my gun as well.
If that's what happened it would be a slam dunk. Smith's group charged at Hayes according to testimony. Also you are leaving out the possible hit and run before Hayes ran into Smith.
This post was edited on 12/7/16 at 11:50 pm
Posted on 12/8/16 at 12:00 am to TigahJay
quote:
possible hit and run before Hayes ran into Smith.
If that was relevant, there should be physical damage/evidence to both the hummer and the Benz that should and will come out in court. To my knowledge it hasn't yet
Posted on 12/8/16 at 12:03 am to diat150
quote:
his 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.
C'mon diat150. We all know Hayes dipped his bullets in Everclear before he shot Smith so that the jury would think hes an alcoholic, drug-addict that beats his wife.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 12:12 am to lsuhunt555
quote:
Reaching =/= armed
And I'm not saying the defense can't climb that hill, im just saying it seems steep.
All of you saying this, I want you to try this...
Next time a cop pulls you over. Have your Chalmation you have riding shotgun get out and rip his shirt off ala Ed Orgeron and jump around like a Silverback in heat. Be all shitfaced drunk and aggressively approach officer while yelling at him. Exclaim, "Nice duty pistol. I got one too. want to see it? Hold on Ill go get it." Walk back to your vehicle. Get shot. Wonder why the cop gets acquitted.
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 12:13 am
Posted on 12/8/16 at 12:33 am to Chad504boy
quote:
will's gun was a 9mm caliber pistol, no 9mm casings were found, only 1 casing found in vehicle and was a .45.
Revolvers dont eject spent casings. There exist 9mm revolvers. Ask me how I know.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:02 am to Lester Earl
quote:
bunchy doesnt realize that jurors are human
Typical lawyer.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:32 am to rt3
quote:
the part that's problematic is that SO FAR the only person that's said in open court Smith proclaimed he was going to get a gun was Hayes himself on McGaw's 911 tape
someone else who is trustworthy is going to need to corroborate that... otherwise it's just someone who realizes he's in big doodoo trying to make a story to get himself out of it
note: I'm going off testimony that's been presented in open court only... nothing else
Agree.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:37 am to rt3
quote:
while correct...
do you trust O'Neal to be anywhere near as presentable on the witness stand as Thomas apparently was today
if not... he'll probably be seen as trustworthy as the Hernandez's... which isn't all that much
Youre right. I should have said..
"Their testimonies should hold equal weight."
But if the idiots on this board are anywhere as near a representation of the general public in LA, no way that happens. PT shows up in a Columbia fishing shirt, a golfing hat, some crocks and a new white F-150 and hes all world. O'Neal. Not so much.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:52 am to tLSU
quote:
I own several, and at no time have I ever gotten out at the scene of an auto accident with a gun in my hand. No reasonable person is going to think "yea, that's normal."
I was talking to funbunch.
But Ill engage.
Ive never gotten out of my car after an accident with my firearm in my hand either but I have gotten out of my car with it ON me. Especially in NOLA. Yall dont remember the several cases of people ramming into the back of drivers and then robbing them when they get out? That obviously doesnt pertain to this case but my point is NOLA is like a box of chocolates.
Also, it still hasnt been established that he got out of the vehicle with his firearm in his HAND. It may have just been on his person. concealed maybe. He was a CCW I think.
This post was edited on 12/8/16 at 1:53 am
Posted on 12/8/16 at 1:58 am to tLSU
quote:
Once again, if you think that when the state stands up in closing and says "picture that you were just in an auto accident, and you get out of your car. The other party is standing there holding a gun" that a single juror will think that's reasonable, you're wrong. More importantly, you take the same scenario and have the other party shooting at you for going get a gun to put yourself on the same footing as him.... It's kind of a whole host of crazy theories.
Im not disagreeing with you as far as what the jury will think. I just like to quash this whole notion that open carry is some kind of social faux pas.
Like Ive said, I wouldnt even have gotten out of the vehicle with the Smith party acting like they were. I wouldve taken full advantage of the protections the State affords me under castle doctrine. If the Smith party would try to gain unlawful entry of my vehicle then it would be an easy self-defense claim.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 3:57 am to tgrbaitn08
Getting away from Fuller's 'he said...she said' witness testimony parade for a moment, let's think about physical evidence.
Two points -
First, the trajectory of the bullet that struck Mr. Smith in the left side is important. Fuller wants to show the victim was armed or in the act of obtaining his weapon. If he was struck while he was sitting in the driver's seat leaning over to the glove box, the bullet trajectory will be upwards towards the head from the entry point.
Second, the pistol itself. Fuller will establish that the victim's pistol was carried in the glove compartment. It would only make sense as to carry the gun between the seat and console would make it visible to thieves. Fuller will then ask why the glove box was open and pistol found elsewhere.
What Fuller wants to do is point to police complicity in moving the victim's weapon from a position that would prove that the victim was in possession of it when he was shot.
Two points -
First, the trajectory of the bullet that struck Mr. Smith in the left side is important. Fuller wants to show the victim was armed or in the act of obtaining his weapon. If he was struck while he was sitting in the driver's seat leaning over to the glove box, the bullet trajectory will be upwards towards the head from the entry point.
Second, the pistol itself. Fuller will establish that the victim's pistol was carried in the glove compartment. It would only make sense as to carry the gun between the seat and console would make it visible to thieves. Fuller will then ask why the glove box was open and pistol found elsewhere.
What Fuller wants to do is point to police complicity in moving the victim's weapon from a position that would prove that the victim was in possession of it when he was shot.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 4:59 am to Fun Bunch
You're confusing pulling out a gun with using it.
You're also overlooking that the standard is not just death but also serious bodily harm.
There doesn't need to be. I can take out my gun right now. What I do afterwards is the issue.
So you have to wait until you reach a certain threshold of pain or physical damage? What exactly is that? And what do you do then, call a timesy so you can pull your gun and shoot him?
You most certainly can. What you do with it is another story.
You're spreading a lot of wrong information. I'll be watching you from now on.
You're also overlooking that the standard is not just death but also serious bodily harm.
quote:
There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that Hayes life was reasonably in danger before he mentioned or took out a gun.
There doesn't need to be. I can take out my gun right now. What I do afterwards is the issue.
quote:
If Smith was on top of him pounding him then yes.
So you have to wait until you reach a certain threshold of pain or physical damage? What exactly is that? And what do you do then, call a timesy so you can pull your gun and shoot him?
quote:
You can't pull out a gun because two guys are talking shite to you.
You most certainly can. What you do with it is another story.
You're spreading a lot of wrong information. I'll be watching you from now on.
Posted on 12/8/16 at 5:04 am to USMCTiger03
have a thumbs up USMC.
i don't think that other dude is even a lawyer.
i don't think that other dude is even a lawyer.
Page 90 of 248
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News