- 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: Left-Wing News Hired Hitman Charged W/ 2nd Degree Murder Of Patriot
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:47 pm to the808bass
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:47 pm to the808bass
quote:I have not seen that. Link?
He should’ve said he thought it was a gun from the jump then. Rather than saying he was protecting Newman from mace.
0
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:47 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
The law regarding “protection of others” is usually quite different from the law on self-defense.
Is it?
quote:
(2) Deadly physical force may be used only if a person reasonably believes a lesser degree of force is inadequate and: (a) The actor has reasonable ground to believe, and does believe, that he or another person is in imminent danger of being killed or of receiving great bodily injury; or
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:50 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:I am beginning to think that you are invested in this one so-emotionally that you just are not listening.
He cannot justify lethal force for an action he was not authorized to be a part of. Why is this so difficult for you to grasp?
He cannot initiate an action of self-defense for his client BECAUSE LEGALLY HE HAD NO CLIENT.
His legal defense is not based upon “protection of Newman.”. It is SELF-defense. It does not matter if he was there (and taking money) to protect Dolloff or to sell popcorn. Once Keltner struck him in the head, the analysis is whether he behaved reasonably, NOT whether he was unauthorized (or even stupid) to have found himself in the situation to start with.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:51 pm to the808bass
quote:In Colorado, perhaps not. It is not important in this case, and I did not look it up.
Is it?
In Texas, they are entirely different statutes. 9.31-32 for self and 9.33 for others.
Do you see it as relevant somehow?
This post was edited on 10/16/20 at 1:28 pm
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:54 pm to AggieHank86
Wrong. Both Newman and Dolloff state during the course of the arrest the actions taken were to protect Newman. If you have not watched the videos of the arrest (which clearly you have not) then shut up.
Damn you are maddeningly ignorant.
To make it easy for you, 1:54 mark;
"Security for 9News" (Dolloff)
"The guy was going to get me" (Newman)
"He's my security guard"
“He maced him (x3)”
“He maced him so that’s when he shot him”
“That guy just saved my fricking life, you know that right?”
"The guy on the ground was going to mace me."
"That was my security guard, he just protected my fricking life."
YouTube video
Damn you are maddeningly ignorant.
To make it easy for you, 1:54 mark;
"Security for 9News" (Dolloff)
"The guy was going to get me" (Newman)
"He's my security guard"
“He maced him (x3)”
“He maced him so that’s when he shot him”
“That guy just saved my fricking life, you know that right?”
"The guy on the ground was going to mace me."
"That was my security guard, he just protected my fricking life."
YouTube video
This post was edited on 10/16/20 at 5:06 pm
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:54 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
His legal defense is not based upon “protection of Newman.”
Maybe, maybe not. The script had the news guy saying over and over again "that guy saved my life!!!!!!!!"
Who knows what dumb shite Dolloff told the cops/detectives after he was arrested?
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:55 pm to AggieHank86
If he can’t shoot Keltner for raising mace at BGM, he can’t shoot Keltner for raising mace at him.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:55 pm to AggieHank86
quote:Just in skimming through updates, coming across this, I felt I'd chime in on that.
You are REALLY emotional on this one.
I'm emotional on this.
Appearance-wise, I would probably look more like Dolloff, fairly trim and athletic looking, wearing a baseball cap and sunglasses with an untucked shirt.
Social-wise, I'm not a vet, but otherwise identify pretty heavily with Keltner. 52, with an early 20's son with whom I often share similar viewpoints, which are conservative. We're not going to a rally, but like Keltner we'e opposed to and frustrated by the Antifa-type demonstrations and the heavy media favor those events get, and we'd definitely like to show that a large segment of the population are pro-police, pro lawful government, and anti-rioting and looting, etc.
We wouldn't be out there, but if it's a gun show or something else similar, you get similar dynamics, and potential for the same thing happening. And in that case I might be like Keltner, other than I'm not waving a pepper spray around.
If someone like the agitator came and attempted to engage a group I'm in, I want to leave, but first I'm making sure my son is safe too, so I might be more active in screening off the agitator. I have more experience, and still a sense of duty to family.
Keltner was armed, but he responded with pepper spray instead of a gun. Showed he felt concerned about verbal harassment, not being killed; it was a public event, in broad daylight, with plenty of cops around. He didn't want someone shouting at him and getting mad enough to throw a punch (at him or those with him), he didn't mentally process the odds of one drawing a firearm and shooting.
If I go to a gun show (or a game, or anything else) at this time of day in public, the argument would have been my concern too. NOW, I'm far more concerned about getting shot.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 12:58 pm to Scoob
quote:
If I go to a gun show (or a game, or anything else) at this time of day in public, the argument would have been my concern too. NOW, I'm far more concerned about getting shot.
We have to be cognizant of the fact that arguments in these scenarios aren’t philosophical discussions. They’re an attempt to get a scalp or a video or both.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:02 pm to Wolfhound45
The lawyer even says Dolloff’s actions were to protect Newman.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:03 pm to Wolfhound45
Thanks for the link.
From what I can tell, Dolloff identified himself as security for 9news and said “that guy was going to get me.”
All the other comments (involving mace) seem to have come from Newman.
From what I can tell, Dolloff identified himself as security for 9news and said “that guy was going to get me.”
All the other comments (involving mace) seem to have come from Newman.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:06 pm to the808bass
quote:That is just a silly generalization.
If he can’t shoot Keltner for raising mace at BGM, he can’t shoot Keltner for raising mace at him.
If he is standing back at a distance and sees that Keltner is about to mace Elliott, it is unlikely that a jury would find him to have been acting reasonably in shooting Keltner. If however, he was right beside Elliott and did not see clearly WHAT Keltner was pointing at Elliott, a jury certainly COULD find that it was reasonable to think he was about to fire a handgun.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:06 pm to Tiguar
Exactly. A lot can happen between the decision to draw and pulling the trigger. That should be incorporated into training for anyone carrying.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:08 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
What matters is whether Dolloff reasonably-PERCEIVED it as a weapon.
Spray can or Airsoft toy, it would not matter if the jury believes that Dolloff believed it to be a functional handgun.
My understanding was the Dolloff knew what Keltner was carrying in his right hand.
Maybe that's not correct.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:10 pm to the808bass
quote:Based upon Wolf’s link, it seems to have been Newman talking about mace. All Dolloff said was “that guy was going to get me.”
He should’ve said he thought it was a gun from the jump then. Rather than saying he was protecting Newman from mace.
Do you have other links?
Seriously, if DOLLOFF said that he knew in advance that it was only “mace,” the calculus changes entirely. But I’ve not seen that.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:29 pm to AggieHank86
Ok, question for legal opinion...
Doloff is not properly licensed security. (my understanding)
He intervenes in a situation which does NOT involve him. Put another way, he's not in danger in the situation and decides to step into the altercation.
If initially, the altercation has NOTHING to do with him, he steps in and puts himself into danger, can that nullify his argument of self defense?
Now, in the video's I've seen it looks like there is the potential that the victim engaged Doloff first, from what I've seen it seems just as probable that Doloff said something to the victim...(please let me know if that appears wrong)
Doloff is not properly licensed security. (my understanding)
He intervenes in a situation which does NOT involve him. Put another way, he's not in danger in the situation and decides to step into the altercation.
If initially, the altercation has NOTHING to do with him, he steps in and puts himself into danger, can that nullify his argument of self defense?
Now, in the video's I've seen it looks like there is the potential that the victim engaged Doloff first, from what I've seen it seems just as probable that Doloff said something to the victim...(please let me know if that appears wrong)
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:34 pm to LafTiger
This has been wolfhounds point. The only reason he was ever put in a position to have to “defend himself” from the strike was his acting in a capacity he was not authorized to act.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:38 pm to LafTiger
We don’t yet have video which answers your question definitively, but I THINK that Newman (the reporter) started filming and/or shouting questions at him. Keltner took offense and moved toward Newman. Dolloff inserted himself between them and PROBABLY made the first contact with Keltner, placing his hands on Keltner’s chest. Sort of a “whoah, buddy” sort of thing.
Keltner hit Dolloff in the head then started to step back and perhaps started raising his mace can. Dolloff started drawing, raising and eventually aiming his weapon. Keltner released the gas before Dolloff had finished raising the handgun, and Dolloff fired at Keltner about 0.2 seconds after the gas deployed.
In most jurisdictions, you do not lose the right of self-defense by trying to stop a fight. You must be an “aggressor.”. Some will argue that Dolloff became an “aggressor” by laying hands on Keltner. Others will disagree. That’s why we have juries.
I don’t think that his lack of a guard license is very important. If he had just been a buddy walking with Newman to get a beer, he would have had every right to try and stop a fight. The licensing misdemeanor does not change that. I’ve no doubt that Wolf sincerely believes what he is saying, but I just don’t think he is legally correct.
Keltner hit Dolloff in the head then started to step back and perhaps started raising his mace can. Dolloff started drawing, raising and eventually aiming his weapon. Keltner released the gas before Dolloff had finished raising the handgun, and Dolloff fired at Keltner about 0.2 seconds after the gas deployed.
In most jurisdictions, you do not lose the right of self-defense by trying to stop a fight. You must be an “aggressor.”. Some will argue that Dolloff became an “aggressor” by laying hands on Keltner. Others will disagree. That’s why we have juries.
I don’t think that his lack of a guard license is very important. If he had just been a buddy walking with Newman to get a beer, he would have had every right to try and stop a fight. The licensing misdemeanor does not change that. I’ve no doubt that Wolf sincerely believes what he is saying, but I just don’t think he is legally correct.
This post was edited on 10/16/20 at 1:42 pm
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:41 pm to AggieHank86
You know why you aggravate people? Because you do not know how to simply apologize and acknowledge fault. It has been stated multiple times in this thread that the position of 9News is that Dolloff was security for Newman. And yet you called me out for pointing out he cannot enter into a legal obligation because he is not authorized to. As a lawyer you should know this more than anyone else. You cannot represent someone if you have not been admitted to the bar.
I have no idea why I waste my time defending you or agreeing with you.
I have no idea why I waste my time defending you or agreeing with you.
Posted on 10/16/20 at 1:42 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
In most jurisdictions, you do not lose the right of self-defense by trying to stop a fight. You must be an “aggressor.”. Some will argue that Dolloff became an “aggressor” by laying hands on Keltner. Others will disagree. That’s why we have juries.
Thanks...that answers my question...I think.
If I'm understanding, if Dolloff stepped in and didn't just "place his hands on Keltner's chest" and did try to grab at the can of mace, which prompted the slap, then Dolloff could be the aggressor. If not, then Keltner could be labeled the aggressor. That makes sense.
Page 88 of 99
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News