- 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: The definitive video showing Good's vehicle striking the agent
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:35 pm to djsdawg
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:35 pm to djsdawg
Not to mention ( re escalation) the fact that she blocked traffic while her wildebeest lover got out and taunted agents after they been doing same all day. Or just generally being placing herself in the middle of a situation she had no business being in. But TXtoast on a mission so….
0
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:40 pm to djsdawg
quote:I hope you're right.
It certainly appears headed that way.
Nope. Just more liberal nonsense.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:40 pm to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
As I said above, there is obviously a fraction of a second when she is facing the camera as her head turns to her right.
Before or after she hit the officer/agent?
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:42 pm to djsdawg
quote:Specifically at what point were those 2 clear and distinct orders given?
e're talking about the actions leading up to that. Try to stay on topic.
The lady escalated the situation twice by refusing 2 clear and distinct orders.
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:43 pm to AquaAg84
She threw it in reverse and looked at him for 2 full seconds
Then put it in drive
Then he tried to shoot out the tires
Then she turned the wheel
Then she accelerated while glancing at him for a fraction of a second while also glancing left and right at the same time
Then she hit him
Then he fired through the windshield once and paused to evaluate his shot
Then he fired 2 more times at her melon through the side window and her brains ended up a snack for the dog in the back.
Try to keep up….
Then put it in drive
Then he tried to shoot out the tires
Then she turned the wheel
Then she accelerated while glancing at him for a fraction of a second while also glancing left and right at the same time
Then she hit him
Then he fired through the windshield once and paused to evaluate his shot
Then he fired 2 more times at her melon through the side window and her brains ended up a snack for the dog in the back.
Try to keep up….
This post was edited on 1/14/26 at 8:50 pm
Posted on 1/14/26 at 8:43 pm to jammajin
Signature line? Like mine?
This post was edited on 1/14/26 at 8:44 pm
Posted on 1/15/26 at 6:11 am to RelentlessAnalysis
quote:
You think that particular video somehow establishes that she saw this agent? OK
Of course, because it does.
I think you should watch it again and again and again. Maybe eventually you'll come to the correct conclusion
Posted on 1/15/26 at 6:29 am to TX Tiger
quote:
hope you're right.
Don’t be an even bigger dumbass than you typically are and you have nothing to fear.
Posted on 1/15/26 at 6:40 am to TX Tiger
quote:It might be.... just maybe, possibly, could be the first time he yelled "GET OUT OF THE CAR".
Specifically at what point were those 2 clear and distinct orders given?
Or, maybe, possibly, could be, if one were to guess the second time where he yelled the same thing, but louder, while trying to open the drivers side door.
Allegedly.
Posted on 1/15/26 at 6:53 am to I20goon
quote:
It might be.... just maybe, possibly, could be the first time he yelled "GET OUT OF THE CAR".
Yes, and it just might have been said after they told her to leave, which was an order she defied.
These before and after concepts are wild!
This post was edited on 1/15/26 at 6:59 am
Posted on 1/15/26 at 10:19 am to I20goon
quote:So if a person doesn't comply within two seconds of a command, it is standard procedure to then yank them out of the car? Does that sound reasonable to you?
Specifically at what point were those 2 clear and distinct orders given?
It might be.... just maybe, possibly, could be the first time he yelled "GET OUT OF THE CAR".
Would you call yelling a command and then after two seconds grabbing the door handle to yank her out of the car, escalating the situation?
Posted on 1/15/26 at 10:28 am to TX Tiger
quote:
So if a person doesn't comply within two seconds of a command, it is standard procedure to then yank them out of the car? Does that sound reasonable to you?
"Standard procedure" is not to interject yourself directly into a federal law enforcement operation, repeatedly. Agree?
And disburse the FIRST time you were told? That sound pretty standard?
Posted on 1/15/26 at 10:56 am to CleverUserName
quote:Correct. And then how do you go about de-escalating the situation. Because that's their policy.
So if a person doesn't comply within two seconds of a command, it is standard procedure to then yank them out of the car? Does that sound reasonable to you?
"Standard procedure" is not to interject yourself directly into a federal law enforcement operation, repeatedly. Agree?
quote:Correct. When was the first time she was told?
And disburse the FIRST time you were told? That sound pretty standard?
Posted on 1/15/26 at 11:02 am to TX Tiger
quote:
Correct. And then how do you go about de-escalating the situation. Because that's their policy.
After several ignored commands? You pull them out of the vehicle and arrest for obstruction. Removing them from the running vehicle per PA vs Mimms.
Remember the old favorite? Obstruction of an official proceeding? Those were fun days weren't they? When that was the most important thing in the world? Similar laws for this.
That was simple.
quote:
Correct. When was the first time she was told?
I imagine every time she involved herself in a federal police action that day and the several days before.
Anything else?
This post was edited on 1/15/26 at 11:07 am
Posted on 1/15/26 at 11:07 am to CleverUserName
quote:Was that the situation? From the video, I saw an officer yell for her to get out of the car as he approached her and then two seconds later (give or take a second or two) grab her door handle to yank her out of the car.
Correct. And then how do you go about de-escalating the situation. Because that's their policy.
After several ignored commands?
Seems like escalation to me. Could they have not calmly approached the vehicle and explained to her that if she didn't move, she would be detained? Doesn't that seem like the proper approach, I mean if your policy is to de-escalate the situation?
quote:Sorry, that's not good enough.
Correct. When was the first time she was told?
I imagine
Posted on 1/15/26 at 11:17 am to TX Tiger
quote:
Was that the situation?
Again. Obstruction. Said it last post.
Here is some good reading for you
-18 U.S.C. § 111 (Assaulting, Resisting, or Impeding Certain Officers)
-18 U.S.C. § 1503 (Influencing or Injuring Officer or Juror Generally)
-18 U.S.C. § 1512 (Tampering with a Witness, Victim, or Informant)
Just to start.
quote:
Seems like escalation to me. Could they have not calmly approached the vehicle and explained to her that if she didn't move, she would be detained? Doesn't that seem like the proper approach, I mean if your policy is to de-escalate the situation?
The escalation was both of these hags screaming, threatening, blocking, and trying to intimidate them. To which her "wife" was absolutely correct when she blamed herself after the fact.
See you hinging your entire stance on this short video. Well.. while ignoring the aggression toward the agent at least.
quote:
Sorry, that's not good enough.
That is all of you folks are absolutely doing.
You are in full speculation mode and you want to chastise someone else for it? Hilarious. Absolutely hilarious. Nice try. quote:
Could they have not calmly approached the vehicle and explained to her that if she didn't move, she would be detained? Doesn't that seem like the proper approach, I mean if your policy is to de-escalate the situation?
Excuse me.... are you speculating they didn't do this? Not. Good. Enough.
This post was edited on 1/15/26 at 11:21 am
Posted on 1/15/26 at 11:24 am to CleverUserName
quote:That may be true. The video showed absolutely ZERO aggression towards the officers.
See you hinging your entire stance on this short video. Well.. while ignoring the aggression toward the agent at least.
Posted on 1/15/26 at 11:28 am to TX Tiger
quote:
That may be true. The video showed absolutely ZERO aggression towards the officers.
Well that's an absolute lie. You may wanna go the legal description route and not the boo hooing emotional wreck route.
Posted on 1/15/26 at 11:45 am to CleverUserName
quote:Well maybe you saw a different video than I. From what I saw, the driver was smiling and even having a friendly conversation with the officer who eventually shot her.
That may be true. The video showed absolutely ZERO aggression towards the officers.
Well that's an absolute lie. You may wanna go the legal description route and not the boo hooing emotional wreck route.
Page 29 of 35
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News