Will Smith from The Saints\ OSU Buckeyes killed in New Orleans tonight (UPDATE: Man found GUILTY)

[MVike28]

 

[Hi!]

 

[Hi!]

 

[Rain]

I think people who have never fired a gun before tend to not fully grasp how easy it is to quickly fire that many shots. I've only shot at targets, but I do appreciate how, under fear for my life, I could empty the entire clip in no time.

I own a P226 DA/SA. I know how easy it is to fire shots. If he had shot him once or twice, I think his chances would be a lot better. I'm not arguing one way or the other of whether he was acting in self defense. But firing eight times into someone's back is ultimately gonna be hard to look past for the jury.

I also think Fuller is losing the jury with this closing argument.

 

[David_TheMan]

I own a P226 DA/SA. I know how easy it is to fire shots. If he had shot him once or twice, I think his chances would be a lot better. I'm not arguing one way or the other of whether he was acting in self defense. But firing eight times into someone's back is ultimately gonna be hard to look past for the jury.

I also think Fuller is losing the jury with this closing argument.

number of.shots is irrelevant if the threat isestablisjed, evwn the state has conceded this point

 

[R.E.N. Spells Ren]

I own a P226 DA/SA. I know how easy it is to fire shots. If he had shot him once or twice, I think his chances would be a lot better. I'm not arguing one way or the other of whether he was acting in self defense. But firing eight times into someone's back is ultimately gonna be hard to look past for the jury.

I agree, less shots would have helped his defense. I was just pointing out that 8 shots sounds like more than it is to most people because they don't realize how quickly you can fire that many rounds. I'd bet most on that jury fit into that category.

 

[Rain]

number of.shots is irrelevant if the threat isestablisjed, evwn the state has conceded this point

Again, I'm not saying that's not true. I'm just saying the jury may find it hard to look past that. What's irrelevant in the court of law may not be irrelevant in a juror's mind at the end of the day. There's no way you can tell me that Hayes firing just once or twice wouldn't look better in terms of defense in comparison to nine times. Does it make it any more right? No. But that's just the way it is. As @R.E.N. Spells Ren said, anyone who's fired a gun knows how easy it is to get a shot off. The jurors probably don't.

 

[David_TheMan]

Again, I'm not saying that's not true. I'm just saying the jury may find it hard to look past that. What's irrelevant in the court of law may not be irrelevant in a juror's mind at the end of the day. There's no way you can tell me that Hayes firing just once or twice wouldn't look better in terms of defense in comparison to nine times. Does it make it any more right? No. But that's just the way it is. As @R.E.N. Spells Ren said, anyone who's fired a gun knows how easy it is to get a shot off. The jurors probably don't.

Not saying it isn't true for the law either, what I'm saying is if they believe that it was appropriate to shot period, its automatically a win for the defense.

 

[The ADD]

Again, I'm not saying that's not true. I'm just saying the jury may find it hard to look past that. What's irrelevant in the court of law may not be irrelevant in a juror's mind at the end of the day. There's no way you can tell me that Hayes firing just once or twice wouldn't look better in terms of defense in comparison to nine times. Does it make it any more right? No. But that's just the way it is. As @R.E.N. Spells Ren said, anyone who's fired a gun knows how easy it is to get a shot off. The jurors probably don't.

Very fair point

 

[Numpsay]

Defense aint gotta prove shyt.
State has the burden of proof.


You been off in this whole thread

I was speaking from my opinion not from a legal standpoint, although if I was on the jury I wouldn't vote to have Hayes acquitted based on the facts of this case.

 

[Donald J Trump]

I was speaking from my opinion not from a legal standpoint, although if I was on the jury I wouldn't vote to have Hayes acquitted based on the facts of this case.

I dunno what to tell you if a crazy fool tells u he about to get his gun and turns his back, lets see if you wait til he fully turns facing you before you shoot

Might be too late

 

[treezee]

Take your shirt off while drunk in an attempt to set it off because you know you're with a former football player with heat and get your homie killed brehs...

 

[David_TheMan]

Take your shirt off while drunk in an attempt to set it off because you know you're with a former football player with heat and get your homie killed brehs...

Yep, on top of that driving 3x over the legal limit.

 

[ByAnyMeans]

Been reading up on the case all day, and watching a little on ESPN.

I think Hayes walks on all charges.

Dead man versus a live man with no Camera footage of shooting is an uphill battle.

State has a lot of digging to do.and explaining Smith being intoxicated and aggressive and then going back to the car. Beyond a reasonable doubt at that.

All roads lead to Rome on this one for me.

I see an acquittal on the horizon.

 

[Donald J Trump]

Been reading up on the case all day, and watching a little on ESPN.

I think Hayes walks on all charges.

Dead man versus a live man with no Camera footage of shooting is an uphill battle.

State has a lot of digging to do.and explaining Smith being intoxicated and aggressive and then going back to the car. Beyond a reasonable doubt at that.

All roads lead to Rome on this one for me.

I see an acquittal on the horizon.

I bet they give him manslaughter them women gone female sympathy for lightskin racquel crying.