Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The 1st link is the original incident, the second is a follow up, Grand jury's decision. Do you think he should have been prosecuted/convicted??? Or was it self defense??
I saw the video and I agree it was self defense. Too many hoodrats like those two women have gotten away with assault. They thought they were gonna beat him down and they got beat down. They deserved everything they got. Can't stand hoodrats.
I saw the video and I agree it was self defense. Too many hoodrats like those two women have gotten away with assault. They thought they were gonna beat him down and they got beat down. They deserved everything they got. Can't stand hoodrats.
I don't know what it is with some people who think they can attack someone for no or little reason, IMHO, I feel they got what they deserved.
It was self defense although they should probably charge him with a lesser crime, like a misdemeanor or battery charge, nothing major. Had those thugettes grabbed that bar they would have done the same thing to him, maybe worse. At some point once the threat is neutralized you have to back off although when your adrenaline is rushing it may be hard to. I say he should be charged with something because he does have a past criminal record. If his record was clean, I'd probably see my way to let him go completely if I was on a jury.
I agree with the jury's decision. Even so, I still say that guy swung that rod a few too many times which I think can still lead to charges at this point, I don't really know. In the end, I think the jury did the right thing.
And the lawyer for those women, he's a pea-brained douche. "Legally and morally unjustified" my a$$, that beating was very legally and very morally justified. If two aggressors attack you, you don' just surrender all semblance of dignity and self-respect, lay on the ground, cover your face and let them have their way with you. You stand the hell up and exercise your basic human right of self defense!
I agree with the jury's decision. Even so, I still say that guy swung that rod a few too many times which I think can still lead to charges at this point, I don't really know. In the end, I think the jury did the right thing.
And the lawyer for those women, he's a pea-brained douche. "Legally and morally unjustified" my a$$, that beating was very legally and very morally justified. If two aggressors attack you, you don' just surrender all semblance of dignity and self-respect, lay on the ground, cover your face and let them have their way with you. You stand the hell up and exercise your basic human right of self defense!
It was self defense although they should probably charge him with a lesser crime, like a misdemeanor or battery charge, nothing major. Had those thugettes grabbed that bar they would have done the same thing to him, maybe worse. At some point once the threat is neutralized you have to back off although when your adrenaline is rushing it may be hard to. I say he should be charged with something because he does have a past criminal record. If his record was clean, I'd probably see my way to let him go completely if I was on a jury.
You keep hitting until the threat is neutralized or they surrender. You cannot be sued by a dead thug.
Jury made a good decision but this trial lasted 11 days ? Seems kind of long to me with vid evidence being the key.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.