Crime Headlining Crime Megathread Vol 4.

[Source]

Don't forget about the shoeprint on his chest!

Don’t forget he died from hitting his head on the pavement after being knocked out in a fight he instigated. It’s a sad preventable tragedy, but it’s not some miscarriage of justice.

 

[Staph infection]

I don’t believe the stomps resulted in his death. It probably should have been agg assault for all of them.

So they stomped on a dead body? No biggie then, let them go and give them some Swedish fish for their troubles.

 

[Staph infection]

Of course. As soon as some teenagers shoot me with water I get to beat the hell out of them right? Grow up.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/nypost...l-released-in-fatal-beating-of-ohio-teen/amp/

Here is some more info to read. Clearly shows the pranksters didn't want to fight and the murderers even took the car after.

If you don’t want problems don’t do stupid things like shooting people with gel pellet water guns.

If you want to prank people you better be ready for the consequences.

 

[IamStryker]

You should have just said yes.

Who is being dense again? The person that thinks you don't get to automatically attack a teenager over a water gun? Ok

That happened after the fight and that doesn’t prove what you claim.

The 911 call showed the prankster group apologizing and not wanting to fight.

The car thing just shows the mentality of the other group. Beat up the kid and then steal the car as well.

 

[IamStryker]

If you don’t want problems don’t do stupid things like shooting people with gel pellet water guns.

If you want to prank people you better be ready for the consequences.

Consequences like being beat to death? Doesnt sound very proportional.

If the other group didn't react like they did I would have been fine with the pranksters getting some kind of minor charge like disturbing the peace or whatever.

 

[panamaican]

https://www.outkick.com/brothers-co...at-lebrons-i-promise-school-found-not-guilty/

From what I have heard and read these guys are only being charged with assault. If that's all they get this is crazy. There is no justice in these murderers only getting assault charges.

Here is what happened. The 17 year old I believe pulls up in a car with friends and shoots some kind of water gun at these guys. Very dumb thing to do. It's obviously a toy gun only meant to get the target wet. The 3 men then go after the guy and beat him so badly he dies.

It's tragic but it's assault by the kid with the pellet gun. Followed by self defense by the other individuals.

Involuntary manslaughter is going to be tough to prove because Ohio law says that the death has to be while committing another crime.

So it boils down to whether or not the response to the initial assault is criminal. Really tough call.

 

[Source]

Who is being dense again? The person that thinks you don't get to automatically attack a teenager over a water gun? Ok



The 911 call showed the prankster group apologizing and not wanting to fight.

The car thing just shows the mentality of the other group. Beat up the kid and then steal the car as well.

That was literally after their friend was knocked out. The fact that they didn’t jump their friends shows it wasn’t nearly how you portray it. It actually hurts your case.


Why weren’t they charged with grand theft auto if they stole his car? Unless that didn’t steal his car and you are again exaggerating.

 

[Source]

It's tragic but it's assault by the kid with the pellet gun. Followed by self defense by the other individuals.

Involuntary manslaughter is going to be tough to prove because Ohio law says that the death has to be while committing another crime.

So it boils down to whether or not the response to the initial assault is criminal. Really tough call.

Im not even going to call it SD. Since the other 2 jumped in, they did stomp him and depending on the definition of the agg assault seems appropriate.


In this case if they did stomp him to death like has been claimed wouldn’t it be voluntary man slaughter or worse?

 

[IamStryker]

It's tragic but it's assault by the kid with the pellet gun. Followed by self defense by the other individuals.

Involuntary manslaughter is going to be tough to prove because Ohio law says that the death has to be while committing another crime.

So it boils down to whether or not the response to the initial assault is criminal. Really tough call.

Anyone who thinks that is self defense is clearly insane. It would be like if a protester threw water on someone and then was beaten to death in response.

 

[IamStryker]

That was literally after their friend was knocked out. The fact that they didn’t jump their friends shows it wasn’t nearly how you portray it. It actually hurts your case.

The guys apologizing for the prank and calling 911 really wanted to fight lol.

Why weren’t they charged with grand theft auto if they stole his car? Unless that didn’t steal his car and you are again exaggerating.

"Liming’s vehicle was reportedly removed from the scene by Deshawn, Tyler and Donovon".

Do you have an explanation for them taking the car?

 

[Source]

The guys apologizing for the prank and calling 911 really wanted to fight lol.



"Liming’s vehicle was reportedly removed from the scene by Deshawn, Tyler and Donovon".

Do you have an explanation for them taking the car?

You said they stole it. Do you admit that was at best and exaggeration or more likely a blatant lie? You haven’t been honest in this entire string.

They claimed it was to keep his friends from fleeing.

 

[IamStryker]

You said they stole it. Do you admit that was at best and exaggeration or more likely a blatant lie?

They claimed it was to keep his friends from fleeing.

Getting in someone's car and moving it at all would be considered stealing it. But you are probably wondering why they would just move it? They guys you are defending moved it to prevent Liming from being taken to the hospital. Real winners you are defending there.

https://thepostmillennial.com/break...nting-friends-from-taking-him-to-the-hospital

 

[jamel]

From the article I posted above.


Liming’s friends pulled into the parking lot and drove directly to where the Staffords and their cousin, 21-year-old Donovon Jones, were playing basketball at the school, which is operated with help from the LeBron James Family Foundation. Liming and his friends began shooting them with the gel guns.

Deshawn Stafford approached Liming and attempted to take the gun away after being shot in the face. The two began fighting. His brother and cousin joined in the fight.

yeah he earned the ass whooping but not the end result which is a possibility when dealing with pranks.

 

[Source]

Getting in someone's car and moving it at all would be considered stealing it. But you are probably wondering why they would just move it? They guys you are defending moved it to prevent Liming from being taken to the hospital. Real winners you are defending there.

https://thepostmillennial.com/break...nting-friends-from-taking-him-to-the-hospital

You read the PM. I see why you’re so reactionary, ignorant and dishonest.

 

[panamaican]

Im not even going to call it SD. Since the other 2 jumped in, they did stomp him and depending on the definition of the agg assault seems appropriate.


In this case if they did stomp him to death like has been claimed wouldn’t it be voluntary man slaughter or worse?

No voluntary manslaughter requires the intent to kill but in a heat of passion response.

Involuntary says there was no intent to kill. I'm going with self defense because shooting someone with an unknown liquid composition is a pretty provocative action. A fist fight gone horribly wrong is still a fist fight first and foremost.

 

[panamaican]

Anyone who thinks that is self defense is clearly insane. It would be like if a protester threw water on someone and then was beaten to death in response.

Well, if you assault someone with an unknown liquid concoction, it's pretty stupid to not assume that they're going to be offended enough by it to respond. And, yes, self defense because the people being shot at have no way of knowing if this individual is going to continue his assault or not. So some kind of action to prevent a repetition of the assault might be necessary.

We know it's water. We know it was a stupid prank. In the moment - can we just assume that the victims of the initial know this?

If someone you don't know ran up to your wife and kid and shot them with some kind of liquid, you wouldn't act? I use "wife and kid" to personalize the fact pattern, to intentionally reach for an emotional trigger. Because for the people being shot and being shot at, their emotional response has to be considered.

 

[Source]

No voluntary manslaughter requires the intent to kill but in a heat of passion response.

Involuntary says there was no intent to kill. I'm going with self defense because shooting someone with an unknown liquid composition is a pretty provocative action. A fist fight gone horribly wrong is still a fist fight first and foremost.

I get what you’re saying. My contention is If you’re stomping on someone especially their head (doesn’t seem to have happened in this case) a reasonable person would know that is likely to kill them. That would be an indicator of intent. That’s why I don’t think it this could be IV even with different factors. You’re correct it would be murder in Ohio.

 

[panamaican]

Getting in someone's car and moving it at all would be considered stealing it. But you are probably wondering why they would just move it? They guys you are defending moved it to prevent Liming from being taken to the hospital. Real winners you are defending there.

https://thepostmillennial.com/break...nting-friends-from-taking-him-to-the-hospital

Nope, moving their car isn't stealing it. Stealing requires an intent to keep it or to not return it.

Moving it to prevent the assaulter from escaping the police would be considered justified. Obviously, you don't believe them but if that's their claim, it's a defensible one.

 

[panamaican]

I get what you’re saying. My contention is If you’re stomping on someone especially their head (doesn’t seem to have happened in this case) a reasonable person would know that is likely to kill them. That would be an indicator of intent. That’s why I don’t think it this could be IV even with different factors.

I understand what you're saying but that's not what intent means legally. Plenty of fights, including those with head stomps, don't result in death. There's no reason to assume that people administering an ass whipping believed or had reason to believe that the level of fighting they were using was likely to result in death. Serious bodily injury -- sure, that's reasonable. But "death" is a whole order of magnitude higher. Shooting the guy with a gun or stabbing his with a knife -- there you can say they reasonably could have assumed death. But stomping on a dude repeatedly? Shit happens frequently and no one dies.

 

[IamStryker]

You read the PM. I see why you’re so reactionary, ignorant and dishonest.

Attacking the source and no other argunent says a lot about you. Let's hear your amazing guess as to why they got in the car after beating this kid?