ICE told to get the eff out

[pete01]

She parked between one hundred and two hundred yards way from an ICE operation, pipping her horn.

Case closed then I hate people pipping their horns.

 

[Highway Man]

Please ignore my learned friend MNW67 who has not put any case forward other than to try to bend the truth to his own advantage. The only conclusion that can be drawn upon as being the truth is that this lady has driven her car at an armed agent who then opened fire in order to preserve his and others safety.

 

[Highway Man]

She parked between one hundred and two hundred yards way from an ICE operation, pipping her horn.

Objection.

 

[MNW67]

Case closed then I hate people pipping their horns.

 

[Highway Man]

Case closed then I hate people pipping their horns.

Exactly

 

[MNW67]

Objection.

Overruled.

 

[pete01]

Objection.

Overruled

 

[pete01]

Overruled.

Damn it

 

[Highway Man]

Overruled.

Lefty.

 

[blup]

For anyone who is interested in the forensic side of things, this is the first shot position. The second and third shots go directly through the side window whilst the car is passing him. By the time of the first shot, the car has already moved forwards between three and five feet. It is arguable that, if the killer really believed he was in danger when the car first set off, then he was too late to stop the first shot. But by the time of this first shot, it is already clear that the car is not going to hit him. The average time delay for an officer to stop firing when a danger has ended is 0.35 seconds. The second shot came 0.4 seconds later. Basically, he could easily have stopped himself from firing the second and third shots. But his intention by then was not self-defence, but to kill.



View attachment 404559

Isn’t the argument that he was clipped by the car? So he shot her.

 

[noseall]

Are you saying that he had made a decision to fire three shots and so he was unable to stop himself completing those shots even when the danger had passed. A court would laugh at that.

He wasn't knocked down nor did the wheels of the car run over him, even though he tried his best to stop her from escaping the attack. She did her utmost (steered full lock) in order to get away from him and the attack.

 

[MNW67]

Isn’t the argument that he was clipped by the car? So he shot her.

There are two arguments being put forward by his defenders, I think. The one I am looking at here is the one which says that, when the car first set off forwards, the killer did not know that it was actually going to be turning right or that it would be going quite slowly. The argument is that, for all knew, Renee might floor the throttle and drive straight at him. As a result, he only had a fraction of a second to make a decision.

 

[Highway Man]

He wasn't knocked down nor did the wheels of the car run over him, even though he tried his best to stop her from escaping the attack. She did her utmost (steered full lock) in order to get away from him and the attack.

Irrelevant

 

[Highway Man]

As your appointed No1 poster I think this thread has now run its course and time for me to make my summary of the thread. Leave it on my note and see who turns out right, spoiler alert. ME. However within my summary I will of course include the defences case and any relevent points.

 

[MNW67]

Bear in mind that there is a difference between a crime being committed and the administration actually agreeing to prosecute it.