• Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
  • Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!

Les Miles (grass eater)

Jump to latest Follow Reply
Sort by date Sort by votes
Nutriaitch;1973776; said:
I think you are correct.

But like I said, the media is making a much bigger deal about this guy than the other 3.

So if his injuries are the worst of the group, this story has been blown up bigger than it needed to be.

I say this with no knowledge of the severity of the other victims' injuries.
Click to expand...
Weird. You'd think the good/evil line would be drawn between whether there was actually a beating or not, rather than between lots of bruises and some bruises.
 
Upvote 0
Deety;1973823; said:
Weird. You'd think the good/evil line would be drawn between whether there was actually a beating or not, rather than between lots of bruises and some bruises.
Click to expand...
That, and the "why" of the beating. I mean, while the law does not recognize your victim saying bad things as a defense to you punching him, if the truck driver yelled "Get out of the way you stupid N-word or I'll break your jaw", some sense might be made of the non-defensible act of pulling someone out of their vehicle. And, the "break your jaw" comment when coupled with the guy getting out of his truck would be cause for someone to think he had to defend himself.

I don't think it went down like that, but there is some talk of a honking of the horn, some comments back at the guy, some jawing back and forth, and some eventual racial epithet being hurled. None of that may turn out to be accurate. But I'd make it more gray than simply if there was a beating. I'd like to more of the "why".
 
Upvote 0
Deety;1973823; said:
Weird. You'd think the good/evil line would be drawn between whether there was actually a beating or not, rather than between lots of bruises and some bruises.
Click to expand...


there was a FIGHT.
not an uncommon event at bar rooms where large groups of college kids congregate.

a FIGHT and a BEATING are two different things.

a FIGHT will get you (at most) a misdemeanor charge for disturbing the peace or simple battery and no one serves time.

a BEATING will bring felony charges and somebody is going to jail, lawsuits will probably happen, etc.

judging by this pic, and this pic only, it looks like a fight happened, not a beating.


P.S. being reported that Jefferson was not directly involved in the fight.
what the hell constitutes "directly"? your guess is as good as mine.
 
Upvote 0
Nutriaitch;1973840; said:
there was a FIGHT.
not an uncommon event at bar rooms where large groups of college kids congregate.

a FIGHT and a BEATING are two different things.

a FIGHT will get you (at most) a misdemeanor charge for disturbing the peace or simple battery and no one serves time.

a BEATING will bring felony charges and somebody is going to jail, lawsuits will probably happen, etc.

judging by this pic, and this pic only, it looks like a fight happened, not a beating.


P.S. being reported that Jefferson was not directly involved in the fight.
what the hell constitutes "directly"? your guess is as good as mine.
Click to expand...
Probably an indirect kick.
 
Upvote 0
Nutriaitch;1973841; said:
also being reported that there is a video of the incident caught by a surveillance camera at a nearby business.

video has not been leaked yet, and BRPD not revealing what is on the video.
Click to expand...

Our only hope is that the BRPD will acknowledge your unequalled level of expertise in bar fights and ask you to analyze it for them and all the rest of us.

BTW, would you have time to be my idol?

.
 
Upvote 0
Gatorubet;1973838; said:
That, and the "why" of the beating. I mean, while the law does not recognize your victim saying bad things as a defense to you punching him, if the truck driver yelled "Get out of the way you stupid N-word or I'll break your jaw", some sense might be made of the non-defensible act of pulling someone out of their vehicle. And, the "break your jaw" comment when coupled with the guy getting out of his truck would be cause for someone to think he had to defend himself.

I don't think it went down like that, but there is some talk of a honking of the horn, some comments back at the guy, some jawing back and forth, and some eventual racial epithet being hurled. None of that may turn out to be accurate. But I'd make it more gray than simply if there was a beating. I'd like to more of the "why".
Click to expand...
Things that determine who is in the wrong at each step of the scenario:

If someone made a racial slur
If someone was pulled from a vehicle for violent purposes
If someone made a physical threat and stepped out of a vehicle, presumably to follow up
If someone was breaking up a fight
If someone was joining and escalating a fight

Things that don't:

How many bruises someone has

Racial epithets are atrocious and would be an emotional justification for pulling someone from a car to beat them (referencing a report earlier in the thread), but not a moral justification. If the driver threatened physical violence and stepped out of the vehicle as you mention here, that's a completely different scenario where self-defense comes into play. We don't know how the Marine was acting during the argument or whether he was breaking up or joining the fight. So there are a lot of factors here that determine who was right or wrong, and many of those are murky. Like I said, whether or not it was a beating determines whether or not the players were wrong. That someone wasn't sufficiently bruised - not relevant.
 
Upvote 0
Deety;1973888; said:
Things that determine who is in the wrong at each step of the scenario:

If someone made a racial slur
If someone was pulled from a vehicle for violent purposes
If someone made a physical threat and stepped out of a vehicle, presumably to follow up
If someone was breaking up a fight
If someone was joining and escalating a fight

Things that don't:

How many bruises someone has

Racial epithets are atrocious and would be an emotional justification for pulling someone from a car to beat them (referencing a report earlier in the thread), but not a moral justification. If the driver threatened physical violence and stepped out of the vehicle as you mention here, that's a completely different scenario where self-defense comes into play. We don't know how the Marine was acting during the argument or whether he was breaking up or joining the fight. So there are a lot of factors here that determine who was right or wrong, and many of those are murky. Like I said, whether or not it was a beating determines whether or not the players were wrong. That someone wasn't sufficiently bruised - not relevant.
Click to expand...
As usual - we agree 100% on this post.








What?
 
Upvote 0
Tlangs;1973765; said:
there is a silver lining to this whole mess...


at least none of the LSU players sold their own property for discounted tatoos.
Click to expand...
1149957259802.gif
 
Upvote 0
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top