Still wanna know where you're getting 911 info.A) 911 told him not to pursue. They didn't need his damn help.
B) Bull f***ing sh** on you saying the narrative is BS. The police report itself says they saw him looking in the window of a house under construction and lead redneck THOUGHT he looked like a guy that he had HEARD was trying to break into other houses. In other words, assumed.
C) If he "knows what he's doing" I hate to see it when he has no idea. And he's NOT a cop anymore, so him USED to being a cop means jack sh**.
I never said they did the right thing. My only point has been you nor I nor anyone on this board knows what happened between when he went around the truck and when the fight begins. You have to assume. You don't convict people with assumptions. Hopefully if they are guilty, more evidence will surface and they'll get what's coming to them .Well good idea, because he had already done that. They had cut him off once and he ran the other way and they had caught up to him again.
Also, they could have never chased after him too.
Him being a retired PO makes it worse. If their only intention was to identify and help the police, why not follow at a distance? They tried to play cowboys and someone died. They should be held accountable.Ok and I stated that I wouldn’t have done the same thing as these two. One was a retired police officer and knows what he’s doing. He didn’t just profile this guy jogging. That narrative is completely BS when you look at all the facts presented
You can disagree with how they handled it but they called 911 and tried to keep up to identify the guy. The situation changed for the worse when the suspect attacked the dude and tried to grab his shotgun. Then it becomes a true life or death scenario no matter what happened.
I used "convicting" with "my opinion" in parenthesis. That's as far as my 'conviction' of them go atm.My apologies if I misscharacterized your position but I thought you used the words " I convict them of". Maybe I missed it. Like I said I'm not defending the two guys, I just don't see enough to convict them of murder. Definitely terrible judgment.
I never said they did the right thing. My only point has been you nor I nor anyone on this board knows what happened between when he went around the truck and when the fight begins. You have to assume. You don't convict people with assumptions. Hopefully if they are guilty, more evidence will surface and they'll get what's coming to them .
Yea I'm sure about that. I've stated it multiple times. I just don't convict people because I don't like them. Notice how you and other have refered to them as bubba's and rednecks while I've refered to the dead guy as the jogger and not the robber? Even though there is reasonable evidence to say he actually could be responsible for the robberies. It's because I don't know. You have 1% of the evidence here and have already sentenced them to death.ROFL, you sure about that?
Ok and I stated that I wouldn’t have done the same thing as these two. One was a retired police officer and knows what he’s doing. He didn’t just profile this guy jogging. That narrative is completely BS when you look at all the facts presented
You can disagree with how they handled it but they called 911 and tried to keep up to identify the guy. The situation changed for the worse when the suspect attacked the dude and tried to grab his shotgun. Then it becomes a true life or death scenario no matter what happened.
No you don't that's why you're wrong. That's the crucial part of the interaction.You most certainly can convict given all the evidence shown and the official police account. Maybe not murder but you sure as hell can reasonably go after manslaughter charges. I don't have to see what happened in front of the truck.