Started By
Message
re: "Brandon Miller has rights. I believe that Alabama has a duty to protect those rights.”
Posted on 2/27/23 at 8:46 am to TrussvilleTide
Posted on 2/27/23 at 8:46 am to TrussvilleTide
quote:
So they should kick him off the team because the public thinks they should?
I think they should try to determine whether he read the text before delivering the gun before making a disciplinary decision.
0
Posted on 2/27/23 at 8:47 am to cajunbama
Posted on 2/27/23 at 8:50 am to Jon Ham
98% of these Jerry Falwell-looking Gump freemasons would want the book thrown at some random ghetto kid from Birmingham or Atlanta who's in the exact boat as Miller.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 8:52 am to cajunbama
Posted on 2/27/23 at 8:54 am to Jon Ham
quote:
if Miller read the text before delivering the gun then he acted in a reckless disregard for the safety of others
I don’t think so. One piece of this puzzle that nobody wants to talk about on this board is that Miles didn’t shoot anybody. And again, no rational person would assume this gun would be handed to a 3rd party.
It’s clear that Miller didn’t believe Miles was going to use the weapon, and he was correct. Tragically, he didn’t bank on Miles being stupid enough to give it to someone else.
Poor judgement, not reckless endangerment.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:00 am to Tuscaloosa
If folks would take a minute to check the social media acct. of the victim's "boyfriend", a sane person could imagine more possible scenarios that haven't been turned up yet.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:02 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
It’s clear that Miller didn’t believe Miles was going to use the weapon
When someone’s driving 100 mph and causes a wreck, they didn’t believe they would cause a wreck.
When someone lets their pit bull off a leash and it attacks someone, they didn’t believe that would happen.
You don’t have to believe a bad outcome will happen in order to be grossly negligent. The bad outcome just has to be reasonably foreseeable.
In this instance, was it reasonably foreseeable someone could unnecessarily be seriously hurt if he delivered the gun? It’s difficult to say “no” when it’s the middle of the night, in a public space, your friend has been out drinking, and an altercation is happening. It’s especially difficult to say “no” when someone was actually shot and killed soon after delivery.
This post was edited on 2/27/23 at 9:04 am
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:08 am to Jon Ham
quote:
When someone’s driving 100 mph and causes a wreck, they didn’t believe they would cause a wreck.
When someone lets their pit bull off a leash and it attacks someone, they didn’t believe that would happen.
You don’t have to believe a bad outcome will happen in order to be grossly negligent. The bad outcome just has to be reasonably foreseeable.
Again, the problem here in all of this is that there was a 3rd party involved - and that 3rd party was the person who shot the gun. No reasonable person would assume a 3rd party would be given that gun.
If the text from Miles has said anything about him giving it to this other guy to take care of, you’d have a valid argument. Miller did not know, and shouldn’t have guessed, that the gun would be used by a 3rd party.
In your above examples, the scenarios would be Miller putting his pit bull in a boarding facility, and someone on staff letting the dog off the leash. Or giving the keys to his car to a buddy, who then gives those keys to a friend to test drive. None of those are foreseeable outcomes by any normal rationale.
This post was edited on 2/27/23 at 9:11 am
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:17 am to Jon Ham
quote:
"Brandon Miller has rights. I believe that Alabama has a duty to protect those rights.”
I think this is half right. Brandon Miller does have rights, including the Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself.
Alabama, however, has no duty to be Miller's advocate. They have every right to ask Miller about the incident. If Miller opts not to cooperate, then Alabama has every right to suspend Miller until the matter is resolved. We all know they're not going to do that, and we all know why. It's a pretty obvious case of willful blindness.
To me, Miller might well be innocent of criminal wrongdoing, but the University of Alabama has mishandled this pretty badly. You can't tell me that, with 3 basketball players at the scene of a homicide that team rules, assuming there are any, weren't broken. Alabama should have suspended Miller and Bradley for the remainder of the regular season, if not for team rules violations then at least for optics. Then Nate Oats, who might possibly not be a very smart person, gives his ham-handed statements. On top of that, Miller performs his little pat-down routine for a national audience.
11 shots were fired in that confrontation--it could have been worse. A lot worse. It's a human tragedy that Alabama compounded into a PR nightmare.
This post was edited on 2/27/23 at 9:20 am
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:18 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
Again, the problem here in all of this is that there was a 3rd party involved - and that 3rd party was the person who shot the gun. No reasonable person would assume a 3rd party would be given that gun.
If he read the text, Miller knew he was bringing the gun to a public place for his friend who had been out drinking and was in an altercation. The fact Miles then gave it to a third party has no relevance as to whether that was a negligent decision.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:21 am to Jon Ham
I’m ok with this being standard. The next time someone is accused of a crime they shouldn’t be punished until convicted.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:23 am to Jon Ham
quote:
If he read the text, Miller knew he was bringing the gun to a public place for his friend who had been out drinking and was in an altercation.
The issue here is intent. Could a reasonable person conclude that the gun was for self-defense? Also, I'm not sure what the law is in Alabama, but we've watered down weapon carrying laws to the point where taking it to a public place isn't likely to be a problem. Making this sort of thing legal is an unanticipated consequence of the Death Valley Days crowd. There's a reason they called it the Wild West and not the Safe West.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:33 am to Ancient Astronaut
quote:
I’m ok with this being standard. The next time someone is accused of a crime they shouldn’t be punished until convicted.
Do you understand certain non-criminal behavior is subject to disciplinary action as well? We see it all the time.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:38 am to NaturalStateReb
quote:
Could a reasonable person conclude that the gun was for self-defense?
You could make the argument, but I don’t think most people would find that to be reasonable.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 9:41 am to Jon Ham
quote:
Do you understand certain non-criminal behavior is subject to disciplinary action as well? We see it all the time.
That’s my point. Don’t punish a student unless they are convicted of a crime. Curious to see what Alabama’s alcohol policy is towards students. Some schools will give you a strike for merely being arrested for public intoxication.
This post was edited on 2/27/23 at 9:42 am
Posted on 2/27/23 at 10:07 am to Jon Ham
quote:
You could make the argument, but I don’t think most people would find that to be reasonable.
I think that’s actually the most reasonable explanation, when we put away our biases and weed through the ebonics. The text you continue to reference straight up said Miles was threatened. We later found out that the guy who threatened him was already armed with a gun. So the guy who threatened Miles was armed when the initial altercation started, and Miles was unarmed.
Self defense is perfectly reasonable, IMO.
What is not reasonable is Miles handing his gun to another guy, and that guy indiscriminately open firing. Both of the individuals who acted unreasonably are in jail for capital murder.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 10:08 am to Jon Ham
quote:
You could make the argument, but I don’t think most people would find that to be reasonable.
That's not the legal standard. It's beyond a reasonable doubt. The "beyond a reasonable doubt" standard is very high. In theory, the state would have to show that there is no other reasonable explanation for the defendant's conduct.
This isn't "most people wouldn't agree" or "I don't agree." We're talking levels of near certitude.
Posted on 2/27/23 at 10:12 am to Tuscaloosa
quote:
Okay, new guy who is definitely not an alter but whose 80 posts are almost all about big bad daddy bammer. Enjoy.
“We don’t care what you think about the Brandon miller situation”
“Buuuuut I will write large journal entries on the rant and scour through anyone’s post history that questions me”
Holy shite you are pathetic lmao
Posted on 2/27/23 at 10:31 am to Cutty Sark
quote:
“We don’t care what you think about the Brandon miller situation” “Buuuuut I will write large journal entries on the rant and scour through anyone’s post history that questions me” Holy shite you are pathetic lmao
What the frick are you gonna do about it, alter?
Lmaaoooooooooooooooooo
Posted on 2/27/23 at 10:33 am to Tuscaloosa
Well it appears I will laugh at how pathetic your life must be
Page 6 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News