Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Right after it happened he did an interview, trying to act like a victim. In that interview he said "I will pray for her". I guess his prayer worked!A woman who ran over a demonstrator during a George Floyd protest in Denver last summer is found not guilty of assault by jury
Ryan Brackley, an attorney for Jennifer Watson, said she was scared for her safety and should have never been charged with assault.news.yahoo.com
If protestors would stay out of the street and quick climbing all over cars and breaking windows they would not get ran into. streets are for cars not people.
www.google.com
Justice served. Maybe now these idiots will remember that playing in the street isn’t very smart.
A woman who ran over a demonstrator during a George Floyd protest in Denver last summer is found not guilty of assault by jury
Ryan Brackley, an attorney for Jennifer Watson, said she was scared for her safety and should have never been charged with assault.
If protestors would stay out of the street and quick climbing all over cars and breaking windows they would not get ran into. streets are for cars not people.
She should not have been charged, in the first place. When the guy jumped on her hood, smashing her windshield, she should have floored it, no matter who was in front of her. I can see, she probably should not have swerved towards a protestor, since the other jerk had already jumped off her hood, but I doubt, she was thinking clearly after the first jerk jumped on her car. In Tennessee, I think she would have been OK to shoot the SOB off the car after he smashed her windshield, jumping on.A woman who ran over a demonstrator during a George Floyd protest in Denver last summer is found not guilty of assault by jury
Ryan Brackley, an attorney for Jennifer Watson, said she was scared for her safety and should have never been charged with assault.
If protestors would stay out of the street and quick climbing all over cars and breaking windows they would not get ran into. streets are for cars not people.
She should not have been charged, in the first place. When the guy jumped on her hood, smashing her windshield, she should have floored it, no matter who was in front of her. I can see, she probably should not have swerved towards a protestor, since the other jerk had already jumped off her hood, but I doubt, she was thinking clearly after the first jerk jumped on her car. In Tennessee, I think she would have been OK to shoot the SOB off the car after he smashed her windshield, jumping on.
You hail from a sensible state. As of the first of July, in Tennessee, you not only can have a weapon in your car for protection, fully loaded whether CCW holder or not, but can now carry walking down the street or into the Q-Mart, without a CCW, if you are not restricted due to criminal record or other court action. At this point I am still not sure that this was a good move on our part. Almost any moron over 18 can now legally carry, whether they know which end the bullets come out of or not.She should not have been charged, in the first place. When the guy jumped on her hood, smashing her windshield, she should have floored it, no matter who was in front of her. I can see, she probably should not have swerved towards a protestor, since the other jerk had already jumped off her hood, but I doubt, she was thinking clearly after the first jerk jumped on her car. In Tennessee, I think she would have been OK to shoot the SOB off the car after he smashed her windshield, jumping on.
Which is why lowlifes only pull stunts like this in leftist states. Here in Ohio our Castle Doctrine extends to our cars if you are a CCW holder. As far as the law is concerned, breaking into my car is no different than trying to break into my house giving me legal rights to use deadly force.
You hail from a sensible state. As of the first of July, in Tennessee, you not only can have a weapon in your car for protection, fully loaded whether CCW holder or not, but can now carry walking down the street or into the Q-Mart, without a CCW, if you are not restricted due to criminal record or other court action. At this point I am still not sure that this was a good move on our part. Almost any moron over 18 can now legally carry, whether they know which end the bullets come out of or not.
Justice served. Maybe now these idiots will remember that playing in the street isn’t very smart.
Reckless driving is not a bullshit misdemeanor in this state. Fine may be less than a hundred bucks, plus court costs on first offense, but the insurance companies will jack your rates higher than a cats back for 6 years, probably costing you thousands before it come off your record. Couple that with the fact, the guy she hit will sue the crap out of her and win on the value of the reckless driving conviction, and she is screwed.Justice served. Maybe now these idiots will remember that playing in the street isn’t very smart.
Not really. She did get convicted of a bullshit misdemeanor “reckless driving” charge. Under the circumstances, Ms. Watson should not have been charged with anything, and the subhuman piece of shit Max Bailey should have been charged, at the very least, with assaulting her and vandalizing her vehicle.
Anyone who voluntarily lives in a state where they CAN'T defend themselves deserves what happens to them.She should not have been charged, in the first place. When the guy jumped on her hood, smashing her windshield, she should have floored it, no matter who was in front of her. I can see, she probably should not have swerved towards a protestor, since the other jerk had already jumped off her hood, but I doubt, she was thinking clearly after the first jerk jumped on her car. In Tennessee, I think she would have been OK to shoot the SOB off the car after he smashed her windshield, jumping on.A woman who ran over a demonstrator during a George Floyd protest in Denver last summer is found not guilty of assault by jury
Ryan Brackley, an attorney for Jennifer Watson, said she was scared for her safety and should have never been charged with assault.
If protestors would stay out of the street and quick climbing all over cars and breaking windows they would not get ran into. streets are for cars not people.
Any update on this driver:
Any update on this driver:
That was tough to watch but the fact that adult women would stand in the middle of a high-speed interstate highway is worse. The narrative began IMMEDIATELY about the "white driver". Once that reflexive lie failed, they kept talking about the "white car".
I'll buy you a drink next time you're in town. You would like our state.Anyone who voluntarily lives in a state where they CAN'T defend themselves deserves what happens to them.She should not have been charged, in the first place. When the guy jumped on her hood, smashing her windshield, she should have floored it, no matter who was in front of her. I can see, she probably should not have swerved towards a protestor, since the other jerk had already jumped off her hood, but I doubt, she was thinking clearly after the first jerk jumped on her car. In Tennessee, I think she would have been OK to shoot the SOB off the car after he smashed her windshield, jumping on.A woman who ran over a demonstrator during a George Floyd protest in Denver last summer is found not guilty of assault by jury
Ryan Brackley, an attorney for Jennifer Watson, said she was scared for her safety and should have never been charged with assault.
If protestors would stay out of the street and quick climbing all over cars and breaking windows they would not get ran into. streets are for cars not people.
Reckless driving is not a bullshit misdemeanor in this state. Fine may be less than a hundred bucks, plus court costs on first offense, but the insurance companies will jack your rates higher than a cats back for 6 years, probably costing you thousands before it come off your record. Couple that with the fact, the guy she hit will sue the crap out of her and win on the value of the reckless driving conviction, and she is screwed.
Would not help in this case. If you run over somebody, get charged with reckless driving and convicted by a jury of your peers, (even though the conviction was kind of a consolation prize because they failed on the more serious charge) you are screwed on the civil case. No way in hell you will when with that reckless driving conviction by a jury in the mix. I hope she didn't have a paid off mortgage, cause she is soon going to be an apartment dweller. I hate it, but the chick is toast. She would have been far better off killing the asshole on her hood (who was really deserving, by the way) than injuring the one to the side by swerving to discourage him from jumping on. I have not seen any video of the swerve, but it looks like it could not be sold to the jury as a panic move while under attack of a mob in the motorway.Reckless driving is not a bullshit misdemeanor in this state. Fine may be less than a hundred bucks, plus court costs on first offense, but the insurance companies will jack your rates higher than a cats back for 6 years, probably costing you thousands before it come off your record. Couple that with the fact, the guy she hit will sue the crap out of her and win on the value of the reckless driving conviction, and she is screwed.
I don't know about that because if sued, it goes to your insurance company who have dream teams of lawyers.
What we really need in this country is a Loser Pays All law. Sue anybody you want, but if you lose, you are responsible for all the costs of the person you tried to sue. You'd see how fast these ambulance chaser lawsuits would stop. The problem? Many of our Congress critters are lawyers and would never write such a law to protect their comrades still working law.
