Bryce Thompson out - potentially

#901
#901
kylealexanderfan said:
Rocktopper, in the articles it states that 1 of the witnesses in the back did not hear the gun threat, but only the slap threat. The witness who made a visual ID and the other witness in the back heard both.
Click to expand...

But what you quoted only stated they only heard parts of the exchange? And it quoted one witness as stating they heard that?
 
#903
#903
cHiZzLeVOL said:
He was arrested because the responding officers thought there was a possibility of bodily harm to the girlfriend based on Thompsons temperament at the time and the report from a witness who overheard him say he would slap her.
Click to expand...

I didn't catch that the part about the gf having bodily harm in the article......if this is true or even if there is an accusation of physical violence, then its clear why he was arrested for assault.......

However, I'm not getting how a threat of physical violence=assault.......I'm sure it's a crime, but assault? I threaten my kids with a butt whoopin almost everyday.
 
#904
#904
kylealexanderfan said:
In a court of law (if he were charged for his threat for shooting up the school) I would think the DA eventually would drop it or he would be found not guilty due to lack of hard evidence. However, UT can be a little but more lax if they chose to pursue this and he could certainly face expulsion.
Click to expand...

What would UT "pursue" that the original investigators charged with protecting and serving that were called to the scene and investigated didnt? Keeping in mind they are the first responders when a situation like this happens. Not the admin at UT.

You mentioned lawsuits regarding UT earlier. I doubt KPD is brushing this under the rug if he is a credible threat, just to hold him for 12 hours and turn him loose.

The chances of expulsion without a charge (much less it being dropped due to lack of credible evidence) is what?
 
#907
#907
keenobserver said:
I didn't catch that the part about the gf having bodily harm in the article......if this is true or even if there is an accusation of physical violence, then its clear why he was arrested for assault.......

However, I'm not getting how a threat of physical violence=assault.......I'm sure it's a crime, but assault? I threaten my kids with a butt whoopin almost everyday.
Click to expand...


As mentioned a couple of times previously, TN Code § 39-13-101 (a) (2)
 
#910
#910
kylealexanderfan said:
Rocktopper, in the articles it states that 1 of the witnesses in the back did not hear the gun threat, but only the slap threat. The witness who made a visual ID and the other witness in the back heard both.
Click to expand...

First off the article only talks about two witnesses not including his GF. The article states that one witness heard the slap comment and the other witness heard the shooting comment.

Please post the article that shows that 3 people were witnesses not including the GF. Thanks.
 
#912
#912
keenobserver said:
I didn't catch that the part about the gf having bodily harm in the article......if this is true or even if there is an accusation of physical violence, then its clear why he was arrested for assault.......

However, I'm not getting how a threat of physical violence=assault.......I'm sure it's a crime, but assault? I threaten my kids with a butt whoopin almost everyday.
Click to expand...

You misread what I typed.

The girl did not have bodily harm. Thompson never touched her.

The police responded and to make an arrest like that they have to fear for bodily harm to the girl. Hence the officers made a determination based on Thompson’s temperament at the time. They he could pose a threat of bodily harm to the girlfriend. Hence why he was arrested.
 
#913
#913
rocktopper16 said:
So WATE says one witness and Knox news says two 😂😂 Well, color me funny. I’m out until something more official leaks.
Click to expand...
At this point they are all reporting on slightly different portions of the police report in regards to what witnesses said and it can be interpreted differently by each news outlet. The actual police report will clarify any grey area. I still have no issue believing an impartial witness though even if it’s only 1 instead of 2.
 
#914
#914
kylealexanderfan said:
At this point they are all reporting on slightly different portions of the police report in regards to what witnesses said and it can be interpreted differently by each news outlet. The actual police report will clarify any grey area. I still have no issue believing an impartial witness though even if it’s only 1 instead of 2.
Click to expand...

I can’t though believe an impartial witness, but that’s just me.
 
#915
#915
Where was this guy during the Gruden threads? The conclusions he could have drawn from unnamed sources mentioned in news reports........ .
 
#918
#918
#919
#919
kylealexanderfan said:
At this point they are all reporting on slightly different portions of the police report in regards to what witnesses said and it can be interpreted differently by each news outlet. The actual police report will clarify any grey area. I still have no issue believing an impartial witness though even if it’s only 1 instead of 2.
Click to expand...
agenda based?..kinda weird here ...am I missing something?
 
#923
#923
peerless98 said:
Serious question: How do you know they are impartial? You have allowed your assumptions to determine your opinion, which you call facts, and nothing is going to change it.
Click to expand...
Wait, you mean to tell me he hasn’t changed your mind yet?
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top