If you are involved in a conflict with a person of another race and you are white, you may as well just say you're guilty because the jury will never be impartial. What a joke of a verdict.

The details of this are crazy. He dragged her partially into his car and stepped on the gas? Absolutely almost killed her.

— Dr. Dad, PhD 🔄🔼◀️🔽▶️ (@GarrettPetersen) December 15, 2023

It's gonna get worse, a lot worse.

Lawyers.

She made some mistakes leading up to the shooting. She was not even hit and shouldn't have pursued him. She really didn't need to be involved with him beyond getting his license plate. She put herself in a bad position IMO. She claims he pulled the trigger.

That said, life without parole is insane.

Not sure I agree with the verdict, but my understanding is that she witnessed an accident and was not in it. She chased the driver down while on a call with 911 operator, and was told to stop the chase once she reported the license plate. She was told not to engage, but she approached the truck with her firearm pulled.

Correct me if any of that is inaccurate. If those are the facts, her actions at least partially led to the man's death (in addition to his own actions).

Get tf out of cities.

redcrayon said:

---

... life without parole is insane.

---

Agree with this, for sure.

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

Sadly, the only solution is to move somewhere without that element present. Avoid the situation at all cost.

Stay away from areas dominated by concentrations of progressive leftists.

They no longer believe in classical western judicial philosophy and common law (except where it happens to align with their political objectives as a tool). They believe in their leftist proscriptive ideology, and it biases all of their decisions. Your jury in such an area will therefore also be biased. If you enter a leftist region or enclave, tread carefully, as you may be a political second class citizen with limited rights, in practice.

Logos Stick said:

---

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

---

If she had stoped following him and NOT GOTTEN OUT OF HER CAR WITH HER GUN OUT, you'd have a point.

But, based on posters descriptions above, she followed him and even after 911 told her to no longer follow or engage him, she did anyway, confronted him with her gun drawn and a fight followed.

If some random person was following you and got out of there car with their gun out would you just stand there, or defend yourself if possible?

Marvin said:

---

Not sure I agree with the verdict, but my understanding is that she witnessed an accident and was not in it. She chased the driver down while on a call with 911 operator, and was told to stop the chase once she reported the license plate. She was told not to engage

---

I was in almost the exact same scenario a few years ago, but instead of witnessing an accident, I had a gun pulled on me and pointed at my head.

When the perp fled I called 911 as I followed. 911 operator told me to stop following because the cavalry was coming so listened to him and stopped…

…DPD showed up an hour and a half later and a detective followed up with me via phone call 6 weeks later.

Absolute joke.

I guess I'd have called 911. I would not try to assault a person that had a gun pointed at me because I'm not stupid.

Also, his story doesn't match her story. So he said, she said I guess.

Marvin said:

---

Not sure I agree with the verdict, but my understanding is that she witnessed an accident and was not in it. She chased the driver down while on a call with 911 operator, and was told to stop the chase once she reported the license plate. She was told not to engage, but she approached the truck with her firearm pulled.

Correct me if any of that is inaccurate. If those are the facts, her actions at least partially led to the man's death (in addition to his own actions).

---

Disregarding the instructions of a 911 operator does not constitute probable cause that she had premeditated intent to commit murder. If there is a crime in disobeying a 911 operator, file charges for that but don't presume that she chased the man down with the intent to kill him. The deceased criminal actions in not only the hit and run but toward the accused were entirely ignored by the jury.


If Governor Kemp has a shred of decency, he will pardon or at least grant clemency to this woman. Unfortunately, Kemp is a reptile in a Republican skin-suit and will not event comment on this case.

Logos Stick said:

---

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

---

This is in Georgia where the laws were changed after the Ahmaud Arbery case. In particular the laws about being able to make a citizen's arrest. You can't anymore.

So that makes her the instigator, no self defense claim. Not following the instructions of the 911 dispatcher to disengage after obtaining the plate number also negates self defense.

My problem from watching that clip of the verdict is piling on the lesser included offenses, that was overkill (pardon the pun).

There is no right to a jury of your peers in the US. That was a concept in British common law wherein you still have royalty and common citizens.

Still a pretty harsh punishment though but I am not seeing much reversible error other than the lesser included offenses appear repetitive to me.

Logos Stick said:

---

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

---

There is video of what happened. She went up to his truck yelling at him to get the F out of the truck. I have no idea what she was thinking but she is responsible for her actions that led to the man's death. She wasn't a police officer.

I think what she did was stupid and needless once the information on the suspect had been relayed. She should have stopped there if further lives weren't at risk.

Once the fight or attack starts, that previous information is less relevant to me. It is the events of the altercation itself that matter.

redcrayon said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

---

There is video of what happened. She went up to his truck yelling at him to get the F out of the truck. I have no idea what she was thinking but she is responsible for her actions that led to the man's death. She wasn't a police officer.

---

Do you have a link to the video? TIA.

So you don't have to be in the process of committing a crime and don't get the right to self defense.

Just to be clear, if I verbally confront someone in GA and that person begins beating the crap out of me and I hit back and some how kill that person, I can be charged?

That's crazy.

redcrayon said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

---

There is video of what happened. She went up to his truck yelling at him to get the F out of the truck. I have no idea what she was thinking but she is responsible for her actions that led to the man's death. She wasn't a police officer.

---

Her actions did not lead to her death. His actions did. Just because someone is yelling at you doesn't give you the right to beat the hell out of them imo.

Thats victim blaming imo.

And if you go to a jury trial, it seems you're almost guaranteed a majority of the jury are the types who sit around on the internet all day while watching whatever comes on daytime TV. In other words the lazy, stupid and jobless.

Scary stuff.

Sad fact of the matter is that in certain locales you're going to pull bad prosecutors, judges, and juries.

That's what appellate courts are for, and why elections/appointments are so important to those benches.

Logos Stick said:

---

redcrayon said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

---

There is video of what happened. She went up to his truck yelling at him to get the F out of the truck. I have no idea what she was thinking but she is responsible for her actions that led to the man's death. She wasn't a police officer.

---

Her actions did not lead to her death. His actions did. Just because someone is yelling at you doesn't give you the right to beat the hell out of them imo.

Thats victim blaming imo.

---

He didn't beat the hell out of her. Have you seen the evidence at all?

You can't chase someone, pull a gun, yell commands, and not expect them to react. She wasn't even hit! She really had no business chasing after him and blocking him in. She just made some really bad decisions and she's going to pay for it.

agracer said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

---

If she had stoped following him and NOT GOTTEN OUT OF HER CAR WITH HER GUN OUT, you'd have a point.

But, based on posters descriptions above, she followed him and even after 911 told her to no longer follow or engage him, she did anyway, confronted him with her gun drawn and a fight followed.

If some random person was following you and got out of there car with their gun out would you just stand there, or defend yourself if possible?

---

Or fire first?

I would have to see all of the evidence but sounds like both parties had a chance to de-escalate before it got to the point it did. Getting mad at other drivers ain't worth your life

To be fair, if a black man was on trial for robbery in a white neighborhood, the jury shouldn't be made up by a bunch of blacks. It should consist of the same racial makeup of the community where the crime happened.

localag88 said:

---

Sad fact of the matter is that in certain locales you're going to pull bad prosecutors, judges, and juries.

That's what appellate courts are for, and why elections/appointments are so important to those benches.

---

As we politically self segregate into different geographies, juries and justice systems will become increasingly biased. That is not good. I almost think we need a completely randomized system for jury selection over larger regions, and virtual courtroom options, or something like that.

Could it be she just had poor legal representation? Seems like being a lawyer in Georgia doesn't require much in the way of skills, knowledge, honesty and critical reasoning...

Ahmed died in 2020; this was in 2019. They changed the law AFTER she killed him and applied it retroactively!?

aggiehawg said:

---

redcrayon said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

Even if what you said is true, that doesn't make her responsible for the guys death in any way imo.

You don't get to assault someone because they follow you after you hit and run.

---

There is video of what happened. She went up to his truck yelling at him to get the F out of the truck. I have no idea what she was thinking but she is responsible for her actions that led to the man's death. She wasn't a police officer.

---

Do you have a link to the video? TIA.

---

I don't but I think I saw it on the Court TV YouTube.

Logos Stick said:

---

So you don't have to be in the process of committing a crime and don't get the right to self defense.

Just to be clear, if I verbally confront someone in GA and that person begins beating the crap out of me and I hit back and some how kill that person, I can be charged?

That's crazy.

---

There's a lot more to this story. Just found this.

Quote:

---

Taking the stand in a gambled effort to augment her defense, Payne admittedly never drew her often-hip-holstered weapon before the day of the hit-and-run that altered so many lives in Clayton County. But, Payne insisted during her testimony on Dec. 11 that she never meant for her brandished handgun to fire a bullet. Rather, she argued, he shot himself during a struggle for the weapon.

---

That was likely not a good idea.

Quote:

---

Payne and a semi-truck had a green light when Herring breezed through a red light in his Dodge Dakota pickup truck, causing a minor crash with the semi-truck. Testimony at an earlier hearing suggested that Herring stayed at the scene of the crash for roughly 15 to 20 minutes before ultimately getting back in his truck and driving away.

---

That's not exactly a hit and run then. He should have waited for police to arrive, though She and semi driver had plenty of time to get the license plate number. But there is more.

Quote:

---

She was not involved in the initial crash, pulled over and called 911, she testified on Monday.
A witness a state corrections officer with medic training also saw the crash and came up to speak to Herring, a detective previously testified. Based on his training, the witness suggested Herring was having a medical emergency a diabetic shock or something of that nature. For example, Herring was disoriented, displayed red-orange eyes, and had walked around his truck several times.
But Payne thought Herring was drunk.

---

Quote:

---

In her testimony, the defendant said that at various points, she was talking with the truck driver, the truck driver's employer via his in-truck dispatch radio, and the 911 dispatcher to share information about the crash principally about the alleged red-light runner being at fault.

"We were kind of just standing there waiting for the police to arrive," Payne testified.

At one point, the other witness flashed a badge on his breast and identified himself as a "state officer," the defendant said. Payne did not know the other witness was only a correctional officer "until months later" when informed by her attorney, she testified.

"He's OK, but he's definitely inebriated," the officer allegedly said at one point, Payne testified. This alleged claim prompted her and the semi-truck driver to ask at the same time: "Do you mean he's drunk?"

---

Quote:

---

After Herring left the initial crash site, however, Payne had settled on the idea that he was drunk. She got back into her Jeep and pursued Herring despite being told at least once by 911 not to do so.

"I saw him stopped in the turning lane, so I turned as well," Payne testified. "When I stopped, I was under the impression, with having 911 on the phone, that I could be a messenger."

---

Yeah, definitely a bad idea to put her on the stand.

Quote:

---

Payne said she initially only intended to get the driver's license plate information, which she said the 911 dispatcher had asked of her.

The state argued the audio from the 911 call shows the dispatcher was adamant that Payne not pursue Herring. The audio is also clear the defendant was adamant she was going to go after him.

"He is drunk. I'm not," Payne told the dispatcher before the fatal confrontation. "I'm sorry, but I'm here to tell you I'm not not going to follow him because he is going to cause an accident."

---

Oy vey! get her off of the stand.

Quote:

---

The defendant claims she got out of her vehicle at an intersection and walked up to Herring to get him to return to the crash site. What happened next is murky. But once Payne and Herring were within reaching distance, the calculus shifted, and a life was quickly lost.

After the two shouted at one another for a few moments, Herring reached out of his truck and grabbed her, Payne testified on Monday. She claims he ripped her shirt with the grab and eventually "mashed the gas," briefly dragging her forward with his car.

Payne said she never stopped trying to pull away from Herring and eventually announced that she had a gun to try and get her alleged assailant to let her go. That's when Payne admittedly drew the gun.
"I pulled it out and immediately started trying to just continue to push against the door with it like push it away from him" she testified. Then, she said: "He grabbed my hand with the gun in it."

---

Quote:

---

All the while, the defendant said, she screamed for Herring to stop.
"As he's pulling it is when it the trigger went off," she testified. "After it went off, my entire body kind of fell backwards."

The state, on the other hand, proved during trial, relying on witness testimony and recordings, that Payne actually cut Herring off with her car, then jumped out and "very aggressively" ran up to Herring's car, cursed at him, immediately started punching the confused man through his window, took out her gun, threatened to shoot him twice, and "immediately" shot him.

---

Quote:

---

Payne was initially charged with one count of murder. She made $100,000 bond in late May 2019. By mid-June of that year, she was charged with several additional felony counts, and her bond was revoked.

---

Okay, that I have a problem with on several levels. Charged with murder but made bail and was released? Then DA adds charges to get her bail revoked?

LINK

Ugh. Payne was very, very stupid. Just brandishing her gun would get her jail time.

Highway6 said:

---

Sadly, the only solution is to move somewhere without that element present. Avoid the situation at all cost.

---

Logos Stick said:

---

So you don't have to be in the process of committing a crime and don't get the right to self defense.

Just to be clear, if I verbally confront someone in GA and that person begins beating the crap out of me and I hit back and some how kill that person, I can be charged?

That's crazy.

---

Yes, everyday and twice on Sunday. Depending on the exact circumstances, might be able to gain an acquittal at trial on self defense but charged? Yes.

fka ftc said:

---

Could it be she just had poor legal representation? Seems like being a lawyer in Georgia doesn't require much in the way of skills, knowledge, honesty and critical reasoning...

---

Don't trust your soul to no backwoods southern lawyer.

I can see how she got convicted. My general sentiment still stands: as we have geographically self segregated, our juries have become more sociopolitically biased and juries have had a tendency to make more political statements in cases with any kind of political ramifications.

The DA's and judges also become more biased.