| MBB/WBB UPDATE 9/29: New Patch article: Pre-Trial Immunity Hearing For Darius Miles Started Today

[Crimson&WhiteGecko]

@Tidestalker the following is my commentary befpre the recently released attorney's statement:

Sooooo, as more information comes available, Miller was told to bring Miles gun back to him. Of which, Miller drove his vehicle that had the gun in the backseat & Miles took it out himself.

On one hand Miller could be viewed as inflaming the situation.
OR
On the other hand Miller took the gun away at first but after Miles insisted, Miller returned but did NOT touch the weapon.

HOWEVER, this is all due to what Miles did. Clearly, he is responsible. Lets stop assigning responsibility of someone else's actions to a bystander. Or to someone who may or may not have disparaged the situation. Certainly, Miller had better options. But that doesn't make him an accessory. There are 1000's of scenarios that come to mind when hind site is 20/20.

Good article with pretty concise account of events.

The challenge the PD has with Miller is charging him that he conspired to the murder. Meaning he knew what was going to happen & willfully engaged. If all there is a text from Miles (who did not even have the gun) asking/telling him to return to get his gun & Miller returning then assisting to box them in, does not mean that the intent to kill anyone was at hand. Acquiring a loaded pistol is not necessarily a predisposition for murder.

After reading the article, Miles told the disgruntled/drunk Davis about the pistol, who then grabbed it out of Miller's car & unloaded on the victim & her boyfriend. That could have happened in seconds.

Yes, if Miller had ignored the texts (I wish he had), etc, this situation may have been avoided or Davis might even be dead. But doesn't mean Miller is responsible for what Miles & Davis did.

Miller is going to have to have to deal with the repercussions for the rest of his life but it not a criminal basis for prosecution.

At least as the facts are revealed for now.

The Attorneys comments relay Miller didn't know there was a gun left in his vehicle. I am definitely leaning that Miller didn't know what was going on & he sure as hell wanted that gun out of his vehicle once Miles told him to bring it to him. Can't say I don't blam him in that way.

Then the drunk Davis grabbed the dang thing & went all New Jack City with it. Ever try predicting what drunks are going to do? They do the damnedest things.

Hell, when my wife gets drunk there is no telling what she is going to do. All I know is to get her naked before she lays on her back otherwise I would have missed out on conspiring to get laid.

 

[Tidestalker]

@Tidestalker the following is my commentary befpre the recently released attorney's statement:





The Attorneys comments relay Miller didn't know there was a gun left in his vehicle. I am definitely leaning that Miller didn't know what was going on & he sure as hell wanted that gun out of his vehicle once Miles told him to bring it to him. Can't say I don't blam him in that way.

That would be an example of being involved in the exchange, wouldn't it?

I can't for the life of me understand how it's not. Knowingly or unknowingly, if you physically drive "the joint" to someone, you are at minimum physically involved in the exchange. Admitting that doesn't mean you think he's culpable, it's just acknowledging you disagree with the lawyer's wording (as I do) given your own arguments here.

 

[Rsedge72]

All of the accounts of what happened lined up, the prosecution didn’t think it warranted anything further (as of now). So why are we talking hearsay and suggesting what should happen. Let it run its course. I’m not big on second chances so I don’t assume or jump onto the bandwagon right out the gate, so to speak!

 

[Crimson&WhiteGecko]

That would be an example of being involved in the exchange, wouldn't it?

I can't for the life of me understand how it's not. Knowingly or unknowingly, if you physically drive "the joint" to someone, you are at minimum physically involved in the exchange. Admitting that doesn't mean you think he's culpable, it's just acknowledging you disagree with the lawyer's wording (as I do) given your own arguments here.

I didn't realize i was disagreeing with the lawyers. For the life of me, bringing someone's gun back to them doesn't mean they are conspiring to shoot up anyone. Their would have to be strong evidence by Milller to say he was bringing the gun back to shoot up Ms Harris or anyone else. That evidence does not exist. Therefore it's pretty straightforward to have reasonable doubt Miller intended foul play.


Now what Miles did & say to Davis, that's different. Which is why he is in jail without bond.

 

[Tidestalker]

I didn't realize i was disagreeing with the lawyers. For the life of me, bringing someone's gun back to them doesn't mean they are conspiring to shoot up anyone. Their would have to be strong evidence by Milller to say he was bringing the gun back to shoot up Ms Harris or anyone else. That evidence does not exist. Therefore it's pretty straightforward to have reasonable doubt Miller intended foul play.


Now what Miles did & say to Davis, that's different. Which is why he is in jail without bond.

Holy crap man - The lawyer says in his statement "He (Miller) was not involved in the gun exchange to Davis in any way".

I'm not even talking about a crime or who's culpable... Was he or was he not involved in the exchange when he physically brought the gun to him? This is the Miller's lawyers statement, not mine... Not yours... Not the police... DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

You yourself said made the assertion that he wanted to get rid of the gun... Well would you consider that being involved in an exchange? Yes or no?

 

[UAgrad93]

I’ve seen and read so much in the last 24 hours about this, that I’m having a hard time keeping track.
Did anyone else see where Miles supposedly sent a text asking Miller to come get him? He then sent another one after the initial text asking for his pistol. Was that in the actual preliminary hearing yesterday or did someone make that up?
If the first text was indeed for Miller to pick him up, then Miller definitely would’ve had no clue as to any “beef”.

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

That would be an example of being involved in the exchange, wouldn't it?

I can't for the life of me understand how it's not. Knowingly or unknowingly, if you physically drive "the joint" to someone, you are at minimum physically involved in the exchange. Admitting that doesn't mean you think he's culpable, it's just acknowledging you disagree with the lawyer's wording (as I do) given your own arguments here.

In the statement, it is specifically noted that Miller had nothing to do with the exchange to Davis (not Miles). Miller thought Miles was going to retrieve his (apparently legally owned) weapon that he had left in his car. At this point, to believe that Miller was delivering the weapon in order for it to be used in a crime, you have to believe in a criminal conspiracy (and a coverup by multiple parties including law enforcement). If one wants to go that route, cool. But that's the road.

 

[Crimson&WhiteGecko]

Holy crap man - The lawyer says in his statement "He (Miller) was not involved in the gun exchange to Davis in any way".

I'm not even talking about a crime or who's culpable... Was he or was he not involved in the exchange when he physically brought the gun to him? This is the Miller's lawyers statement, not mine... Not yours... Not the police... DO YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

You yourself said made the assertion that he wanted to get rid of the gun... Well would you consider that being involved in an exchange? Yes or no?

His attorney is saying that Miller was unaware that it was left in his car to begin with. Once he found it was, he took it straight back to the owner, while it was in the back seat having NEVER touched it, & then Davis took it out of the back seat.

To call it an exchange is stretch at best. Wanting to get rid of the gun doesn't make him a part of the exchange. So, as the facts are at present I WOULD AGREE with the attorney's statement.

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

I’ve seen and read so much in the last 24 hours about this, that I’m having a hard time keeping track.
Did anyone else see where Miles supposedly sent a text asking Miller to come get him? He then sent another one after the initial text asking for his pistol. Was that in the actual preliminary hearing yesterday or did someone make that up?
If the first text was indeed for Miller to pick him up, then Miller definitely would’ve had no clue as to any “beef”.

Check that statement from Miller's attorney. It's pretty much outlined in there.

 

[Justneedme81]

You can't convince me he didn't know what was going on.

I didn't know Trump was gonna scream false election and started riot..... You mean to tell me you think I knew about what Trump was gonna do?

 

[Tidestalker]

In the statement, it is specifically noted that Miller had nothing to do with the exchange to Davis (not Miles). Miller thought Miles was going to retrieve his (apparently legally owned) weapon that he had left in his car. At this point, to believe that Miller was delivering the weapon in order for it to be used in a crime, you have to believe in a criminal conspiracy (and a coverup by multiple parties including law enforcement). If one wants to go that route, cool. But that's the road.

My statement has nothing to do with the criminality of it. My statement is in regard to the lawyers quote that he had nothing to do with the exchange to Davis.

I understand your point that he didn't directly give it to Davis. But the lawyer never discusses when the "exchange" starts or ends. If he clearly states he's not involved with the gun exchange from Miles to Davis, you're right. But the obvious fact is that he was involved in the general exchange from the gun being in his car, physically being brought to the scene, in which the gun ended up in Davis' hands. I just think it's extremely unnecessary and poorly worded on the lawyer's behalf.

 

[Tidestalker]

To call it an exchange is stretch at best. Wanting to get rid of the gun doesn't make him a part of the exchange.

OK... Agree to disagree.

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

My statement has nothing to do with the criminality of it. My statement is in regard to the lawyers quote that he had nothing to do with the exchange to Davis.

I understand your point that he didn't directly give it to Davis. But the lawyer never discusses when the "exchange" starts or ends. If he clearly states he's not involved with the gun exchange from Miles to Davis, you're right. But the obvious fact is that he was involved in the general exchange from the gun being in his car, physically being brought to the scene, in which the gun ended up in Davis' hands. I just think it's extremely unnecessary and poorly worded on the lawyer's behalf.

After yesterday, a lot of people (nationally) latched on to the idea that Miller drove the gun there to literally hand it off for it to be used to kill someone in a premeditated manner. The statement is just trying squash that narrative.

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

 

[Tidestalker]

After yesterday, a lot of people (nationally) latched on to the idea that Miller drove the gun there to literally hand it off for it to be used to kill someone in a premeditated manner. The statement is just trying squash that narrative.

Man... Sometimes less is more. In trying to attach extra innocence, it looks more suspicious because he chose to use some challenging word gymnastics. Lawyers need to justify those big checks though.

And after yesterday, Oats should re consider his own PR team or lack thereof. That was brutal.

 

[Crimson&WhiteGecko]

And after yesterday, Oats should re consider his own PR team or lack thereof. That was brutal.

1000% with you there. Oats had major mouth diarrhea.

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

Man... Sometimes less is more. In trying to attach extra innocence, it looks more suspicious because he chose to use some challenging word gymnastics. Lawyers need to justify those big checks though.

And after yesterday, Oats should re consider his own PR team or lack thereof. That was brutal.

Oats didn't give the best answer, but he was caught off guard by it (which is the AD's fault). For a guy that shoots from the hip, it wasn't wise to have him in the dark and in front of a mic while the hearing was actively underway. While saying it could (and should) have been handled much better, I'll also echo what he did say... Miller was in fact in the wrong place at the wrong time.

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

1000% with you there. Oats had major mouth diarrhea.

A common theme with HS coaches who shoot to the top of major college sports at mach 5.

 

[Tidestalker]

Oats didn't give the best answer, but he was caught off guard by it (which is the AD's fault). For a guy that shoots from the hip, it wasn't wise to have him in the dark and in front of a mic while the hearing was actively underway. While saying it could (and should) have been handled much better, I'll also echo what he did say... Miller was in fact in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Lots of people end up in the wrong place at the wrong time... Some have choices, some don't. Miller chose to be there.

Like I said, sometimes less is more. No need to even say that. I guess "shooting from the hip" probably not the best call for a Coach in that situation

 

[Brandon Van de Graaff]

Lots of people end up in the wrong place at the wrong time... Some have choices, some don't. Miller chose to be there.

Like I said, sometimes less is more. No need to even say that. I guess "shooting from the hip" probably not the best call for a Coach in that situation

I realized it... still went with it. I need my own PR person, but that's a different story.