Allegedly he sought Chud out and attacked him which means that Chud can infact claim self defense and should not even be charged. I still think that the previous attempts at justifying what would have been illegal behavior is ridiculous.
However if the new reporting is true then Chud did absolutely nothing wrong legally.
Also the wife of Fox has started a Go Fund Me for him despite the attempted murder and domestic abuse lmao
No I made an informed legal take based on the reporting from all sources at the time. You just made a reddit tier take like a retard. The law doesn't care about your feelings
It's not an informed legal take to suggest that being insulted justifies attempted murder AND also nullifies self defense against said attempted murder. Especially when the supposed insult was entirely imagined by you.
That's a "blacks get to do whatever they want" take.
Agreed. Good on Matt for adjusting his stance based on new info but "assault is justified because it was a nigger chimping out over hurty words" is clearly a reddit-tier argument.
Pretty obvious someone graduated a DEI-infested university.
Uh, yeah. It does. That's why niggers who commit crimes get off scot free if there are enough niggers on the jury. The law takes a back seat to mob rule; that has been clearly demonstrated many times over.
Allegedly he sought Chud out and attacked him which means that Chud can infact claim self defense and should not even be charged. I still think that the previous attempts at justifying what would have been illegal behavior is ridiculous.
However if the new reporting is true then Chud did absolutely nothing wrong legally.
Also the wife of Fox has started a Go Fund Me for him despite the attempted murder and domestic abuse lmao
There isn't a "would have been". You decided to make a reddit tier take on what was frankly a fairly obvious situation.
No I made an informed legal take based on the reporting from all sources at the time. You just made a reddit tier take like a retard. The law doesn't care about your feelings
It's not an informed legal take to suggest that being insulted justifies attempted murder AND also nullifies self defense against said attempted murder. Especially when the supposed insult was entirely imagined by you.
That's a "blacks get to do whatever they want" take.
Agreed. Good on Matt for adjusting his stance based on new info but "assault is justified because it was a nigger chimping out over hurty words" is clearly a reddit-tier argument.
Pretty obvious someone graduated a DEI-infested university.
Nope. Provocation will almost always nullify self defense claims. This is established law.
Find me one comment I made where I said that Fox was justified.
Also I did not make any imagined claim faggot. I based my analysis of the incident on the information that had been reported.
Again you retarded faggot I never claimed Fox was justified just that Chud couldn't claim self defense. Those are entirely different things.
Uh, yeah. It does. That's why niggers who commit crimes get off scot free if there are enough niggers on the jury. The law takes a back seat to mob rule; that has been clearly demonstrated many times over.
I'm sorry you dedicated your life to a lie...
I don't live in liberal fairy faggot country. If I did my job would be alot easier