Do you mean Bryant’s drinking habits during dinner?
Yes, the CTV news clip was presenting the argument that Sheppard could have been affecting Bryant’s ability to control the steering wheel. My problem with that argument is that I don’t know how Sheppard could have been affecting Mr. Bryant’s feet so that he couldn’t hit the brakes, he could only accelerate, and also Bryant seemed to have enough control of the vehicle to flee the scene.
I agree - my fashion shopping in that neighbourhood begins and ends at Stollery’s basement!
Question: Can Ambramovitch (Bryant’s wife) testify as a witness? On TV shows that are oh-so-very-accurate, y’know, like Law & Order, they say that in the U.S. spouses can’t testify against each other.
a) Is that true?
b) Is that only for conversations wherein there is an expectation of confidentiality between hubby and wife?
c) Can she be compelled to testify to what went down even if it’s damning against her husband?
IANAL, but my understanding is that if you’re acting in a way that any reasonable person would know had a decent chance of killing someone, then my nonlawyerly understanding is that proof of intent isn’t exactly needed, because it’s contained in my acting in a way that I have to know is creating a lethal hazard for someone.
Maybe one of our legal eagles can weigh in to clarify or correct my unreliable recollection.
Yeah, I watched that clip to and I was going WTF difference does it make if Sheppard was grabbing the wheel, was there something wrong with the brakes? Accelerator pedal stuck? It does seem as if there were a fair bit of provocation going on, but that still doesn’t mean you aren’t required to operate your vehicle in a non-negligent manner, and there’s no way I can see that Bryant wouldn’t have had control over his right foot.
Given that all this is still speculation, I am, in general, glad to know that if you have an angry drunk man leaning into your car and hanging on to the steering wheel, you will still react in a cool, calm, and collected manner.
I was about to praise his cool-headedness myself.
You’ve got a disconnect there.
I expect I would not. I also expect I would not mash the gas pedal to the floor. I am quite frankly not seeing any excuses here, barring the possibility of Sheppard having pulled a knife or some such. But I expect we would have heard about something like that by now.
I know it’s off topic, but I just HAVE to know how a pit bull ban broke up families…?!? Anybody know the connection?
Because really stupid people misunderstood the ban and dumped their pets (“family members”) at the Humane Society. There are many, many pit bulls living at the shelter now. The ban actually means you can’t bring a new pit bull into the family and must have your pit bull spayed/neutred to prevent puppies (I think puppies would be seized and destroyed).
If you’ve had a pet with a family for a long time, it is very much like pulling a family apart. Particularly if you had a young child who was raised with the pet all his/her life. It’s utterly heart wrenching.
But also unnecessary. If you already had a pit bull, you could keep it (with some restrictions I think w/r/t muzzling and such). There was no reason to unload your beloved pet.
Missed the edit.
There was also no requirement whatsoever to have your pet killed, as Sailboat stated. That was hogwash. The rules may be reviewed here. You could keep your furry family member as long as it was sterilized by Oct. 8, 2005. ETA: There were also limited exceptions allowed to sterilization for pets that a veterinarian deemed to be too old or at risk to safely be anesthetized for surgery.
Leaving aside the pitbull hijack for now, what a bunch of friggin’ hypocrites you people are. Did Bryant use bad judgement? Absolutely, but good luck any one of us doing better in that situation. The papers can try to paint Sheppard as an innocent victim all they want, but he wasn’t. Not even close.
I think it’s way too early to reach that conclusion. It may be true (not sure, although I’m leaning towards your interpretation of events) but right now there’s not enough solid information to state the case with any certainty.
I might have difficulty deciding what to do, driving my car with my wife sitting next to me, in a busy street, with a person hanging on to the side of my car screaming at me. It’s a tricky situation, and there doesn’t appear to be an easy way out. But I hope I wouldn’t try driving on the wrong side of the road, hoping to knock the person off. It really doesn’t seem the best solution.
(Especially if you are a former MP and attorney general, and head of a major municipal corporation, with all the city and provincial contacts that implies. You don’t need to ring 9-1-1: you can ring the head cop in the Province of Ontario on his unlisted home number, and get him onto the case. Most folk don’t have the options that Bryant had in the situation.)
I agree with this. I don’t think there is enough information either way. A few witness accounts are troubling and paint both men in a poor light.
I’m not sure why Cat Whisperer is saying anyone in this thread is a hypocrite since it seems pretty much unanimous in the thread that there is not enough information to go on. Everyone is simply discussing the various possible scenarios and witness statements, the types of charges that are being levied, and how the media is reporting it all, and speculating on how it could be interpreted in court.
I don’t think anyone is trying to claim that Bryant was entirely to blame for this mess.
As far as I can tell, both Bryant and Sheppard acted like assholes that night, so unless new information comes to light, it’s quite likely that they’re both to blame for what happened. I’m sure neither of them had any idea how badly it was going to end, but there were plenty of chances for either one to put a stop to the confrontation at any given time.
Unfortunately, only Bryant is in any position to face criminal charges, given that you can’t really charge a dead man with much of anything.
A most unfortunate case. From what is currently known, it seems to me evenly balanced as to whether what Bryant did would be considered criminal or not. Did he react in panic over a beligerent stranger trying to get into his car, or is this an extreme example of road rage - a fight over a very minor accident that got totally out of control and lead to Bryant murdering Sheppard by running him down in a fit of anger?
I disagree with those upthread who are saying that the cops are smearing Sheppard. Ironically, it is not in their interests to do so. If they claim he was drunk and dangerous, they have to explain why they let him ride his bike away scot free after his confrontation with his girlfriend …
Anyway, at the least, it will make for a very interesting trial.
Yup. It’s basically comparable to two assholes getting into a fist-fight in a bar. You’d charge both of them with felony assault or what have you, but when one of the combatants ends up dead, then the other will get charged with some form of manslaughter.