Nick Lachey seeks justice for employee shot in the face

applecruncher

applecruncher

SF VIP
Location
Ohio USA
This really makes me angry.

Singer Nick Lachey is asking for help from the public to catch the person who shot his employee in the face several days ago. Nick owns a bar in Cincinnati, and his employee walked out and was almost hit by a van. There was apparently an altercation and the 27 y/o woman was shot in the face. I think the news had a picture of the van. I hope they catch this son of a b@$%h. :mad::mad:

Here's a link to the story:

http://people.com/music/nick-lachey-seeking-justice-for-employee-who-was-shot-in-the-face/
 

The man who allegedly shot singer Nick Lachey‘s bar employee in the face surrendered himself to Cincinnati police Thursday night, PEOPLE confirms. Lavoris Hightower, 36, was indicted by the Cincinnati Police Department for “attempted murder, felonious assault, weapons under disability and tampering with evidence.” Police released a photo of Hightower on Thursday, saying he was a wanted suspect in the shooting of Ellie Richardson, who was shot on Thanksgiving morning as she was leaving the sports bar.
http://people.com/music/manhunt-und...gedly-shot-nick-lacheys-bar-employee-in-face/
​
 

People have to be very careful out there, especially when a motor vehicle is involved. Even though in this case, just the shooter was in an auto, for some reason people think they can shout, gesture, shoot or do anything they want when in their vehicles and able to beat a hasty retreat.

Thank goodness she'll survive.
 
RadishRose said:
People have to be very careful out there, especially when a motor vehicle is involved. Even though in this case, just the shooter was in an auto, for some reason people think they can shout, gesture, shoot or do anything they want when in their vehicles and able to beat a hasty retreat.

Thank goodness she'll survive.
Click to expand...

At 3 a.m. it's probably wise to assume someone who is out and around is drunk. high or tweaking. Best to move on and stay out of their way, especially when they're in a van with dark tinted windows and could have other messed-up people with them.
 
So, the suspect is claiming to be innocent and his attorney has stated that his client wasn't even in the area at the time of the shooting. Did he or was he able to bail out? If the judge refused to set bail, that will go a long way in getting a guilty conviction because it tells me that the DA's office had presented enough evidence to convince the judge that he was more than likely involved in the shooting, in which case, I wouldn't be surprised if the attorney and the DA doesn't try to work out a compromised plea deal somewhere down the road. Good thing for the suspect that the lady survived. If he was able to bail out, it may very well go to trial, unless the suspect has a high degree of confidence that he will be found guilty and then he will try to plea bargain, then it will probably be up to the victim and the DA if they think it's wiser to take the sure thing (pleas deal) than risk going to a jury trial.
 
RadishRose said:
Absolutely.
Click to expand...


If a 'pedestrian' and a vehicle come close to each other that means one of two things....

Either the vehicle was on the sidewalk or the 'pedestrian' was in the street. If 'she' was in the street?...very possible she [or her boyfriend] mouthed off to the driver, and that set things in motion.

I'm not blaming her at all...I just don't think we've heard the whole story.
 
It doesn't surprise me that you've never heard of crosswalks, rgp. Or parking lots. Or gas stations. There are any number of situations where pedestrians and vehicles have the potential to come close to one another.

I seriously doubt the victim mouthed off to an unknown man in a van with blacked out windows at 3 a.m. And yes, you are blaming her without knowing what happened.
 
Smiling Jane said:
It doesn't surprise me that you've never heard of crosswalks, rgp. Or parking lots. Or gas stations. There are any number of situations where pedestrians and vehicles have the potential to come close to one another.

I seriously doubt the victim mouthed off to an unknown man in a van with blacked out windows at 3 a.m. And yes, you are blaming her without knowing what happened.
Click to expand...

To the first paragraph...not in that area there isn't.

Well I live here , there have been questions about just what did happen...and words may have been exchanged.

But it appears you know everything, so why continue discussing it.......?
 
Why would I have known or not be skeptical that you live in Cincinnati, rgp? I know it's Christmas time when we tend to ignore rational thinking, but your profile gives no information, so you can say you're from anywhere at anytime. Heck, for all we know you're part of an alien species.
 
Smiling Jane said:
Why would I have known or not be skeptical that you live in Cincinnati, rgp? I know it's Christmas time when we tend to ignore rational thinking, but your profile gives no information, so you can say you're from anywhere at anytime. Heck, for all we know you're part of an alien species.
Click to expand...


So...I'm not thinking rationally? Why?.....just because I feel there is more to this story than currently known?

OK fine,...I can't change what you may or may not think.

But think about this part....The side story of this is that....the door man/bouncer that came to her aid claims that while he was being interviewed by the police, @ the crime scene , his car was stolen as he was warming it up! A car thief enters an area swarming with police & steals a car ??..the car of a good Samaritan ..and the police don't give chase? Yet his car is found the next day in another town, all the Christmas presents missing ?

As I said earlier I am not blaming anyone...or making any conclusions. I am just thinking out loud. Is that not a part of what a discussion group is all about? Or am I being irrational here as well ??

I'm not sure what information in my profile has to do with anything ?...does that make a person more creditable ? But yes I live just east of Cincinnati.
 
Heck, for all we know you're part of an alien species.
Click to expand...

Jane, LOL! But let's cut him a little slack. He's been thoroughly vanquished in his long-running (boy, I'll say!) argument that the police should be entitled to shoot anyone who might arouse their suspicion for any reason, because they're probably a dangerous felon, even in the absence of any evidence whatsoever. So now he's found another argument to pick on this bb. A woman walking in the street, or on the sidewalk, or wherever, who cares? deserves to be shot in the face because MAYBE she could have been "mouthing off" at the driver.

Thank heavens most of us are in a much more rational frame of mind.
 
Sunny, that's so true.

There's a world of distinction between having an argument and mouthing off. The first choice seems to have been corroborated by official reports, the second is pure judgment.
 
Sunny said:
Jane, LOL! But let's cut him a little slack. He's been thoroughly vanquished in his long-running (boy, I'll say!) argument that the police should be entitled to shoot anyone who might arouse their suspicion for any reason, because they're probably a dangerous felon, even in the absence of any evidence whatsoever. So now he's found another argument to pick on this bb. A woman walking in the street, or on the sidewalk, or wherever, who cares? deserves to be shot in the face because MAYBE she could have been "mouthing off" at the driver.

Thank heavens most of us are in a much more rational frame of mind.
Click to expand...



So, first you drag another discussion over here, then you start putting words in mouth....

I never said any of....

"argument that the police should be entitled to shoot anyone who might arouse their suspicion for any reason, because they're probably a dangerous felon, even in the absence of any evidence whatsoever. "

And then you accuse me of being the one that is irrational .

Vanquished ?...I don't think so.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top