That ESPN article sure as hell doesn't read like he didn't do anything…..0

Jarrin Jay said:

---

That ESPN article sure as hell doesn't read like he didn't do anything…..0

---

Which article? New evidence just came out yesterday. I think you are reading a very old article. New evidence in the form of security footage from a gas station just came out proving that he was 100 yards behind the collision when it happened. There is also body cam footage of the cop talking to a witness telling the witness what to put in the report.

There is also body cam footage of the cop talking to a witness and he is telling the witness what to put in the report. At one point the witness even says that's not how it happened, and the final report submitted does not have a signature from the witness leading one to believe the cop filled out the report himself.

This whole story got even worse with that new evidence

https://www.htv10.tv/clip/15518438/kyren-lacy-update-htvs-martin-folse-attorney-matt-ory

Some leading questions by the trooper showed as well.
I always thought it was odd that they say he caused the accident by trying to pass illegally but then also somehow drove around the wreck.
The video clip his lawyer showed makes it hard to see how his lawyer could be misrepresenting it. Sure seems like drives up after the wreck already happened.

It won't bring him back, but if I was his family I would be pushing for this to come to light and officially exonerate him. I would also be pushing for that trooper to no longer work in law enforcement, if not being punished legally.

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Jarrin Jay said:

---

That ESPN article sure as hell doesn't read like he didn't do anything…..0

---

Which article? New evidence just came out yesterday. I think you are reading a very old article. New evidence just came out that he was 100 yards behind the collision when it happened. There is also body cam footage of the cop talking to a witness telling the witness what to put in the report.

---

He was in his own lane when the accident occurred but before that, he was driving recklessly and illegally passing cars in the opposite lane.

If he was driving in his own lane, would the truck have slowed down causing the car tailgating to avoid the truck by crossing over to the other lane?

Ultimately, the car that was tailgating the truck was at fault for not paying attention.

He didn't directly cause the crash but his actions played a factor. I don't think his actions rose to the level of murder but it was definitely reckless.

Not defending oneself publicly by saying "I was far behind the wreck" was certainly a choice, if true. Beyond feeling like the evidence in trial would show you weren't at fault.

Jawn Dough said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Jarrin Jay said:

---

That ESPN article sure as hell doesn't read like he didn't do anything…..0

---

Which article? New evidence just came out yesterday. I think you are reading a very old article. New evidence just came out that he was 100 yards behind the collision when it happened. There is also body cam footage of the cop talking to a witness telling the witness what to put in the report.

---

He was in his own lane when the accident occurred but before that, he was driving recklessly and illegally passing cars in the opposite lane.

If he was driving in his own lane, would the truck have slowed down causing the car tailgating to avoid the truck by crossing over to the other lane?

Ultimately, the car that was tailgating the truck was at fault for not paying attention.

He didn't directly cause the crash but his actions played a factor. I don't think his actions rose to the level of murder but it was definitely reckless.

---

According to his lawyer he did indeed pass illegally on that road, but he was back in his lane well before the crash occurred and had no impact on the collision according to video and data from the cars computers

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Jawn Dough said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Jarrin Jay said:

---

That ESPN article sure as hell doesn't read like he didn't do anything…..0

---

Which article? New evidence just came out yesterday. I think you are reading a very old article. New evidence just came out that he was 100 yards behind the collision when it happened. There is also body cam footage of the cop talking to a witness telling the witness what to put in the report.

---

He was in his own lane when the accident occurred but before that, he was driving recklessly and illegally passing cars in the opposite lane.

If he was driving in his own lane, would the truck have slowed down causing the car tailgating to avoid the truck by crossing over to the other lane?

Ultimately, the car that was tailgating the truck was at fault for not paying attention.

He didn't directly cause the crash but his actions played a factor. I don't think his actions rose to the level of murder but it was definitely reckless.

---

According to his lawyer he did indeed pass illegally on that road, but he was back in his lane well before the crash occurred and had no impact on the collision according to video and data from the cars computers

---

He was back into his own lane at 70 yds from the collision. And you know he was speeding in order to pass the cars ahead of him.

The driver of the truck slowed down because he saw Lacy's car coming at him.

Lacy didn't directly cause the accident but his recklessness played a role in causing it.

95% of the blame goes to the woman who crossed over into oncoming traffic and 5% to Lacy for initiating the chain of events that led to the collision.

Jawn Dough said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Jawn Dough said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Jarrin Jay said:

---

That ESPN article sure as hell doesn't read like he didn't do anything…..0

---

Which article? New evidence just came out yesterday. I think you are reading a very old article. New evidence just came out that he was 100 yards behind the collision when it happened. There is also body cam footage of the cop talking to a witness telling the witness what to put in the report.

---

He was in his own lane when the accident occurred but before that, he was driving recklessly and illegally passing cars in the opposite lane.

If he was driving in his own lane, would the truck have slowed down causing the car tailgating to avoid the truck by crossing over to the other lane?

Ultimately, the car that was tailgating the truck was at fault for not paying attention.

He didn't directly cause the crash but his actions played a factor. I don't think his actions rose to the level of murder but it was definitely reckless.

---

According to his lawyer he did indeed pass illegally on that road, but he was back in his lane well before the crash occurred and had no impact on the collision according to video and data from the cars computers

---

He was back into his own lane at 70 yds from the collision. And you know he was speeding in order to pass the cars ahead of him.

The driver of the truck slowed down because he saw Lacy's car coming at him.

Lacy didn't directly cause the accident but his recklessness played a role in causing it.

95% of the blame goes to the woman who crossed over into oncoming traffic and 5% to Lacy for initiating the chain of events that led to the collision.

---

He was back in his lane 92 yards from the collision, the collision occurs when he is 70 yards away and was already safely back in his lane behind the vehicle that was driven by the victim. The driver of the truck was only going 29 miles an hour and claimed he didn't slam on the breaks when you watch the body cam footage. The girl driving the car that swerved was not paying attention and was coming up too fast on the truck and caused this accident

Agreed. It's way too far away to say he had anything to do with it.

Utterly absurd he was ever implicated in a "negligent homicide" in any capacity. Actually sounds like the lady completely made up the story to try and get out of her own reckless fault. And the cop trying to place blame on him... scumbag.

Oh, and I'm sure Lacey's first call, 10 minutes after he fled the scene, was to a defense lawyer because he didn't have anything to do with the crash

Yeah, this video looks pretty clear cut to me:

https://www.wafb.com/2025/10/07/lsp-releases-new-video-evidence-deadly-crash-kyren-lacy-case/

It's funny that the defense attorney made a big deal about the trooper "telling the witness to talk about the green Charger". Watching that video and speaking from experience investigating crashes/crimes, that is completely standard practice. Especially when combining it with the video where the witnesses tell the trooper on their own about the Charger.

What the attorney misled about in his claims is this: Witnesses know what they have told the officer in person but have a hard time writing a statement that is easy to read to an investigator/prosecutor who is not on scene. I always tell the witness to write the statement to a person who has no idea what has happened and then have to review it and have them edit it for clarity. So yes, the trooper would have reminded the witnesses to "write about the green Charger" since there is no green Charger on the videos but was identified immediately by every witness as the cause

Greg Costanza said:

---

Oh, and I'm sure Lacey's first call, 10 minutes after he fled the scene, was to a defense lawyer because he didn't have anything to do with the crash

---

Funny how they don't mention that the person he called is his step dad who happens to be a personal injury attorney and he calls on an almost daily basis.

Greg Costanza said:

---

Some of you just talk out of your a&$s. Do you have any clue how long it takes 2 cars headed at each other 90 yards apart, at 40 mph and probably 70 mph, to reach each other? It would take about a second and a half. And all the witnesses in the video posted by the state today, were stating that the green car was to blame for the resulting actions of the others, at the scene right after. Watch the video posted by the state today, not the partial video that the lawyer is trying to use to create a false narrative.

---

Probably 70? Talk about talking out of your a$$.

The driver in the truck that was driving towards Kyren was going 29 mph. He never slammed on his brakes because why would he? Kyren had gotten back into his lane 92 yards away. The entire blame on Kyren rests on saying that the guy in the truck had to slam on his brakes causing the car behind him to swerve into oncoming traffic. We now know definitely he never touched his brakes. So why did the person behind him have to swerve if he never braked which the data from his truck says is factual?

gtaggie_08 said:

---

It's funny that the defense attorney made a big deal about the trooper "telling the witness to talk about the green Charger". Watching that video and speaking from experience investigating crashes/crimes, that is completely standard practice. Especially when combining it with the video where the witnesses tell the trooper on their own about the Charger.

What the attorney misled about in his claims is this: Witnesses know what they have told the officer in person but have a hard time writing a statement that is easy to read to an investigator/prosecutor who is not on scene. I always tell the witness to write the statement to a person who has no idea what has happened and then have to review it and have them edit it for clarity. So yes, the trooper would have reminded the witnesses to "write about the green Charger" since there is no green Charger on the videos but was identified immediately by every witness as the cause

---

The problem isn't reminding the witness to talk about the green charger. The problem is telling the witness "remember to say that you slammed on your brakes" and the witness says outloud on the video that he never really braked. This was later proven from studying the data from his car which we can now do to show things like whether or not he braked at all, which he didn't.

Iraq2xVeteran said:

---

It's a tragic story. Former LSU wide receiver Kyren Lacy could have gone on to have a great NFL career, but he squandered his talent by making some bad choices. Prayers for the victims' family

---

I swear you are Generative AI

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Greg Costanza said:

---

Some of you just talk out of your a&$s. Do you have any clue how long it takes 2 cars headed at each other 90 yards apart, at 40 mph and probably 70 mph, to reach each other? It would take about a second and a half. And all the witnesses in the video posted by the state today, were stating that the green car was to blame for the resulting actions of the others, at the scene right after. Watch the video posted by the state today, not the partial video that the lawyer is trying to use to create a false narrative.

---

Probably 70? Talk about talking out of your a$$.

The driver in the truck that was driving towards Kyren was going 29 mph. He never slammed on his brakes because why would he? Kyren had gotten back into his lane 92 yards away. The entire blame on Kyren rests on saying that the guy in the truck had to slam on his brakes causing the car behind him to swerve into oncoming traffic. We now know definitely he never touched his brakes. So why did the person behind him have to swerve if he never braked which the data from his truck says is factual?

---

The driver of the truck veered off to the right because Lacy was going straight at him. And unfortunately, the lady in the car behind him panicked and crossed over to oncoming traffic.

Not sure how you can say that because Lacy returned back to his own lane at 100 yards, that those two should not have reacted as they did. And before that, he was driving at a high rate of speed to illegally pass 4 vehicles. Maybe it wasn't 70 but it sure as hell wasn't close to 40, either. If I see a car going pretty damn fast and heading towards me, I'm not gonna not do anything and hope that he returns back to his own lane.

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Greg Costanza said:

---

Some of you just talk out of your a&$s. Do you have any clue how long it takes 2 cars headed at each other 90 yards apart, at 40 mph and probably 70 mph, to reach each other? It would take about a second and a half. And all the witnesses in the video posted by the state today, were stating that the green car was to blame for the resulting actions of the others, at the scene right after. Watch the video posted by the state today, not the partial video that the lawyer is trying to use to create a false narrative.

---

Probably 70? Talk about talking out of your a$$.

The driver in the truck that was driving towards Kyren was going 29 mph. He never slammed on his brakes because why would he? Kyren had gotten back into his lane 92 yards away. The entire blame on Kyren rests on saying that the guy in the truck had to slam on his brakes causing the car behind him to swerve into oncoming traffic. We now know definitely he never touched his brakes. So why did the person behind him have to swerve if he never braked which the data from his truck says is factual?

---

What a dumb take. Cars approaching each other that fast and at that distance... if you wait until 92 yards apart to take action it's almost too late.

The Louisiana AG just announced they will be doing an independent investigation of the evidence and the witnesses to see if there was any wrong doing. We will know a lot more than we know now soon

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Greg Costanza said:

---

Some of you just talk out of your a&$s. Do you have any clue how long it takes 2 cars headed at each other 90 yards apart, at 40 mph and probably 70 mph, to reach each other? It would take about a second and a half. And all the witnesses in the video posted by the state today, were stating that the green car was to blame for the resulting actions of the others, at the scene right after. Watch the video posted by the state today, not the partial video that the lawyer is trying to use to create a false narrative.

---

Probably 70? Talk about talking out of your a$$.

The driver in the truck that was driving towards Kyren was going 29 mph. He never slammed on his brakes because why would he? Kyren had gotten back into his lane 92 yards away. The entire blame on Kyren rests on saying that the guy in the truck had to slam on his brakes causing the car behind him to swerve into oncoming traffic. We now know definitely he never touched his brakes. So why did the person behind him have to swerve if he never braked which the data from his truck says is factual?

---

If the driver of the truck never hit the brakes and just ditched, the car behind him wouldn't have seen Lacy and swerved left. Even Lacy's attorney says the truck hit his brakes and accused the driver behind him of tailgating the truck in an attempt to shift liability from Lacy

That said, exactly where Lacy reentered his lane is pretty much irrelevant. He was passing vehicles going 40 mph, and witnesses estimated his speed at 80 mph. If we're conservative and say he was pushing at 60 mph, that would put him and the truck at a closing speed of 90 mph. That's ~44 yards/sec. At 150 yards, the driver of the truck has roughly 3 seconds to decide to keep going, ditch, or slam on his brakes. We know he did a combination of the latter 2. That let the car behind him with maybe 2-3 seconds to come to a decision as well. He may have gotten back over, but the oncoming drivers didn't have time to wait and see what he would do before they had to react themselves.

And even if the truck were wrong and unnecessarily hit the brakes and ditched, Lacy was in a no passing zone. The truck never would have reacted the way it did if Lacy were obeying the traffic markings. That fact alone makes him responsible.

ABATTBQ11 said:

---

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Greg Costanza said:

---

Some of you just talk out of your a&$s. Do you have any clue how long it takes 2 cars headed at each other 90 yards apart, at 40 mph and probably 70 mph, to reach each other? It would take about a second and a half. And all the witnesses in the video posted by the state today, were stating that the green car was to blame for the resulting actions of the others, at the scene right after. Watch the video posted by the state today, not the partial video that the lawyer is trying to use to create a false narrative.

---

Probably 70? Talk about talking out of your a$$.

The driver in the truck that was driving towards Kyren was going 29 mph. He never slammed on his brakes because why would he? Kyren had gotten back into his lane 92 yards away. The entire blame on Kyren rests on saying that the guy in the truck had to slam on his brakes causing the car behind him to swerve into oncoming traffic. We now know definitely he never touched his brakes. So why did the person behind him have to swerve if he never braked which the data from his truck says is factual?

---

If the driver of the truck never hit the brakes and just ditched, the car behind him wouldn't have seen Lacy and swerved left. Even Lacy's attorney says the truck hit his brakes and accused the driver behind him of tailgating the truck in an attempt to shift liability from Lacy

That said, exactly where Lacy reentered his lane is pretty much irrelevant. He was passing vehicles going 40 mph, and witnesses estimated his speed at 80 mph. If we're conservative and say he was pushing at 60 mph, that would put him and the truck at a closing speed of 90 mph. That's ~44 yards/sec. At 150 yards, the driver of the truck has roughly 3 seconds to decide to keep going, ditch, or slam on his brakes. We know he did a combination of the latter 2. That let the car behind him with maybe 2-3 seconds to come to a decision as well. He may have gotten back over, but the oncoming drivers didn't have time to wait and see what he would do before they had to react themselves.

And even if the truck were wrong and unnecessarily hit the brakes and ditched, Lacy was in a no passing zone. The truck never would have reacted the way it did if Lacy were obeying the traffic markings. That fact alone makes him responsible.

---

The truck never swerved, he turned into the gas station after the wreck because he was pulling over to be a witness. The driver behind him was going 50 mph (we just learned this from the black box data in her car). The truck was going 29. She came up on him and was not paying attention and she never braked either, she just swerved into oncoming traffic to avoid rear ending the truck. She claims the truck was slamming on his brakes, not that he swerved and he was doing neither and that is proven by the black box data from his truck. I don't know where you made up that he swerved. She took an opportunity to blame Kyren when it came up because she didn't want it to be her fault.

HoustonAg2106 said:

---

Greg Costanza said:

---

Some of you just talk out of your a&$s. Do you have any clue how long it takes 2 cars headed at each other 90 yards apart, at 40 mph and probably 70 mph, to reach each other? It would take about a second and a half. And all the witnesses in the video posted by the state today, were stating that the green car was to blame for the resulting actions of the others, at the scene right after. Watch the video posted by the state today, not the partial video that the lawyer is trying to use to create a false narrative.

---

Probably 70? Talk about talking out of your a$$.

The driver in the truck that was driving towards Kyren was going 29 mph. He never slammed on his brakes because why would he? Kyren had gotten back into his lane 92 yards away. The entire blame on Kyren rests on saying that the guy in the truck had to slam on his brakes causing the car behind him to swerve into oncoming traffic. We now know definitely he never touched his brakes. So why did the person behind him have to swerve if he never braked which the data from his truck says is factual?

---

Since your brain struggles to comprehend the point, we can go with the speed that witnesses estimated, which was over 80 in a 40 like an a&& clown. At 80 and 29 you get about the same math. The point was, at those speeds, 90 yards is nothing when human reaction time is involved.