💪 Tough Guys Dalton Levi Eatherly / Chud the Builder / ChudTheBuilder - Putting the hard r in retard. IRL streamer who provokes confrontations with Tennessee blacks and shot a guy while streaming.

[Lime]

no it's actually because he shot a nigga in front of the court house

Not even shot a nigger in front of a court house. He made multiple public statements about wanting to shoot niggers in the street. Walk up calling them niggers while following them around with a camera in their face. Then shot a nigger in the street and started boasting about going to be lauded a white folk hero for blasting a nwah. So he had recorded intent recorded motive and recorded action.

 

[Flaming Insignias]

Not even shot a nigger in front of a court house. He made multiple public statements about wanting to shoot niggers in the street. Walk up calling them niggers while following them around with a camera in their face. Then shot a nigger in the street and started boasting about going to be lauded a white folk hero for blasting a nwah. So he had recorded intent recorded motive and recorded action.

But it's really about “free speech” if you suggest that being able to legally say a word doesn't permit you to pick fights with people angry about you saying that word.

 

[Lime]

But it's really about “free speech” if you suggest that being able to legally say a word doesn't permit you to pick fights with people angry about you saying that word.

If I wanted to go on a safari and didn't have a post history of wanting to turn minorities into pepperoni. Say walk into a bar and say nigger to the bar tender in conversation. And then a black tries to attack me that is a better legal standing for self defense approaching true self defense.
A 3rd party tried to attack me for something that was not directed towards me they tried to attack me from behind and I defended myself.

Now if we add in factors say I am strolling down the street and pass a melanated gentleman and loudly call out out of my way you pavement ape and he starts a fight that begins to muddy the waters with the legal concept of true self defense. Because you are instigating a hostile interaction. Say the gentleman was white and you casually throw in choice words about his wife or calling him a mouth breathing missing link Neanderthal. If he chooses to escalate that is you causing escalation.

If we add on another layer and say I am walking in front of someone and choosing to insult his honor and color coordination blocking his path. That almost gets rid of self defense entirely if he is unarmed. But if someone records the interaction of you stepping in someone's way while instigating that would most likely become murder.

True self defense in law in a iron case can still bring you to court say that a methed out tweaker tries to hit you in the head from behind and you have no history with them and have not shared a single word and you blow a hole through his CNS it can still be disputed because a hostile prosecution saying "well you shouldn't have had that spirited walk through tweaker ally at 4pm in the afternoon."

Self defense law is extremely case by case basis and factors all throughout the scenario have effects on the outcome. Location, time, social media history, personal outward disposition, locations of shots that where fired, what ammo you are using how scary does your gun look, is it a modified firearm?

So when you look at the overhead outlook of the case a armed man who regularly talked about wanting to make room temperature joggers was loudly shouting nigger to a poor combat veteran. Pointing a camera in his face then recklessly fires in a uncontrolled fashion to the point he shoots himself it does not look like a sunny outlook for our dear chud.

https://youtu.be/gUccLZPRGjk

Here is a case where a man shot a nuisance streamer and didn't get convicted of attempted murder but instead got a reckless discharge of a firearm.

 

[AirMail]

The legal problem is intent. If I post about my intention of a black safari on Twitter by saying "I can't wait to blow a niggers head smooth off and mount it on my wall" a jury can look at that in context of me blowing a niggers head off with a elephant gun. Chud will have to try stating his dozens of posts of wanting to blow niggers in half with rifles as that was just a joke haha to a reasonable person. A normal person doesn't post about wanting to turn minorities into pepperoni so it will harm his defense.

His statements of intent are the intent to speak freely and the intent to defend himself if and when needed. That is his intention and it's completely legal.

If you can find me any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation then, yes, that would be devastating proof of his intent.

Can you?

You have a right to call people niggers to their face but you need to think of the 60 year old Karen Democrat who donates to the splc who will have your life in your hand.

No.
You don't have the right to do it if doing it is going to put your life in someone's hands. That's the point. That's not a right, it's a hope. You already lost your right because of people like you.

 

[Lime]

His statements of intent are the intent to speak freely and the intent to defend himself if and when needed. That is his intention and it's completely legal.

If you can find me any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation then, yes, that would be devastating proof of his intent.

Can you?


No.
You don't have the right to do it if doing it is going to put your life in someone's hands. That's the point. That's not a right, it's a hope. You already lost your right because of people like you.

Where in these two statements is self defense explicitly mentioned? Because to a California expat in Nashville one of the most liberal districts in all of Tennessee due to niggers and Californians where they get the jury pool a selection of your peers has a very low chance of finding brothers in your cause. The best you could hope for is jury nullification.

I am not speaking of this in the political fashion or even caring about the guy but when you go on blast about how you want to put niggers in the ground with glee that will absolutely come up in a self defense trial to a jury of your peers. A majority of Americans do not share the political world view of dead nigger storage. The best self defense is not being in a situation you need to draw so it is a fact this probably will not go well.

And you are correct self defense is not treated as a right per say legally it is a circumstance it is guilty until proven innocent in a great many places.

 

[AirMail]

Where in these two statements is self defense explicitly mentioned?

My question "any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation".

You strawman "any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person where he doesn't explicitly mention the words 'self defense'".

"It's amazing how much leftist discourse is just them pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible."

 

[Gatcha Gonna Getcha]

"It's amazing how much leftist discourse is just them pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible."

It's a good thing people like you are actually incapable of understanding things due to your crippling retardation.

 

[Lime]

My question "any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation".

You strawman "any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person where he doesn't explicitly mention the words 'self defense'".

"It's amazing how much leftist discourse is just them pretending not to understand things, thus making discourse impossible."

Do you think the prosecution will be arguing from good Faith?

When he looks at this he says to the jury "I could've killed a black man today. Can you see this man was already planning to commit a hate crime against these poor negros?" I get what you are saying I am telling you it is extremely poor judgement. These statements are not I will need to defend myself this is a statement that can be pulled apart by a liberal attorney easily for a call to action.

 

[Lime]

The best case scenario for a self defense case is
1 you are a nobody. No significant online presence if you are political outspoken.
2 the attacker came for no reason other than psychotic violence. No prior interaction to point to you escalated a prior altercation.
3 the attacker was armed.
4 the attacker looks physically imposing tattoos bigger larger build and tattoos.
5 you make sure to kill them if you do need to defend yourself to stop yourself from being open to civil litigation.
6 you attempt to stabilize the patient.
7 is it is recorded that everything happened this way. This is the closest to a open and shut self defense case you can get.

Now getting into self defense will obviously not have all of these boxes checked, But the most you can hope for is to have as clean of a shoot as possible. You have no one asking questions about what happened due to the facts. And for them to leave you alone afterwards

1 This is a extremely public trial he is a popular nuisance streamer with a long online history for the prosecution to pull from.
2 the attacker was verbally berated by chud.
3 the attacker was unarmed.
4 chud was similar statue to the attacker.
5 the attacker lived to be able to sit on the bench against chud to look pitiful to the jury.
6 chud came out of the gate bragging about his self defense sinario while purposely recording himself shooting the nog
7 all other six points are recorded against him.

He does not have a single point for him other than the nigger swung first if it was a punch and not a shove.

 

[Anton LaVay’s watersports]

Ver archivo adjunto 9110645Ver archivo adjunto 9110643
Where in these two statements is self defense explicitly mentioned? Because to a California expat in Nashville one of the most liberal districts in all of Tennessee due to niggers and Californians where they get the jury pool a selection of your peers has a very low chance of finding brothers in your cause. The best you could hope for is jury nullification.

I am not speaking of this in the political fashion or even caring about the guy but when you go on blast about how you want to put niggers in the ground with glee that will absolutely come up in a self defense trial to a jury of your peers. A majority of Americans do not share the political world view of dead nigger storage. The best self defense is not being in a situation you need to draw so it is a fact this probably will not go well.

And you are correct self defense is not treated as a right per say legally it is a circumstance it is guilty until proven innocent in a great many places.

This is textbook premeditation. Chud is going to be forever in kangaroo court. What a retard.

 

[Priest Bulla]

The best case scenario for a self defense case is 1 you are a nobody. No significant online presence if you are political outspoken. 2 the attacker came for no reason other than psychotic violence. No prior interaction to point to you escalated a prior altercation. 3 the attacker was armed. 4 the attacker looks physically imposing tattoos bigger larger build and tattoos. 5 you make sure to kill them if you do need to defend yourself to stop yourself from being open to civil litigation. 6 you attempt to stabilize the patient. And 7 is it is recorded that everything happened this way. This is the closest to a open and shut self defense case you can get.

Now getting into self defense will obviously not have all of these boxes checked but the most you can hope for is if needed to have as clean as a shoot as possible and have no one asking questions and the police to just check off the boxes and leave you be.

This is a extremely public trial for one he is a popular nuisance streamer with a long online history for the prosecution to pull from. 2 the attacker was verbally berated by chud. 3 the attacker was unarmed. 4 chud was similar statue to the attacker. 5 the attacker lived to be able to sit on the bench against chud to look pitiful to the jury. 6 chud came out of the gate bragging about his self defense sinario while purposely recording himself shooting the nog 7 all other six points are recorded against him.

He does not have a single point for him other than the nigger swong first if it was a punch and not a shove.

English is your second language? It’s Saturday night so maybe drunk.
Difficult to read but valid post nonetheless.

 

[Lime]

English is your second language? It’s Saturday night so maybe drunk.
Difficult to read but valid post nonetheless.

Mostly being a phone posting nigger. But self defense is complex and has a shit ton of case law. They are going to drag up everything he has said online for the past 10 years. Then they will build up the nog as being innocent. After that they'll go into the shoot and throw together a sob story at the end of the case. I will try to clean up the post later to set up a lot of common factors for self defense cases because I think that is relevant.

Maybe a bit drunk. Because yeah it's a awful first draft rereading it.

 

[AirMail]

Do you think the prosecution will be arguing from good Faith?
Ver archivo adjunto 9110709
When he looks at this he says to the jury "I could've killed a black man today. Can you see this man was already planning to commit a hate crime against these poor negros?" I get what you are saying I am telling you it is extremely poor judgement. These statements are not I will need to defend myself this is a statement that can be pulled apart by a liberal attorney easily for a call to action.

Thank you for confirming that you cannot find any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation.

 

[Lime]

Thank you for confirming that you cannot find any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation.

The ones I posted are close enough. None of them stated a fear of loss or life or great bodily injury but instead a intent for violence. Nothing like "if it comes to it I'll do what I have to to defend myself and family."
Is there a post history from the other side that the defense can pull? Because if you just throw these in front of a jury from Nashville I think that would be enough. I'd start trying to archive them as a rebuttal to these posts.
Besides that I don't think he hits any other box for a self defense case even in a fairly good state for self defense like Tennessee.

 

[Sheogorath]

Thank you for confirming that you cannot find any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation.

They only need to prove you are purposefully creating self defense situations "I REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY WANT TO KILL NIGGER MONKEYS but only In minecraft self defense" is not gonna cut it lmao

 

[AirMail]

They only need to prove you are purposefully creating self defense situations "I REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY REALLY WANT TO KILL NIGGER MONKEYS but only In minecraft self defense" is not gonna cut it lmao

If by "purposely creating self defense situations" you mean using your right to free speech, then no.

That would effectively mean you have no right to free speech.

If you have proof he did something to "purposefully create self defense situations" other than exercise his right to free speech, then please tell me what it is.

The ones I posted are close enough.

Saying you intend to defend yourself if attacked is not close enough. If you believe it is then you just simply don't believe in the right to self defense, and are a total faggot.

If you can find me any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation, then go ahead and post it. If not, then feel free to cope and sneed.

 

[Lime]

If by "purposely creating self defense situations" you mean using your right to free speech, then no.

That would effectively mean you have no right to free speech.

If you have proof he did something to "purposefully create self defense situations" other than exercise his right to free speech, then please tell me what it is.


Saying you intend to defend yourself if attacked is not close enough. If you believe it is then you just simply don't believe in the right to self defense, and are a total faggot.

If you can find me any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation, then go ahead and post it. If not, then feel free to cope and sneed.

In Virginia v. Black (2003), the Supreme Court defined true threats as “those statements where the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals.”

Importantly, the speaker does not need to actually intend to engage in violence for the government to punish threats or intimidation. As the Supreme Court clarified earlier this year in Counterman v. Colorado, the speaker crosses beyond the First Amendment’s protection when he knows of or “consciously disregard
a substantial risk that his communications would be viewed as threatening violence.”

That being said, true threats are distinguishable from heated rhetoric. For example, the Court held in Watts v. United States (1969) that the First Amendment protected a man’s statement — after being drafted to serve in the Vietnam War — that “f they ever make me carry a rifle the first man I want to get in my sights is L. B. J.,” as the statement was not a true expression of intent to kill the president.

There are multiple forms of speech that are not covered under freedom of speech and the two that matter right now are true threats and fighting words. I posted true threats above but fighting words are-

Fighting words are those that, by the very act of being spoken, tend to incite the individual to whom they are addressed to respond violently and to do so immediately, with no time to think things over. The fighting words category is an exceedingly limited classification of speech, encompassing only face-to-face communications that would obviously provoke an immediate and violent reaction from the average listener.

Other forms of speech not covered by the first amendment are incitement, obscenity, defamation, fraud, perjury, and speech integral to criminal conduct.


Right here he states when I "inevitable" shoot. Making it a outcome rather than self defense opening himself up to legal problems in his constitution rights by making it to interpretation whether he lawfully would commit violence.

This is just on his speech alone not going over his use of force was lawful until we get videos. Such as if a reasonable person would be in fear for his life. Image of Kyle Rittenhouse said before his shooting "when I inevitable have to shoot one of you Communist pedophiles or niggers you'll be rioting when I walk." Statements like that can greatly harm a case and can be argued as not protected speech and can be used against you.

Hell even with Kyle remember when they tried to assassinate his character with the four doors more whores comment he had on Instagram? That took like 3 hours of the case trying to beat that dead horse.

I mean the defense can focus on the "when threatening an Americans life" but the prosecution can point to "inevitability" as his state of mind building his character to the jury.

 

[AirMail]

Right here he states when I "inevitable" shoot. Making it a outcome rather than self defense opening himself up to legal problems in his constitution rights by making it to interpretation whether he lawfully would commit violence.

Thank you for your further confirmation that you cannot find any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation.

If you have any more statements where he says that he will speak freely and lawfully defend himself, then please feel free to post them all and then have another drink.

 

[Lime]

Thank you for your further confirmation that you cannot find any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation.

If you have any more statements where he says that he will speak freely and lawfully defend himself, then please feel free to post them all and then have another drink.

I am not trying to tell you he is guilty but trying to inform you this is a legal nightmare. He already was talking about the police confiscating his devices during the restraunt arrest. All private DMs and everything else compromised already. There is a recording supposedly but I wouldn't want to be in his situation. It is a coin toss for jury selection.

 

[Sheogorath]

If you have proof he did something to "purposefully create self defense situations" other than exercise his right to free speech, then please tell me what it is.

you cannot find any statements saying that he intends to kill any black person in a non self defense situation.

it seems you admitted yourself that his xeets mean he intends to kill so you added a stipulation about self defense

like sorry man if you say it's inevitable (it's not) you kill someone if you keep streaming screaming nigger chimp out at people maybe you could have stopped streaming

^CtB drones actually believe this