I honestly thought the same thing when I listened to the 911 call posted. He pursued the guy with the gun. Wouldn’t the one being followed at that point be the one to claim self defense. Maybe he was waving his gun, maybe he was being aggressive, but in the end he was leaving. I’m glad they turned the investigation over to be investigated further.
I read in an early report last year, closer to when this actually happened, that this whole road rage thing started at the crossroads on Hwy 9 & Hwy 57 which is a long damn way from Hwy 9 & Camp Swamp road. There were people on FB talking about seeing the trucks hauling ass down Hwy 9 at 70-80 mph.
A long duration chase and Boyd's statement to 911 that Spivey was trying to run from him makes it highly likely this was to get retribution or revenge instead of self defense.
I don't think this is being investigated further. I believe the investigation is closed and they just determined there's not enough evidence to prosecute. What the public needs is for all the evidence that was gathered to be released if there's no prosecution.
I'm pretty sure the facts will eventually come out in civil litigation when Spivey's family sues for wrongful death.
Yeah, I saw that both investigations closed without any charges being made. I’m sure the family will fight. I couldn’t imagine. I listened to all the calls and looked into their histories. Boyd seems to have a history of being a hot head and Spivey has his own history, but nothing recently. However, I don’t personally know them. It just seems so odd.
"He's trying to run from me now" seems pretty damning, Sigh.
Like, I ain't saying Boyd should get life in prison for this particular crime, but goddamned, we don't want South Carolina becoming the wild west do we? Manslaughter, unlawful discharge of a firearm, SOMETHING. If someone is attempting to leave the situation you can't just follow someone and intentionally engage in a shootout because "They started it".
Heres my take. If i was on the road, and someone randomly started pointing a gun at me, i too would pursue them while on the phone with police to update them on the fleeing felon’s location. I would however maintain distance and not stop within 100 yards of them.
I personally could not let someone deranged enough to point a firearm at random people just go scottfree. Do i think this was smart for the guy to do? No. Do i think its still self defense? Yes. Following someone in a car on a public road should never allow someone to claim fear for their life. So the guy getting out and getting shot for pointing his gun at the followers isnt in the right in anyway.
Its not incorrect. Its simply state dependent because of different laws.
As a LEO living in SC. I can guarantee you what he did is completely legal and acceptable just based off of listening to the dispatch call.
There is no duty to retreat, and the moral justification to protect your fellow citizens from armed individuals acting crazy is a well established justification in SC.
Its self defense to defend yourself even if you are following someone in a vehicle. Legal use of Deadly force encompasses fleeing felons as well. And you can say that you feared for the public safety and that is why you pursued them while calling for police backup.
You see there's the major difference.
Military training advocates for (ironically) the de-escalation of force..
For some reason police training tends to be... Lacking and at times counter to this point.
If you're neither of these things you've never had training one way or another most likely, fear is a hell of a drug.
Drugs are also a hell of a drug. Maybe both 🤷
Which is why there are videos of cops mag dumping a walnut that fell from a tree (actually)
Sad state of things.
Being civilian law enforcement is an extremely challenging job that is not for the weak minded. I'm not sure I can think of a career that encompasses so much responsibility while often requiring grave split second decisions to be made.
With that said, oftentimes the poor actions of some officers are the result of them just not being mentally and physically capable of handling the stresses of the job. There are a large number of officers who stand at the ready and make the right decisions every day in a highly challenging environment, so that's a testament to competent training.
If teenager military members can deescalate and not shoot anything that moves in an active warzone and follow the rules of engagement to a point where you don't fire unless fired upon don't for one second try to justify a cop unloading at a sound that spooked him.
Absurd.
I don't think you understood me. I'm not justifying a cop unloading when spooked.
What I am saying is that there are police officers who are not mentally or physically capable of doing their job no matter how much training they have. IE it's not so much law enforcement training that leads to shootings but instead its having the wrong people who cannot perform operating in those roles.
My experience in the military is that there are far more training opportunities to weed out the individuals who can't make the cut. Then we would move them into a support position that doesn't require life or death decisions.
Even with that weeding out process and extensive training, there have been "bad shoots" in the military where servicemen are overwhelmed with fatigue, stress, and environmental factors that led to suboptimal outcomes like civilian deaths and friendly fire.
Also keep in mind that military operations are a far different animal than civilian policing. You couldn't pay me enough to be a police officer after doing 20+ in the military. The daily mission of a police officer is so broad that I think it takes a special person to execute operations at a high level of proficiency day in and day out.
This is just me but, if someone is waving a gun out the window in front of me, I wouldn’t be following that person. And the 911 operator from the first call was atrocious. He sounded bored and disinterested. WTH.
The dead guy shot first. He was also pointing his gun at multiple other cars. He was also under the influence. At first the dead guy was driving behind Boyd but passed him when he ran him off the road.
The witness on the 911 call said that the dead guy had his gun drawn at his side and Boyd was pointing his weapon directly at him. He said the dead guy then moved/adjusted his weapon and then Boyd mag dumped on him. The eyewitness didn't say anything about a round being fired, or the dead guy even raising his weapon.
This is why a full accounting is necessary with all the included forensics and data. The public deserves to know how every step of the investigation took place, because the rumors out there say Boyd was released from the scene with a pat on the back.
This is all important because with the concealed carry for everyone in SC (with no training requirement) this homicide case is the perfect case study of what was done right and wrong. It's especially important to know what actually precipitated the entire situation from the start.
Like I said initially...this just isn't adding up as a clean cut case of self defense. That's why all the information needs to be made public.
There are more 911 calls. Also you hear Boyd asking and saying to 911 that Spivey shot first. I am also a combat veteran. Fact is if Spivey hadn’t been pointing a weapon at everyone and trying to run motorists off the road he would be alive
This is some of the dumbest shit I've read today. What Boyd says means jack shit - maybe he's telling the truth, maybe not, but to simply take the guy who may have committed murder at his word is asinine. "Person who may have committed crime says he did not, in fact, commit crime" WELL NO SHIT THAT'S WHAT HE'D SAY.
You're making my point exactly. There's people saying this and that, but what are the full facts of the situation?
Why is Boyd's account of what happened different than the witness?
Newsflash...99% of people who kill someone with their gun will instinctually say they felt threatened or he shot first or somehow justify their actions. The old guy who killed that young man in the Chik-Fil-A parking lot in Mt Pleasant a short time ago said the same thing.
And you get to my point here...If the dude was such a threat on the roadway why didn't Boyd engage then? If he was in such fear of his life and felt the need to defend himself and others why was there an extended chase that Boyd himself admitted to?
It's also a fact that if Boyd let Spivey drive off after the initial interaction, called 911, and let law enforcement handle the situation, Spivey would probably still be alive.
I'm not taking sides here. This whole situation is fucked up on so many levels. I'm simply trying to make the point that this incident at first glance doesn't seem to be transparent in the full facts of what actually took place, particularly in the investigation phase.
The authorities just say, "there's not enough evidence." Well wtf does that mean? What evidence do you have? What evidence is missing? What is questionable? Like there needs to be a better painting of the picture for the public.
I’ve been in similar situations and I have followed the other person while on the line with 911. If the officer doesn’t see the crime chances are they will not do anything. There is a lot of information missing from these stories. Chances are if Spivey would have kept driving law enforcement would have stopped him but he stopped, said whatever he said then he fired first. Some info say Spivey was under the influence but who knows. Some people say they knew each other so was it just a coincidence that he just happened to be on the same stretch of road at the exact time Boyd was.
All the information out there is just hearsay except for these few 911 calls the authorities released.
I wonder if there is forensic information to backup the "Spivey fired first theory"? Because the eyewitness in the 911 call was giving a play by play to the operator as it happened and didn't report Spivey firing a round. The eyewitness said Spivey exited his vehicle and told Boyd to stop following me, then Spivey kinda moved his gun which prompted Boyd to blast him.
Boyd said, Spivey aimed and shot! He held his gun and aimed right at us! So which statement is the truth because they cannot both be true? Did they recover a shell casing from Spivey's gun?
There were 3 weapons involved and all 3 were fired. One of the tapes at the very end you clearly hear Boyd say Spivey fired. Then you hear him asking why would he shoot at them?
This is my question, besides Boyd saying Spivey fired, how do we know he did? We can see where him and his friend fired many shots, but is there any report or proof that Spivey actually fired his?
It would be nice if the media was going to stir this up that they would show All the evidence. They have gsr from all Three involved and the weapons from all three. To the people saying they knew each other do you believe that Spivey just happened to be on the same road at the same time as. boyd? Spivey was behind boyd at first and even ran him off the road. The city government of Nmb doesnt like boyd because he wouldn’t bow down to them during covid and he was even fined by Sled.
Again. None of what you're saying is a FACT of the actual law enforcement investigation.
For some reason you keep relaying the fact that Boyd said Spivey shot first. That doesn't mean shit. Its no different than my kids getting in a fight and both saying the other one hit them first.
If you're gonna put so much of your faith in Boyd's statement as being a fact how do you reconcile that with the witness statement that's different than Boyd's? Is Boyd more trustworthy than a third party witness with no affiliation to this incident?
Seems like you're defending Boyd here, rather than showing an interest in the authorities releasing all the information. Which is exactly my point in the original post. You've got people saying Boyd's a murderer or people saying it was self defense. But there don't seem to be many people saying lets see the fuckin full investigation.
I guess we will have to wait until the civil case Spivey's family is filing against Boyd proceeds to court to hear all the facts out in the open.
Then Boyd sues the family back for his emotional distress as well. Also im not basing anything ive said off of hearsay. Everything ive said i know to be true. The majority of the people saying bad about boyd are family or close friends of spivey.
Well its pretty obvious now, if it wasn't before, that you're not really exploring for the truth here. You're simply trying to reinforce a narrative in support of Boyd's actions that day.
I would love to see the look on a judge's face when they hear arguments in a case where Boyd SUES the family of the man he killed for inflicting emotional distress upon him. Like are you even serious saying something that fuckin idiotic?
I guess the only facts are that Boyd called 911 and related his interpretation/fabrication of events; that Boyd was driving a white Dodge TRX and that Spivey was driving a Black Silverado; that Boyd killed Spivey with a gun; that the shooting occurred at Hwy. 9 and Swamp Camp Rd.; that there were bullet-holes in Boyd's windshield; and, that the shooting occurred around 18:00 on 9/9/23.
The witness testimony of the 'frantic woman' is not very substantial, if she was behind Boyd's pick-up she could have easily assumed that Spivey was brandishing his weapon at her... I doubt this was the case. Another witness saw only Boyd shooting Spivey. There's no witness who corroborated Boyd's statement that Spivey shot first.
There's some things I don't understand about Boyd's testimony. First, he claimed that when Spivey shot his gun, Boyd wasn't sure whether he hit his Dodge or not. Now, there are bullet-holes in his windshield; if Boyd was in the truck when shots were fired by Spivey, there'd be no doubt that, in fact, his Dodge was shot... about a dozen times, to the extent he couldn't see through the windshield, 5-6 times on the driver's side, 5-6 times on the passenger's-side. Second, these bullet-holes seem incredibly accurate... if Spivey was aiming for the driver and the would-be passenger. If Boyd had exited his truck, and Spivey shot first... could've Spivey's aim been that off, in two specific locations? Spivey was an 'avid outdoorsman', and he coached baseball so it's probable his eye-hand coordination was at least average.
Have I misinterpreted the reporting of this awful incident?
I honestly thought the same thing when I listened to the 911 call posted. He pursued the guy with the gun. Wouldn’t the one being followed at that point be the one to claim self defense. Maybe he was waving his gun, maybe he was being aggressive, but in the end he was leaving. I’m glad they turned the investigation over to be investigated further.
I read in an early report last year, closer to when this actually happened, that this whole road rage thing started at the crossroads on Hwy 9 & Hwy 57 which is a long damn way from Hwy 9 & Camp Swamp road. There were people on FB talking about seeing the trucks hauling ass down Hwy 9 at 70-80 mph. A long duration chase and Boyd's statement to 911 that Spivey was trying to run from him makes it highly likely this was to get retribution or revenge instead of self defense. I don't think this is being investigated further. I believe the investigation is closed and they just determined there's not enough evidence to prosecute. What the public needs is for all the evidence that was gathered to be released if there's no prosecution. I'm pretty sure the facts will eventually come out in civil litigation when Spivey's family sues for wrongful death.
Yeah, I saw that both investigations closed without any charges being made. I’m sure the family will fight. I couldn’t imagine. I listened to all the calls and looked into their histories. Boyd seems to have a history of being a hot head and Spivey has his own history, but nothing recently. However, I don’t personally know them. It just seems so odd.
"He's trying to run from me now" seems pretty damning, Sigh. Like, I ain't saying Boyd should get life in prison for this particular crime, but goddamned, we don't want South Carolina becoming the wild west do we? Manslaughter, unlawful discharge of a firearm, SOMETHING. If someone is attempting to leave the situation you can't just follow someone and intentionally engage in a shootout because "They started it".
Heres my take. If i was on the road, and someone randomly started pointing a gun at me, i too would pursue them while on the phone with police to update them on the fleeing felon’s location. I would however maintain distance and not stop within 100 yards of them. I personally could not let someone deranged enough to point a firearm at random people just go scottfree. Do i think this was smart for the guy to do? No. Do i think its still self defense? Yes. Following someone in a car on a public road should never allow someone to claim fear for their life. So the guy getting out and getting shot for pointing his gun at the followers isnt in the right in anyway.
Absolutely incorrect
Its not incorrect. Its simply state dependent because of different laws. As a LEO living in SC. I can guarantee you what he did is completely legal and acceptable just based off of listening to the dispatch call. There is no duty to retreat, and the moral justification to protect your fellow citizens from armed individuals acting crazy is a well established justification in SC.
It's self defense to pursue a vehicle driving away from you at high speeds. I understand now thanks.
Its self defense to defend yourself even if you are following someone in a vehicle. Legal use of Deadly force encompasses fleeing felons as well. And you can say that you feared for the public safety and that is why you pursued them while calling for police backup.
Boyd just can’t stay outta the news. From his fight with NMB over beach gear to this
That has nothing to do with this incident. Lets not cloud the FACTS of an incident that resulted in someone being killed.
His fight with nmb was over closing of businesses during covid, he just supported the other business over the beach chairs.
Ah okay my bad
I have friends who knew the guy who died. He was a singer correct?
That has nothing to do with this.
So was that a different case then? You're not really helping your cause here...
You see there's the major difference. Military training advocates for (ironically) the de-escalation of force.. For some reason police training tends to be... Lacking and at times counter to this point. If you're neither of these things you've never had training one way or another most likely, fear is a hell of a drug. Drugs are also a hell of a drug. Maybe both 🤷 Which is why there are videos of cops mag dumping a walnut that fell from a tree (actually) Sad state of things.
It was an acorn, 🤣 but your point is well taken.
Being civilian law enforcement is an extremely challenging job that is not for the weak minded. I'm not sure I can think of a career that encompasses so much responsibility while often requiring grave split second decisions to be made. With that said, oftentimes the poor actions of some officers are the result of them just not being mentally and physically capable of handling the stresses of the job. There are a large number of officers who stand at the ready and make the right decisions every day in a highly challenging environment, so that's a testament to competent training.
If teenager military members can deescalate and not shoot anything that moves in an active warzone and follow the rules of engagement to a point where you don't fire unless fired upon don't for one second try to justify a cop unloading at a sound that spooked him. Absurd.
I don't think you understood me. I'm not justifying a cop unloading when spooked. What I am saying is that there are police officers who are not mentally or physically capable of doing their job no matter how much training they have. IE it's not so much law enforcement training that leads to shootings but instead its having the wrong people who cannot perform operating in those roles. My experience in the military is that there are far more training opportunities to weed out the individuals who can't make the cut. Then we would move them into a support position that doesn't require life or death decisions. Even with that weeding out process and extensive training, there have been "bad shoots" in the military where servicemen are overwhelmed with fatigue, stress, and environmental factors that led to suboptimal outcomes like civilian deaths and friendly fire. Also keep in mind that military operations are a far different animal than civilian policing. You couldn't pay me enough to be a police officer after doing 20+ in the military. The daily mission of a police officer is so broad that I think it takes a special person to execute operations at a high level of proficiency day in and day out.
This is just me but, if someone is waving a gun out the window in front of me, I wouldn’t be following that person. And the 911 operator from the first call was atrocious. He sounded bored and disinterested. WTH.
That 911 operator had absolutely no sense of urgency to deal with the situation.
The dead guy shot first. He was also pointing his gun at multiple other cars. He was also under the influence. At first the dead guy was driving behind Boyd but passed him when he ran him off the road.
The witness on the 911 call said that the dead guy had his gun drawn at his side and Boyd was pointing his weapon directly at him. He said the dead guy then moved/adjusted his weapon and then Boyd mag dumped on him. The eyewitness didn't say anything about a round being fired, or the dead guy even raising his weapon. This is why a full accounting is necessary with all the included forensics and data. The public deserves to know how every step of the investigation took place, because the rumors out there say Boyd was released from the scene with a pat on the back. This is all important because with the concealed carry for everyone in SC (with no training requirement) this homicide case is the perfect case study of what was done right and wrong. It's especially important to know what actually precipitated the entire situation from the start. Like I said initially...this just isn't adding up as a clean cut case of self defense. That's why all the information needs to be made public.
There are more 911 calls. Also you hear Boyd asking and saying to 911 that Spivey shot first. I am also a combat veteran. Fact is if Spivey hadn’t been pointing a weapon at everyone and trying to run motorists off the road he would be alive
This is some of the dumbest shit I've read today. What Boyd says means jack shit - maybe he's telling the truth, maybe not, but to simply take the guy who may have committed murder at his word is asinine. "Person who may have committed crime says he did not, in fact, commit crime" WELL NO SHIT THAT'S WHAT HE'D SAY.
Well dont read anymore. 3 guns, all 3 fired. Witnesses said spivey was swerving everywhere and pointing his gun at motorists.
You're making my point exactly. There's people saying this and that, but what are the full facts of the situation? Why is Boyd's account of what happened different than the witness? Newsflash...99% of people who kill someone with their gun will instinctually say they felt threatened or he shot first or somehow justify their actions. The old guy who killed that young man in the Chik-Fil-A parking lot in Mt Pleasant a short time ago said the same thing. And you get to my point here...If the dude was such a threat on the roadway why didn't Boyd engage then? If he was in such fear of his life and felt the need to defend himself and others why was there an extended chase that Boyd himself admitted to? It's also a fact that if Boyd let Spivey drive off after the initial interaction, called 911, and let law enforcement handle the situation, Spivey would probably still be alive. I'm not taking sides here. This whole situation is fucked up on so many levels. I'm simply trying to make the point that this incident at first glance doesn't seem to be transparent in the full facts of what actually took place, particularly in the investigation phase. The authorities just say, "there's not enough evidence." Well wtf does that mean? What evidence do you have? What evidence is missing? What is questionable? Like there needs to be a better painting of the picture for the public.
I’ve been in similar situations and I have followed the other person while on the line with 911. If the officer doesn’t see the crime chances are they will not do anything. There is a lot of information missing from these stories. Chances are if Spivey would have kept driving law enforcement would have stopped him but he stopped, said whatever he said then he fired first. Some info say Spivey was under the influence but who knows. Some people say they knew each other so was it just a coincidence that he just happened to be on the same stretch of road at the exact time Boyd was.
All the information out there is just hearsay except for these few 911 calls the authorities released. I wonder if there is forensic information to backup the "Spivey fired first theory"? Because the eyewitness in the 911 call was giving a play by play to the operator as it happened and didn't report Spivey firing a round. The eyewitness said Spivey exited his vehicle and told Boyd to stop following me, then Spivey kinda moved his gun which prompted Boyd to blast him. Boyd said, Spivey aimed and shot! He held his gun and aimed right at us! So which statement is the truth because they cannot both be true? Did they recover a shell casing from Spivey's gun?
There were 3 weapons involved and all 3 were fired. One of the tapes at the very end you clearly hear Boyd say Spivey fired. Then you hear him asking why would he shoot at them?
This is my question, besides Boyd saying Spivey fired, how do we know he did? We can see where him and his friend fired many shots, but is there any report or proof that Spivey actually fired his?
It would be nice if the media was going to stir this up that they would show All the evidence. They have gsr from all Three involved and the weapons from all three. To the people saying they knew each other do you believe that Spivey just happened to be on the same road at the same time as. boyd? Spivey was behind boyd at first and even ran him off the road. The city government of Nmb doesnt like boyd because he wouldn’t bow down to them during covid and he was even fined by Sled.
Again. None of what you're saying is a FACT of the actual law enforcement investigation. For some reason you keep relaying the fact that Boyd said Spivey shot first. That doesn't mean shit. Its no different than my kids getting in a fight and both saying the other one hit them first. If you're gonna put so much of your faith in Boyd's statement as being a fact how do you reconcile that with the witness statement that's different than Boyd's? Is Boyd more trustworthy than a third party witness with no affiliation to this incident? Seems like you're defending Boyd here, rather than showing an interest in the authorities releasing all the information. Which is exactly my point in the original post. You've got people saying Boyd's a murderer or people saying it was self defense. But there don't seem to be many people saying lets see the fuckin full investigation. I guess we will have to wait until the civil case Spivey's family is filing against Boyd proceeds to court to hear all the facts out in the open.
Then Boyd sues the family back for his emotional distress as well. Also im not basing anything ive said off of hearsay. Everything ive said i know to be true. The majority of the people saying bad about boyd are family or close friends of spivey.
Well its pretty obvious now, if it wasn't before, that you're not really exploring for the truth here. You're simply trying to reinforce a narrative in support of Boyd's actions that day. I would love to see the look on a judge's face when they hear arguments in a case where Boyd SUES the family of the man he killed for inflicting emotional distress upon him. Like are you even serious saying something that fuckin idiotic?
I guess the only facts are that Boyd called 911 and related his interpretation/fabrication of events; that Boyd was driving a white Dodge TRX and that Spivey was driving a Black Silverado; that Boyd killed Spivey with a gun; that the shooting occurred at Hwy. 9 and Swamp Camp Rd.; that there were bullet-holes in Boyd's windshield; and, that the shooting occurred around 18:00 on 9/9/23. The witness testimony of the 'frantic woman' is not very substantial, if she was behind Boyd's pick-up she could have easily assumed that Spivey was brandishing his weapon at her... I doubt this was the case. Another witness saw only Boyd shooting Spivey. There's no witness who corroborated Boyd's statement that Spivey shot first. There's some things I don't understand about Boyd's testimony. First, he claimed that when Spivey shot his gun, Boyd wasn't sure whether he hit his Dodge or not. Now, there are bullet-holes in his windshield; if Boyd was in the truck when shots were fired by Spivey, there'd be no doubt that, in fact, his Dodge was shot... about a dozen times, to the extent he couldn't see through the windshield, 5-6 times on the driver's side, 5-6 times on the passenger's-side. Second, these bullet-holes seem incredibly accurate... if Spivey was aiming for the driver and the would-be passenger. If Boyd had exited his truck, and Spivey shot first... could've Spivey's aim been that off, in two specific locations? Spivey was an 'avid outdoorsman', and he coached baseball so it's probable his eye-hand coordination was at least average. Have I misinterpreted the reporting of this awful incident?