Tory Lanez Sentenced to 10 Years for 2020 Shooting of Megan Thee Stallion

Chi-Town B said:
Who has the motive Gabi? The dude who wasn't in a physical altercation or the chick who got hands put on her. Take Meg's account out of it cause we know she lied about everything.
Click to expand...
Fam miss me with all this. You asking dumb shit like we didnt have a trial with evidence already. A male's DNA was on the gun and kelseys wasn't. No other male in the vehicle had gunshot residue on him. Only tory. Logical conclusion is he shot her. Again none of tory's defense lined up with physical evidence.
 
shutupGabi said:
Fam A male's DNA was on the gun and kelseys wasn't.
Click to expand...

See, this is what I be talking about.

Screenshot 2025-05-31 at 9.41.44 PM.png


I'm open to being wrong if there's proof to the contrary.
 
unSCENE said:
See, this is what I be talking about.

View attachment 1527073

I'm open to being wrong if there's proof to the contrary.
Click to expand...
90% of the DNA found on the gun was a male. Tory couldn't be included or excluded which suggests (to me, not saying this is proof) they tried to wipe the gun off.

That along with the pauses in the gunshots (cant call it an accident or struggle over the gun with that cuz the shots would be closer together) + tory tryna bribe them to not say anything + meg saying kelsey didnt shoot her......
megan-thee-stalion-tory-ig-2.jpg


Meg and kelsey weren't friends at that point and had fell out. If kelsey was the shooter why would meg cover for kelsey and say she didnt shoot her if they had fell out and were beefin. If she said kelsey didnt shoot her then it's bc.....she probly didnt. Interesting how both meg and kelsey identified the same nigga as the shooter even immediately after the incident even tho they weren't even cool.
 
shutupGabi said:
90% of the DNA found on the gun was a male. Tory couldn't be included or excluded which suggests (to me, not saying this is proof) they tried to wipe the gun off.

That along with the pauses in the gunshots (cant call it an accident or struggle over the gun with that cuz the shots would be closer together) + tory tryna bribe them to not say anything + meg saying kelsey didnt shoot her......

Meg and kelsey weren't friends at that point and had fell out. If kelsey was the shooter why would meg cover for kelsey and say she didnt shoot her if they had fell out and were beefin. If she said kelsey didnt shoot her then it's bc.....she probly didnt. Interesting how both meg and kelsey identified the same nigga as the shooter even immediately after the incident even tho they weren't even cool.
Click to expand...

If they know that 90% of the DNA found on the gun came from a male then there should also be enough of a profile to conclusively determine if it matched the individual already in custody... not an inconclusive finding. What it does tell me is the person in custody might not be responsible for the 90% you're referring to. Also, that weapon didn't magically appear out of thin air within the car so the DNA profile is really only relevant if you're matching it to the person being charged. You don't know who handled it prior to it being in the vehicle so you're taking limited information to draw a conclusion put forth by the prosecution.

It says far more that they couldn't match the DNA to him and that none of his fingerprints were present than it does that 90% of the DNA belonged to some unknown individual with an xy chromosome.

Additionally, did you listen to the gunshot audio? The shots were definitely all close enough to plausibly be a result of a struggle for the weapon.

Yes, the claims of a money bribe is damning. That's why I won't ever absolve him of being responsible in all of this because it's dumb. But we see dumb people do dumb shit all the time so I don't take that to only have one potential reason for being. What Meg says at this point means little to nothing. I wholly believe she and Kelsey were too drunk to remember who did what to who that night and I also believe Meg knows she doesn't remember and will go to the grave with the story she put forward now.

Again, I'm going to lean on the facts presented:

1.) Inconclusive DNA and fingerprints
2.) A sober witness who said one thing the night of the shooting when he had zero knowledge of anyone involved and then said something discernibly different months later on trial.
 
She had to stick to the lie, her account of the shooting does not match the eyewitness. Meg account was Tory was shooting from the car, she has no recollection of being in a fist fight so why is she believable about who shot her. That woman don't know anything about that night. Kelsey retrieved the gun after getting beat up so why isnt it believable that she fired the shot?

Tory is a dumbass for not coming out and saying what happened from the start
 
Last edited:
First shot came from Kelsey, the shot that hit Meg. Tory got jammed up for firing the gun in the air to empty the clip. Free that man for saving the life of Meg
 
Chi-Town B said:
First shot came from Kelsey, the shot that hit Meg. Tory got jammed up for firing the gun in the air to empty the clip. Free that man for saving the life of Meg
Click to expand...
2 of the charges was possessing a loaded, unregistered firearm and discharging said firearm with gross negligence.

Let's say only the shot kelsey fired was the one meg was hit with. Bruh still guilty of them other 2 charges based on the bolded.

Shit let's remove meg from the equation altogether and pretend she was never shot. Having an unregistered gun as a famous immigrant is prison worthy on its own lolllll.
 
shutupGabi said:
2 of the charges was possessing a loaded, unregistered firearm and discharging said firearm with gross negligence.

Let's say only the shot kelsey fired was the one meg was hit with. Bruh still guilty of them other 2 charges based on the bolded.

Shit let's remove meg from the equation altogether and pretend she was never shot. Having an unregistered gun as a famous immigrant is prison worthy on its own lolllll.
Click to expand...
Take one of those gun charges away as well cause it was Kelsey's gun, she brought it into play.
 
Lost in all this hoopla… is the fact that Tory was not convicted for shooting Meg, anyway.

Even if this “new evidence” was 1000% true, it wouldn’t matter. He needs to prove the gun wasn’t his and not ever in his possession to overturn his conviction.
 
Inglewood_B said:
Lost in all this hoopla… is the fact that Tory was not convicted for shooting Meg, anyway.

Even if this “new evidence” was 1000% true, it wouldn’t matter. He needs to prove the gun wasn’t his and not ever in his possession to overturn his conviction.
Click to expand...
I’m lost again.

I could have sworn that what he was guilty of.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top