1. Home
  2. Detail

@babuzlab: Melhor churrasqueiro do Brasil. Como ele conquistou? @netaobombeef #netaobombeef #clipfyleague #netaoclipfy

babuzlab
babuzlab
Open In TikTok:
Region: BR
Wednesday 21 October 2026 01:14:40 GMT
255
17
0
0

Music

Download

No Watermark .mp4 (1.92MB) No Watermark(HD) .mp4 (1.92MB) Watermark .mp4 (4.36MB) Music .mp3

Comments

There are no more comments for this video.
To see more videos from user @babuzlab, please go to the Tikwm homepage.

Other Videos

4K 60FPS Lucy Netrunner Ultimate Skill Animation Slowed To Perfection #wuwa #wuwacreator #wuwaedit #wutheringwaves #kurogames #hsin #wuwacontest37
4K 60FPS Lucy Netrunner Ultimate Skill Animation Slowed To Perfection #wuwa #wuwacreator #wuwaedit #wutheringwaves #kurogames #hsin #wuwacontest37
I love them so so so much #southpark #ericcartman #kylebroflovski #butters
I love them so so so much #southpark #ericcartman #kylebroflovski #butters
#TeofimoLopez #ShakurStevenson #BoxingDrama #TrashTalk #FightTalk
#TeofimoLopez #ShakurStevenson #BoxingDrama #TrashTalk #FightTalk
🚨 WAIT. LINDSAY CLANCY’S ATTORNEY JUST SAID WHAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKING THROUGH THIS ENTIRE TRIAL. And I genuinely did NOT expect him to say this. There has been a massive debate happening online throughout the Lindsay Clancy trial: What if Lindsay didn’t do it? I’ve seen the comments. I’ve seen people questioning Patrick. I’ve seen people point to what they believe wasn’t investigated. And every time that theory comes up, there’s been one pretty major response: Even Lindsay’s own attorneys say she did it. Well… apparently it’s not quite that simple. Outside court, Lindsay’s attorney was asked about exactly that issue — and his answer was a bombshell. He explained that in order to pursue a defense of lack of criminal responsibility, the defense had to proceed from the position that Lindsay committed the acts. In other words: “She did it, BUT she was not criminally responsible” is the legal defense they chose. But then he made the distinction I think EVERYONE following this case needs to hear: Having to take that position for the defense does NOT necessarily mean that’s what he personally believes happened. 😳😳😳 And this becomes even more interesting after what happened IN COURT TODAY. The defense directly attacked the investigation itself. They argued investigators essentially settled on Lindsay immediately and didn’t adequately investigate alternative possibilities. And now, outside the courtroom, her attorney is explaining that his statements accepting that Lindsay committed the acts were tied to the legal defense he was required to present. THAT changes the conversation. It does NOT prove Lindsay is innocent. It does NOT prove Patrick—or anyone else—was responsible. And I want to be extremely clear about that because social media speculation is not evidence. But it DOES answer something I’ve seen people asking again and again: “If Lindsay didn’t do it, why would her own attorney admit that she did?” According to her attorney? Because for the lack-of-criminal-responsibility defense, he had to. And now I have about 47 more questions. 😳 Tomorrow is CLOSING ARGUMENTS. So before either side gets their final opportunity to persuade the jury, I want to know what you think: ⚖️ Does hearing THIS change anything for you? A — YES. I’ve questioned the investigation and this makes me question it even more. B — NO. I still believe the evidence establishes Lindsay committed the acts; the real question is criminal responsibility. C — MAYBE. I need to hear exactly what the defense says in closing tomorrow. D — NO WAY. I think the defense is simply doing its job and this changes nothing about the evidence. And here’s the question that’s probably going to start a war in these comments: Do you believe investigators developed the evidence and THEN reached their conclusion — or decided what happened first and investigated from there? 👇 Tell me WHY. Please keep accusations against people who have not been charged out of the comments unless you’re discussing actual evidence presented in court. There is a huge difference between questioning an investigation and declaring an innocent person guilty of something. Tomorrow is going to be WILD. #LindsayClancy #LindsayClancyTrial #TrueCrime #CourtroomNews #TrialWatch
🚨 WAIT. LINDSAY CLANCY’S ATTORNEY JUST SAID WHAT PEOPLE HAVE BEEN ASKING THROUGH THIS ENTIRE TRIAL. And I genuinely did NOT expect him to say this. There has been a massive debate happening online throughout the Lindsay Clancy trial: What if Lindsay didn’t do it? I’ve seen the comments. I’ve seen people questioning Patrick. I’ve seen people point to what they believe wasn’t investigated. And every time that theory comes up, there’s been one pretty major response: Even Lindsay’s own attorneys say she did it. Well… apparently it’s not quite that simple. Outside court, Lindsay’s attorney was asked about exactly that issue — and his answer was a bombshell. He explained that in order to pursue a defense of lack of criminal responsibility, the defense had to proceed from the position that Lindsay committed the acts. In other words: “She did it, BUT she was not criminally responsible” is the legal defense they chose. But then he made the distinction I think EVERYONE following this case needs to hear: Having to take that position for the defense does NOT necessarily mean that’s what he personally believes happened. 😳😳😳 And this becomes even more interesting after what happened IN COURT TODAY. The defense directly attacked the investigation itself. They argued investigators essentially settled on Lindsay immediately and didn’t adequately investigate alternative possibilities. And now, outside the courtroom, her attorney is explaining that his statements accepting that Lindsay committed the acts were tied to the legal defense he was required to present. THAT changes the conversation. It does NOT prove Lindsay is innocent. It does NOT prove Patrick—or anyone else—was responsible. And I want to be extremely clear about that because social media speculation is not evidence. But it DOES answer something I’ve seen people asking again and again: “If Lindsay didn’t do it, why would her own attorney admit that she did?” According to her attorney? Because for the lack-of-criminal-responsibility defense, he had to. And now I have about 47 more questions. 😳 Tomorrow is CLOSING ARGUMENTS. So before either side gets their final opportunity to persuade the jury, I want to know what you think: ⚖️ Does hearing THIS change anything for you? A — YES. I’ve questioned the investigation and this makes me question it even more. B — NO. I still believe the evidence establishes Lindsay committed the acts; the real question is criminal responsibility. C — MAYBE. I need to hear exactly what the defense says in closing tomorrow. D — NO WAY. I think the defense is simply doing its job and this changes nothing about the evidence. And here’s the question that’s probably going to start a war in these comments: Do you believe investigators developed the evidence and THEN reached their conclusion — or decided what happened first and investigated from there? 👇 Tell me WHY. Please keep accusations against people who have not been charged out of the comments unless you’re discussing actual evidence presented in court. There is a huge difference between questioning an investigation and declaring an innocent person guilty of something. Tomorrow is going to be WILD. #LindsayClancy #LindsayClancyTrial #TrueCrime #CourtroomNews #TrialWatch
القطيفة موضه وراحت عليها..؟ #ديكور #دهانات
القطيفة موضه وراحت عليها..؟ #ديكور #دهانات
دایجیل🖤.#fyp #acc #دایجیل #foryou
دایجیل🖤.#fyp #acc #دایجیل #foryou

About

Legal