wrong on so many levels

davidmcbeth said:

Folks need to listen to the video again. At the time she mowed him down:

The guy was not wearing a mask or hosiery

The lady called 911 because he was just carrying...which is not illegal I presume

Click to expand...

She stated some concerns. There is no requirement that 9-1-1 be reserved only for the reporting of crimes in progress/completed.

The lady CLAIMS that he pointed a gun at her.

Click to expand...

We have some witnesses that have not yet been heard from. So maybe it is not a simple she said/he said

[quote}The lady DID hit him with her car.

The lady did follow him.[/quote] Yeppers. No argument on those two. Why you bring them up is still a wonderment.

The lady did talk to him, presumably because she thought he was a threat to 2 bikers, indicating that she knew the gun was not real (or that's what the argument will be).

Click to expand...

Yes, to the first part. It goes back to the 9-1-1 call that you seem to be suggesting above shuld not have been made until something actually did happen.

Just how do you plan to support thjat statement that she knew the gun was not real? If she knew it was not real why would she have called 9-1-1? Why would she have followed him?

I could see no criminal charges being filed but she is going to be a world of hurt in civil court. Her insurance company will not defend her as it was a willing act.

Click to expand...

If there are no criminal charges filed then most of your ravings are just that. There is always the chance of a civil suit - in fact I ought to sue you for intentional infliction of emotional trauma. Jut might, now that I think about it. Wonder how much farther that suit will get than the civil suit you suggest here.

BTW, your insurance company will not defend you because your acts are also intentional. So what? Are you just reminding folks that insurance is the seeking of protection against the unexpected, not the consequenes of our deliberate acts?

This kid will get some $$$ out of this woman (I figure 5-20K) as it would go to trial...and her lawyer will tell her the cost of doing so (40K-60K) and w/o insurance that would come out of her own pocket.

Click to expand...

Figures snatched out of thin air with even less authority than what my attorney has? Or do you know something he does not?

See, you can be 100% right and still be wrong.

Click to expand...

Help me here. Where is it that you were right? It certainly was not 100% of the time.

Horrible? Maybe .. welcome to America !

Click to expand...

stay safe.

I guess we'll just wait and see ... wait and see. In litigious America, my guess is a suit is being drafted as we speak.

Of course, it could be settled out of court too ... and we would never know.

davidmcbeth said:

I guess we'll just wait and see ... wait and see. In litigious America, my guess is a suit is being drafted as we speak.

Of course, it could be settled out of court too ... and we would never know.

Click to expand...

As mentioned above, just about anybody can sue just about anybody else over just about anything. What counts is what happens after the paperwork is filed.

And it is not difficult to determine if a suit was settled as opposed to having been adjudicated. It's merely the details of the settlement that may be restricted from publication.

All of that aside - I notice you are not answering the majority of the challenges posted to those assertions you made. Care to say why?

stay safe.

JAMES you might be confusing the criminal charges with the civil case. no criminal charges have been brought.

but then in light of the Zimmerman/Martin case maybe there should be a trail to prove it was self defense

sorry poor writing skills. i probably should have said to see if we can prove attempted homicide

Wrong on So Many Levels

This post is about 25 levels down from the top. Whatever was in the OP, but was left mysterious by the thread title--was it wrong this many levels down?

I don't wanta read a post in a thread with wrongness on a vague number of levels. Gimme a nice, solid, dependable level of wrongness so I can judge whether I want to read about it.

papa bear said:

JAMES you might be confusing the criminal charges with the civil case. no criminal charges have been brought.

but then in light of the Zimmerman/Martin case maybe there should be a trail to prove it was self defense

sorry poor writing skills. i probably should have said to see if we can prove attempted homicide

Click to expand...

PAPA ... What civil case? So far as I know no civil suit has been filed.

Again, if no criminal charges were filed because the police determined that she acted correctly (i.e., in self defense) wouldn't any judge dismiss a civil suit brought by the perp?

Attempted Homicide is a *criminal* act that would be charged in a criminal case, yes? But there's not going to be a criminal trial because no charges were placed against her.

If the perp files a civil action for injury, pain and suffering, I suspect that the judge will throw it out, in much the same way that an armed home-invader can't sue when a law-abiding homeowner shoots him after he breaks into his home... It was the criminal act by the perp that precipitated the injury.

JamesCanby said:

PAPA ... What civil case? So far as I know no civil suit has been filed.

Again, if no criminal charges were filed because the police determined that she acted correctly (i.e., in self defense) wouldn't any judge dismiss a civil suit brought by the perp?

Attempted Homicide is a *criminal* act that would be charged in a criminal case, yes? But there's not going to be a criminal trial because no charges were placed against her.

If the perp files a civil action for injury, pain and suffering, I suspect that the judge will throw it out, in much the same way that an armed home-invader can't sue when a law-abiding homeowner shoots him after he breaks into his home... It was the criminal act by the perp that precipitated the injury.

Click to expand...

you are right we do not yet know of a civil case. it was just mentioned in the discussion. just thought you were not picking up on that.
attempted Homicide IS a criminal act. remember Zimmerman was arrested. what, about a month later. of course he was a white man that killed a sweet little boy. just because the LE have given her a pass does not mean she didn't do anything wrong.
as SKIDMARK said, anybody can be sued for anything. there are cases where a person has broken into someones home and when they got injured, sued the home owner.

two things still out there. did he point the shotgun (i know it was fake, but for all purposes it looked real) at her? did she instigate the encounter by hollering at the man? she did admit she was a Hopolophobe, and was scared by the carry