As people have pointed out, he is in a highly stressful situation where his life is in danger. Can you explain what his "what ifs" were in this situation against two violent pursuers?
Mcdonalds Incident.... Self defense???
- Thread starter tapdatass
- Start date
As people have pointed out, he is in a highly stressful situation where his life is in danger. Can you explain what his "what ifs" were in this situation against two violent pursuers?
And when did the world become fair to you?
It has never been. Now please answer the question?
That is true, but the "what ifs" that can be used against him don't make much sense given the aggressive nature of the thugs.
Prosecution just needs to wait for the hype to die down and drop the charges. Why waste time when it is obvious a jury isn't going to convict?
What if he would've gotten the manager and let the manager deal with it from the very beginning? What if he would've never gotten into the verbal altercation with the woman in the first place? What if he just plain old kept his cool and didn't respond to her?
"I'll get my manager for you." - Has killed MANY irate customer situations in my experience. I'm talking about him. I'm not talking about them. I'm not talking about where they came from. That's not the topic. None of these what if's is the topic to me. The topic is, was it self defense. My answer is, it was until he stopped and then kept going.
Irrelevant. We are speaking from the time of him being struck. I apologize if that wasn't clear.
As to what "your" topic is, that is unclear. He commanded them to stay down and then struck again. We can assume either he struck for no reason or they continued to try and get up, forcing him to neutralize the threat. That is nothing that we can debate as we cannot see the two women nor can we determine whether they had weapons after they threatened to "cut him up" and then hopped into a restricted area to attack him.
If it's not too much, can you answer my initial question: What were the gentleman's "what ifs" after he was struck and pursued by two violent attackers?
This thread is STILL going on? Damn. Yo, what most of you "it was self defense" people need to realize is that this regardless of whether or not you think dude crossed a line in what he did or not, the law doesn't care about explanations and/or excuses for why someone broke their rules. Sure, the guy may have snapped, and gone over the line due to that, but the fact remains that he did it. He stepped outside of what is legal in terms of a self defense claim and he became the aggressor. That is all the prosecution cares about. Their job is to prove that a person broke the law. They don't give a shit about why the person did it. When this goes to trial the judge and/or jury might even give dude the benefit of the doubt and say that he might have felt threatened and that doing what he did, to the extent he did it was his only way to survive the situation. That could be their emotional, rational, human response, but they are not allowed to think that way in this process. Their duty is to look at things legally. When they do that, they will see that despite the "normal, human" elements of what this man did, he did go above and beyond what was legal. That in my mind, is why they will find him guilty of what he is charged with, and send him away for a while. It's not about blame, it's about the laws that have been written and whether or not someone broke them. If anything, we need to change the law(s)...
Kindly explain the law. We already had a NY lawyer say most lawyers in his firm found his actions were justified.
Was it a prosecutor who said that?
You realize we have resident lawyers on BGOL who have cosigned this dude getting off, right? You also realize that if this wasn't so highly publicized, dude would have already been off by now?
As for the "law", the WHY always matters in self defense cases. If a defense lawyer can prove that he had a reasonable thought that his life was in danger, then he walks. Plain and simple.
This is the type of shit I've been talking about, women bitch and complain about the injustice they have in this country and yet they are allow to hit men like they are some fucking punching bag and get away with it but the man gets in trouble...
Me and many others have said people should keep their hands to themselves but it only implies to men because women can hit a guy and not get in trouble.
I dont understand how can say the guy is in the wrong when,they hit him first...I dont get it....especially when they jumped over the counter to hit the guy and yet the guy gets in trouble for defending himself....
Like I've said many times why would any woman hit a guy knowing men are stronger than them but act all fucking surprised when a guy hits them back,it makes no fucking sense at all..
You dont see men going around taking jabs at a lion with a stick you know why because most of us have some fucking sense that the lion will retailate but somehow when it implies to women hitting the guy first they wanna act all surprise when a guy hits them and wanna play this victim card..
I've said this many times and I will say this again,people need to keep their hands to themselves....when I mean people I mean women because they think just because they are a female they cant be hit...
As for the white women she needs to shut the fuck up because where was she when the woman hitting guy...You didnt see her telling that woman to quit or stop but once the guy started hitting back thats when she wanted to open her fucking mouth.....get the fuck outa hear with that bullshit
I dont understand why women think men are their punching bag
Me and many others have said people should keep their hands to themselves but it only implies to men because women can hit a guy and not get in trouble.
I dont understand how can say the guy is in the wrong when,they hit him first...I dont get it....especially when they jumped over the counter to hit the guy and yet the guy gets in trouble for defending himself....
Like I've said many times why would any woman hit a guy knowing men are stronger than them but act all fucking surprised when a guy hits them back,it makes no fucking sense at all..
You dont see men going around taking jabs at a lion with a stick you know why because most of us have some fucking sense that the lion will retailate but somehow when it implies to women hitting the guy first they wanna act all surprise when a guy hits them and wanna play this victim card..
I've said this many times and I will say this again,people need to keep their hands to themselves....when I mean people I mean women because they think just because they are a female they cant be hit...
As for the white women she needs to shut the fuck up because where was she when the woman hitting guy...You didnt see her telling that woman to quit or stop but once the guy started hitting back thats when she wanted to open her fucking mouth.....get the fuck outa hear with that bullshit
I dont understand why women think men are their punching bag
Fine, my point is that people need to take emotions and "normal human reactions" out of their responses to this. Yeah, there may be ways the guy could get out of this, but I would put money on them being legal ways. Not emotional. There are plenty of people in this thread and on the net in general who are reacting emotionally to this. They are projecting themselves in the situation as well. My main point is that we have to take emotions out of this and many other situations. We as black folks tend to be lead by emotion and don't think rationally at times. If the brotha gets off it won't be because of the emotions of anyone involved. So, people need to calm that shit down and look at things rationally. homeboy's lawyers won't be defending him strictly based on emotions will they? No, they'll be looking for legal ways to justify what he did.
If my what if's are irrelevant what makes your what if's valid? And who is WE? And you do realize that the topic of this thread is was it self defense? And the topic of what will be argued is was he acting in self defense?
Is he capable of making a decision to NOT respond to them like he did?
It isn't fair. And women will continue to get their asses beat whenever they put their hands on people - and no matter how much you wish that those beatings will stop, it won't.
Now that I've answered your question, I have one for you.
You say a man that hits a women (no matter the circumstance) is no longer a man. Is that an "opinion" or a "fact"????
Of course emotion will be involved. Anyone who ever participated in a jury trial knows that emotion will play a factor in the outcome. The jurors won't be lawyers, they will be people off the street.
And the legal ways the lawyer looks for may involve emotion as well. Be assured that the lawyers closing argument will be an emotional plea as well, focusing of the emotion of a situation that occurred over a very short moment in time that escalated at each step due to the aggressiveness of those who he defended himself against.
We don't know that. Everyone is different. We aren't robots and their is no standard way for people to act.
For some reason you believe this. Just like I can cuss you out all day, talk about your kids and you wouldn't resort to threatening me with murder, where some people will lose their minds and resort to it. We are all different. Not everyone shares your level of self control.
The issue that many people take with you is that you heap "expectations" on men while avoiding those same "expectations" for women. You've already established that you are bias and you believe that men should be like robots, always show control, where women don't have to.
The bottom, line, NONE of this would have happened if those women had kept their hands to themselves. No one should touch anyone. That's the lesson of this whole tale. Whenever your resort to touching people, all your wants, expectations and desires are off the table.
Sure, there will be emotional things in the case. That's true of every case, but it's not the most important thing. Again, I am saying people don't need to be LEAD by emotion. The system is not designed to be concerened with our emotions.
The system is ruled by laws sure enough, but the totality of a case is the Law AND the Facts....If the facts are emotional, like here, then the case will be emotional.
I don't know what you mean by "lead by emotion", but if either side can use emotion to their advantage, you best believe a good lawyer will do just that.
Further, emotion is intricately weaved in the justification of self defense. A lawyer will ask questions like, "when she said she had a knife how did that make you feel?" and "when she jumped the counter after stating that she had a knife, how did you feel then?" and "when you retreated to a more secure area and looked and saw that not just one, but both of the women had jumped the counter and were stalking you, what did you feel then?"
All those are relevant and material questions that will help to set up the defense of justification.
Not that I know of. But some lawyers at firms are former prosecutors.
But I see your point. This -- like other cases -- will come down to interpretation of the law. It will come down to the defense saying a threat was still posed by his attackers trying to get up while the prosecutors will say he went beyond the law.
It is up to defense to convince the jurors that the prior actions of the thugs led his client to believe they were trying to get up to continue an attack. The prosecutors will try to convince the jurors that the metal rod turned the thugs into carebears who were only trying to get up to show some love.
When shorty SLAPPED and JUMPED over that counter, they put themselves at risk and retaliation from the workers back there (every being is entitle to protect his or herself). Those counters are there for a reason, if you assault someone, be prepared to be assaulted in return.
some quotes from the comments section of the village voice:
varmitydog 2011-10-14 11:20:14 PM
The dude gets out of jail, and the only job he can get is to work the counter at the Mickey D's. And he can't quit, because it would violate his parole. You know that the dude is already feeling lower than whale sh*t and pissed off at the world. Then these two drunk women come in and start fucking with him. And one of them slaps him, and they both hop the counter, going to kick his ass. Uh huh. Of all the Mickey D's in the world, they picked this one. Big mistake.
I have absolutely no sympathy for them, they got what they deserved. Too bad we couldn't get a close up on their faces the second they knew that they had severely miscalculated.
Angelo_sebello 10 hours ago
1. They were extremely disrespectful to him. 2. They physically assaulted him first. 3. They went over the counter to further assault him. It may be extremely out of line, but the bitches deserved it.
MW33 10 hours ago
Looked like self defense to me, heck they could have been armed, and they attacked him, not the other way around. I think he did pretty good myself. He took out the threat to not only himself but the other employees and customers. He should get an award in my book after he wins the jury trial.
You have obviously never heard of jury nullification... It has everything to do with emotion and morals over riding law.
The Manhattan DA has an uphill battle on this case... If they get an indictment, they are going to do everything to throw out the video and pick a jury that hasn't seen the full video.
Word. I agree with you. To clarify, what I mean be "lead by emotion" is the fact that in many situations our emotional response to something is all we think or see. We can't just be emotional, we have calm down at some point and use our rational minds as well.
Exactly, it's in how the law is interpreted.
:lol @ the last line about Care Bears.
It was irrelevant to the question I posed because I was speaking of the man's what if's after he got struck. As far as I am concerned, NOTHING allows a person to place their hands on another, so what happened before is 100% irrelevant because he never stroke the patrons.
The topic at hand is "was it self defense"? As I previously wrote, and maybe you missed it, if he struck them while they were down for no reason, then it is not self defense. If they were continuously trying to get up once he commanded them to stay down, then it is self defense. This currently isn't up for debate as we cannot see what is going on behind the counter.
Once again, can you answer my initial question: What was the gentleman's "what ifs" once the two aggressors leap the counter into a restricted area and pursue him?
Why are you even trying to convince her,its been established that she hates men...A woman can randomly shoot a guy in the head and she will find some way blame the guy...
He is not going to prove his life was in danger because he is not going to trail because he defended himself. He is going to trial for excessive force. He will have to somehow prove why he kept hitting those females when they were on the ground.
Him being a violent criminal before is not going to help. I think he will plea
TRUE.
That's b/c we are taught from day one that you go fucking w/ a lion and your ass will get dealt w/ in the worst way, whereas in society a lot of girls and boys grow up being taught, for the most part, that a male shouldn't hit a female under any circumstances. Most women know this and some of them try to abuse it. A lot of women have the idea in their head that they can lash out and get physical with no consequences b/c they believe that you have been taught to basically sit there and take it.
It will still involve Self Defense and the degree of force allowed in defense of self.
The argument is going in circles now, but even Ray Charles can see that his explanation will be that they kept trying to get up and he took that as aggression and kept hitting them to make them stay down.
Can you find since September 10th where this has been said? I don't believe this. I'm of the standing that there's a reason to hit everyone. May not be a good reason. If a woman is acting unruly and attacking a guy and he loses control of his senses as well and he hits her. Well to me that's just what happened. I won't look at him as respectable though. If that's what you're asking. It will cause me to understand his character better. If that's what this is getting too.
TRUE.
That's b/c we are taught from day one that if you go fucking w/ a lion, your ass will get dealt w/ in the worst way. Whereas in society, a lot of girls and boys grow up being taught, for the most part, that a male shouldn't hit a female under any circumstances. Most women know this and a lot of them try to abuse or take advantage of it.
A lot of women have the idea in their head that they can lash out and get physical with no consequences b/c they believe that you have been taught to basically sit there and take it. And they are very aware that even in extreme circumstances where they provoke or initiate physical violence or in cases of self defense, the SECOND a man retaliates HE will be the one under the microscope despite what may have transpired prior to his actions.
If you watch the video he messed up at around the 40 second mark. Several people was telling him to stop hitting them. Even his co-worker was trying to step in and say chill out and not hit them anymore. The next two hits are what fractured her skull. Again his co-workers and others were like chill and tried to get him to stop. He hit them several more times.
He was justified up until the 40 second mark. To any one of us we probably beat the charge and receive probation. With him already being a violent offender he needs to worry
y'all niggas should go outside and find an actual bird and film yourself talking to it. then go watch the video.
see how stupid that looks?
well it STILL makes more sense than talkin to the bird in this post. way more. and you'd probably get more sensible responses.
this applies to bird-brained ass niggas too.
see how stupid that looks?
well it STILL makes more sense than talkin to the bird in this post. way more. and you'd probably get more sensible responses.
this applies to bird-brained ass niggas too.
Last edited:
True man. I was doing good the last two days
You're making it sound like he's incapable of controlling his emotions. What i'm really TRYING to understand from you people is why you believe controlling yourself is so HARD to do? Why it's something so out of reach for some of you to understand. It escapes me how 1 black man i know can understand how under the gun he is. 24/7 by society. And he knows 1 slip up can land him in the pen. And he controls himself because going to prison is the worst thing he can think of to happen to him. As it is 1 of my own personal fears as well. I don't respond emotionally to every given slight. I don't do it for a number of reasons, 1 of those reasons is because i don't want to go to prison.
You as black men should understand this concept, i feel. In This country. Above ALL OTHERS.
I don't care what their issues are. That's not what the topic was about. The topic is about, was this self defense. My answer is, and was. Yes it was up until a certain point. Life's not fair. He's going to jail. I've been in situations where somehow i've avoided going to prison for keeping my head even though i was perfectly in my rights to go off on this person. But i didn't. The funny thing is, you guys talk about fair and right. When all i'm doing is holding you to the same standards i hold myself too.
The bottom line is that's grade school logic. You're all grown ups now. You know how the system works. You're supposed to act accordingly.
Similar threads
