Kidnap-Rapist-Murderer stopped by legally armed citizen!
- Thread starter AC_Pilot
- Start date
A couple of points:
First: In my reading, she was surprised from behind. There is no mention of a confrontation, a fight, her running, or even her calling out. The account seems to me that she was clubed from behind and in her vehicle before she knew what was going on. She failed basic awareness of her surroundings an no blade, firearm, or grenade-launcher would have fixed that.
Second: Aremed or unarmed, an escort would have made her a less appealling target and less likely to eb attacked. Security at WalMart is generally unarmed, and it would still have been possible to take them, but it would have been less likely.
Third: Firearms work both ways. Ignoring the "draws attention" problem, I could walk to 20 ft behind you, wait till you turn to your car and shoot you in the head. You would then be dead, wheather armed or unarmed. I can do the same to armed security.
I'm glad he got shot. I advocate people learning to use and carrying fireamrs, though I doubt someone untrained to even observe her surroundings has any business with one yet. I don't think anyone here truely believes that her having a firearm would have "made it all turn out better", but many of the posts sure seem to be saying that.
First: In my reading, she was surprised from behind. There is no mention of a confrontation, a fight, her running, or even her calling out. The account seems to me that she was clubed from behind and in her vehicle before she knew what was going on. She failed basic awareness of her surroundings an no blade, firearm, or grenade-launcher would have fixed that.
Second: Aremed or unarmed, an escort would have made her a less appealling target and less likely to eb attacked. Security at WalMart is generally unarmed, and it would still have been possible to take them, but it would have been less likely.
Third: Firearms work both ways. Ignoring the "draws attention" problem, I could walk to 20 ft behind you, wait till you turn to your car and shoot you in the head. You would then be dead, wheather armed or unarmed. I can do the same to armed security.
I'm glad he got shot. I advocate people learning to use and carrying fireamrs, though I doubt someone untrained to even observe her surroundings has any business with one yet. I don't think anyone here truely believes that her having a firearm would have "made it all turn out better", but many of the posts sure seem to be saying that.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
What he deserves is the presumption of innocence until such time as he is proven guilty before a jury of his peers. It seems that many here have already tried an convicted this person.BrandiJo said:
That depends pretty heavily. We here are not his jury, nor are we acting against him. We have an opinion and are entitled to it.
There comes a point where the presumption of innocence is a neccessairy formailty... and not one that "Joe on the street" needs to make, any more than the witnesses or prosecution needs to make it.
OP
AC_Pilot
Blue Belt
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2004
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 4
- Thread Starter
- #26
Jerry,
Some good points above.. no weapon does you any good if you are running around on auto pilot and unaware.. this is why freaks like this guy pick the targets they do.. they have learned that intended targets like AC Pilot and his gal are aware of the attack before the bad guys can strike, and fight back without hesitation, intercepting the attack.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As to the innocence issue.. if I were on the jury I would start from scratch and give him a fair trial. The evidence, it seems, is overwhelming. But we out here at this point have only what the media and law enforcement tells us.. and at this point we are told the following basics, aside from forensic and other evidence that will come out in the trial, maybe even a confession:
1) Video cameras at Wal Mart caught the very act of this very scumbag assaulting the girl at her truck, kidnapping her (kidnapping, felony offense)
2) Her partially clothed body was found in Texas, along a HWY that the suspect drove on the commit one robbery and another attempted robbery where he was shot by a legally armed citizen with a concealed handgun. (abduction-rape)
3) The victim of the rape and murder was found to have a gunshot wound and she is (of course) dead (Murder one)
4) The suspect can be identified as driving the murdered girl's stolen truck by numerous witnesses. In fact he drove to the hospital in it, where sadly he was patched up at taxpayer's expense. This is grand theft auto and made a federal crime I believe, by crossing interstate lines in it.
5) He is accused of at least two armed robberies
If all the above is true and comes out in court he will be found guilty by a jury of his peers, sentenced to death and executed, and rightfully so. In this case justice will be served, but delayed.
Some good points above.. no weapon does you any good if you are running around on auto pilot and unaware.. this is why freaks like this guy pick the targets they do.. they have learned that intended targets like AC Pilot and his gal are aware of the attack before the bad guys can strike, and fight back without hesitation, intercepting the attack.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
As to the innocence issue.. if I were on the jury I would start from scratch and give him a fair trial. The evidence, it seems, is overwhelming. But we out here at this point have only what the media and law enforcement tells us.. and at this point we are told the following basics, aside from forensic and other evidence that will come out in the trial, maybe even a confession:
1) Video cameras at Wal Mart caught the very act of this very scumbag assaulting the girl at her truck, kidnapping her (kidnapping, felony offense)
2) Her partially clothed body was found in Texas, along a HWY that the suspect drove on the commit one robbery and another attempted robbery where he was shot by a legally armed citizen with a concealed handgun. (abduction-rape)
3) The victim of the rape and murder was found to have a gunshot wound and she is (of course) dead (Murder one)
4) The suspect can be identified as driving the murdered girl's stolen truck by numerous witnesses. In fact he drove to the hospital in it, where sadly he was patched up at taxpayer's expense. This is grand theft auto and made a federal crime I believe, by crossing interstate lines in it.
5) He is accused of at least two armed robberies
If all the above is true and comes out in court he will be found guilty by a jury of his peers, sentenced to death and executed, and rightfully so. In this case justice will be served, but delayed.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
Oh, please. Your comments in this thread belie this statement. You have already convinced yourself of this persons guilt and are set on revenging those actions with the death penalty.AC_Pilot said:
Nothing you have presented is 'evidence'. What you have presented are statements by the police, and by the media concerning some assumed actions. Evidence is presented in a court of law.AC_Pilot said:
Even though we all know that the police, and the media, never, ever tell a lie, or mislead the public.
The video tape caught someone pushing a woman into her car. To ascribe a motive; kidnapping, to that action requires more information than can be seen on a video tape. Further, the statements indicate the person pushing the woman into the car is unidentified. The article assumes it is the same person the security people questioned 90 minutes earlier.AC_Pilot said:
How many people drove along that stretch of road?AC_Pilot said:
What happened in the two days, and 300 plus miles between the video tape and the discovery of the body.
I will further point out that neither of the articles presented make any statements as to rape. It's awful nice of you to add that to the list of accusations without any supporting evidence.
re: rape - see above.AC_Pilot said:
Not all gunshot deaths are murder, by the way. Further, no evidence was presented (forensic or even anectdotally) that the person who pushed the woman into the car was the person who caused the gunshot wound.
A is driving B's car. B is dead by gunshot. Therefore, A murdered B.AC_Pilot said:
There are so many flaws in that logic argument as to be laughable.
This is a non-sequiture argument. It is not possible to determine who shot whom by what car is being driven. While it is possible the two premises are are related, they do not lead to the conclusion presented.
Accused is not the same thing as convicted.AC_Pilot said:
You are further accusing him of kidnapping, rape and murder. I am wondering why you state he is accused of 'armed robberies', but, by the title of this thread, have already determined that the detained person is a 'murderer', 'rapist', and 'kidnapper'.
If all the above is true ....AC_Pilot said:
If all the above is true ....
(hell, that bears repeating again)
If all the above is true ....
It seems from the posts in this thread that many have already made that determination. Some are already impatient for revenge against the accused activities.
Jerry, many of the statements in this thread are, indeed, acting against him. To claim he is a rapist, without any evidence, is character assassination. To think you are not acting against him, I think is deceptive.Jerry said:
The presuption of innocence is there to protect all citizens, even me and you.
Witnesses are not allowed to view the testimony of other witnesses in a trial. Prosecutors are required to present evidence of innocence if it makes itself know. These actions are required to keep the 'evidence' presented to a jury clean.
While we are not on the jury for this trial, neither have we been exposed to the 'evidence' at that trial. Surely, we must weigh the value of our 'opinion' against the complete lack of 'evidence' we have before us.
michaeledward
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
All valid points, but when you put together the "facts" (or evidence such as it is) that this guy was seen in the store on video, with a grainy but similar shot of what could be the same guy pushing her into the car, and the guy shows up latter in said car, heck the guys parents are already on Good Morning America saying that PTSD from Iraq is what caused their son to "flip out".....I wouldnt hold out much on "CSI" twists that this guy just happened to be in the same store and somehow managed to just wind up in the dead girls car out of some bizzare twist of fate.
While its not "open and shut", I dont think its a big suprise that many people have come to judgement already.
All the same, I would think that in a crime like this there should be plenty of physical evidence. It dosent look like a well though out crime and there should be things like prints, DNA, ballistics etc. coming forth at trial.
While its not "open and shut", I dont think its a big suprise that many people have come to judgement already.
All the same, I would think that in a crime like this there should be plenty of physical evidence. It dosent look like a well though out crime and there should be things like prints, DNA, ballistics etc. coming forth at trial.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
I agree Tgace. The guy may very well be guilty as hell. But many here are already screamin' for vengence - Faster Pussycat, Kill! Kill!.
Spinning facts for their argument with the dexterity of Roger Ailes.
I didn't see any statements in the articles posted about 'partially clothed body', but that doesn't stop this statement as being the basis for a rape accusation. Good Grief.
All while serving the 'King of Kings'. Makes me ask, 'What Would Jesus Do?' ... or as rmcrobertson would say ... 'Who Would Jesus Bomb?'
Spinning facts for their argument with the dexterity of Roger Ailes.
I didn't see any statements in the articles posted about 'partially clothed body', but that doesn't stop this statement as being the basis for a rape accusation. Good Grief.
All while serving the 'King of Kings'. Makes me ask, 'What Would Jesus Do?' ... or as rmcrobertson would say ... 'Who Would Jesus Bomb?'
OP
AC_Pilot
Blue Belt
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2004
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 4
- Thread Starter
- #30
A few points:
Don't slander my Master by insinuating He would be for Bush and his wars, please. G-d has allowed every human to evidence what they are made of, by their actions and He will judge their eternal destiny. By the evidence, Bush is in big trouble when he comes up in that judgement, but let's not further sidetrack this discussion..
If you think Jesus is against using deadly force on evildoers, or against death for them, or self defense, then you know nothing about scripture. Jesus is the Warlord and Prince of Yahweh (G-d the father) read the end of the 19th chapter of Luke, and Revelations 19
In the meantime G-d created human governments to keep the peace and sanction evildoers. The bible is clear that killing in self defense is acceptable, and so governments may do this collectively, for us. Common sense dictates that the most dangerous among us should be eliminated for the safety of the innocent, of which some folks, maybe you, care little it seems. The liberal's heart bleeds for vicious, monstrous Orcs, twisted violent creatures, void of decentcy or consideration for others, incapable of doing good, bent on evil.. those who are a danger to all around them.
I won't waste my time trying to respond to the various phony arguments you made, twisting what I stated.. all I will say is that IF what we are being told is presented in court, this person will be found guilty and thankfully executed. If the evidence is accurate, then more evidence (forensic) will come out in the trial.. proving this person guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. You are no judge of my intents or suitability to impartially judge the facts of the case as a juror, because I have stated these points.
One more point of refutation to you..as I am busy at work today.. the dead girl was seen being kidnapped on camera by the arrested man, according to law enforcement.. there's no argument against this if true. Her semi nude body was discovered on the roadside, http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=050122&cat=news&st=newsd87pfqj80&src=ap (Forensics will prove if she was raped and if you don't think it a 99% + probability, you are clueless. Genetic evidence will prove this if true) If that evidence, plus him being found with her truck and committing violent felony crimes immediately afterwards, is presented in court, and you still had this attitude as a juror, I certainly would definitely question your suitability as a juror. I certainly see that you did not care enough about this case to even look up the latest info on it. I do care and I despise creatures that can commit these acts.. such should not be allowed to walk the earth and G-d will destroy such in His judgement..as scripture clearly states. They and those who aid and abet them will not be allowed to exist in the same universe as His faithful children!
Don't slander my Master by insinuating He would be for Bush and his wars, please. G-d has allowed every human to evidence what they are made of, by their actions and He will judge their eternal destiny. By the evidence, Bush is in big trouble when he comes up in that judgement, but let's not further sidetrack this discussion..
If you think Jesus is against using deadly force on evildoers, or against death for them, or self defense, then you know nothing about scripture. Jesus is the Warlord and Prince of Yahweh (G-d the father) read the end of the 19th chapter of Luke, and Revelations 19
In the meantime G-d created human governments to keep the peace and sanction evildoers. The bible is clear that killing in self defense is acceptable, and so governments may do this collectively, for us. Common sense dictates that the most dangerous among us should be eliminated for the safety of the innocent, of which some folks, maybe you, care little it seems. The liberal's heart bleeds for vicious, monstrous Orcs, twisted violent creatures, void of decentcy or consideration for others, incapable of doing good, bent on evil.. those who are a danger to all around them.
I won't waste my time trying to respond to the various phony arguments you made, twisting what I stated.. all I will say is that IF what we are being told is presented in court, this person will be found guilty and thankfully executed. If the evidence is accurate, then more evidence (forensic) will come out in the trial.. proving this person guilty beyond a shadow of a doubt. You are no judge of my intents or suitability to impartially judge the facts of the case as a juror, because I have stated these points.
One more point of refutation to you..as I am busy at work today.. the dead girl was seen being kidnapped on camera by the arrested man, according to law enforcement.. there's no argument against this if true. Her semi nude body was discovered on the roadside, http://dailynews.att.net/cgi-bin/news?e=pri&dt=050122&cat=news&st=newsd87pfqj80&src=ap (Forensics will prove if she was raped and if you don't think it a 99% + probability, you are clueless. Genetic evidence will prove this if true) If that evidence, plus him being found with her truck and committing violent felony crimes immediately afterwards, is presented in court, and you still had this attitude as a juror, I certainly would definitely question your suitability as a juror. I certainly see that you did not care enough about this case to even look up the latest info on it. I do care and I despise creatures that can commit these acts.. such should not be allowed to walk the earth and G-d will destroy such in His judgement..as scripture clearly states. They and those who aid and abet them will not be allowed to exist in the same universe as His faithful children!
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
Orcs and G-d in the same paragraph.
Somehow, that just seems so fitting.
Oh, and the standard in a criminal case is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.
And still more links with no accusation of rape.
Somehow, that just seems so fitting.
Oh, and the standard in a criminal case is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'.
And still more links with no accusation of rape.
OP
AC_Pilot
Blue Belt
- Joined
- Dec 31, 2004
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 4
- Thread Starter
- #32
Michael.. I see a lot of concern from you for a probable monster.. where's your concern for the other potential innocent victims (if he had not been stopped by an armed citizen) and the victim and her shocked and suffering family? G-d created Orcs and Angels, and his (temporarily) mortal children in between. This life is a test to see what we, His children, will do.. unfortunately for the vast majority, they are failing this test.. it's a pass/fail, with no in between. In a mirror of that, if a man murders, he has failed the requirements to remain alive amongst peaceable people, and government's job is to see to this. A jury will decide and they are performing a civil or government action when doing so.
If you cannot see from the evidence presented that she was 99% likely to have been savaged and raped, you are blind.. some people go through their entire life in this state, while others see clearly.. it's just the first part of the test.. if you cannot even see clear events and realities, you will fail.
BTW you act out like every other liberal.. emotionally and with angry hate for right thinking people, inherent in your "arguments". You make personal ad hominym attacks which do not relate to the issues being discussed, in an atempt to sidetrack the basic issue. This is because you do hate us, but more of us are realizing this and we will not back down to you or be intimidated by the shrill tone. We demand justice and that includes the death penalty for convicted murderers. I would extend it for certain types of rape, like kidnapping/rape.
If you cannot see from the evidence presented that she was 99% likely to have been savaged and raped, you are blind.. some people go through their entire life in this state, while others see clearly.. it's just the first part of the test.. if you cannot even see clear events and realities, you will fail.
BTW you act out like every other liberal.. emotionally and with angry hate for right thinking people, inherent in your "arguments". You make personal ad hominym attacks which do not relate to the issues being discussed, in an atempt to sidetrack the basic issue. This is because you do hate us, but more of us are realizing this and we will not back down to you or be intimidated by the shrill tone. We demand justice and that includes the death penalty for convicted murderers. I would extend it for certain types of rape, like kidnapping/rape.
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
I dunno what the big issue of if this girl was raped or not is. Does it make the person who did it less of a monster if he didnt and more of one if he did? Whoever did it is a low life scumbag regardless IMO. BTW, while I havent seen any announcement that she was raped, I must admit that I wouldnt be too surprised if she was. it would just seem to "fit" in this whole ugly scene.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
Tgace said:
Exodus 20:16AC_Pilot Signature said:
"You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
Who here is presenting testimony? Or making an official false statement? Thats what "bearing false witness" means to me. Our opinions have no bearing on this guys upcoming legal issues. I dont know if this poor girl was sexually assaulted or not. It just seems like a strange issue to get sidetracked into.
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
Tgace said:
AC_Pilot said:
I am wondering when 'official' became part of the requirements of that commandment ... seems to me that the teachings said something about even if you have violated the premise in your heart, you have committed the sin.Tgace said:
It must suck to have the athiest presenting Christian teachings. But, I am not proclaiming that my principles follow any higher power, and then calling out actions against those principles. And it must be nice to be able to compartmentalize that 'Thou Shalt Not Kill' doesn't mean the tax collectors.Tgace said:
Oh well.
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
Well tell me if Im wrong o' enlightened one, but I always thought that "bearing false witness" meant saying something "false" (an intentional lie) in order to get your neighbor in trouble. The old "ive got a hair up my *** about michaeledward" so Ill call his boss and tell him a lie to get him in trouble. Or "oh yes officer I saw him throwing a body in the trunk of his car". Just considering doing any to those would be a "sin of the heart".
If anybody here is "guilty" of anything its of making assumptions without any evidence. Im not claiming she was raped...just that it wouldnt surprise me if it did happen. And Id be lying to say I didnt expect to hear it.
If anybody here is "guilty" of anything its of making assumptions without any evidence. Im not claiming she was raped...just that it wouldnt surprise me if it did happen. And Id be lying to say I didnt expect to hear it.
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
BTW I havent even stated a "kill him" sentiment or a pre judgement, only thats its natural, based on what weve seen/heard at this point to "think" this guy is guilty as hell. Thats a far cry from "proven".
Who dosent look at a case like this and form some opinion? Like the Peterson case. I thought "yeah, guilty as all get out". Who goes "fishing" on X-mass eve and the body "happens" to surface in the same area? However I was suprised that he got convicted on the evidence presented (what I saw of it at least). From what I saw (qualifier there), I didnt even think there was enough for an arrest. What about OJ? It is possible to separate opinion from what can be proven.
Innocent untill proven guilty is a legal standard, not an emotional one. It must be adhered to if youre a juror. It "should" be the citizens mindset too, but good luck there....
Who dosent look at a case like this and form some opinion? Like the Peterson case. I thought "yeah, guilty as all get out". Who goes "fishing" on X-mass eve and the body "happens" to surface in the same area? However I was suprised that he got convicted on the evidence presented (what I saw of it at least). From what I saw (qualifier there), I didnt even think there was enough for an arrest. What about OJ? It is possible to separate opinion from what can be proven.
Innocent untill proven guilty is a legal standard, not an emotional one. It must be adhered to if youre a juror. It "should" be the citizens mindset too, but good luck there....
Tgace
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Jul 31, 2003
- Messages
- 7,766
- Reaction score
- 409
Just to see if I was way off base I googled "bear false witness" to see what I could find. I think Im pretty close...intentional lying with the intent to harm another.
http://www.uurockford.org/sermons/s96-11rpt.htm
http://www.uurockford.org/sermons/s96-11rpt.htm
michaeledward
Grandmaster
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,063
- Reaction score
- 82
Tgace ... while normally, just about everything you say offends me (and I am sure the reverse is true too), in this case, I think we are pretty much on the same side.
I have noticed that you have not claimed the woman was raped. But it we look at the title of the thread, that claim was made right out of the blocks. Claiming "rape", when not substantiated, is, in my unenlighted point of view, 'bearing false witness' ... somebody has got a hair across his or her *** and wants to plunge the needle deeper, faster.
I have also noticed that you have not made a 'kill him' statement or pre-judgement. However, there are statements on this thread about how it is unfortunate we can't "get a rope" and hang him. Further, his execution would be "justice delayed". Apparently some are impatient for justice.
And, I love the fact we are now turning to the Unitarian Universalist church for guidance on the 10 Commandments. I especially like this quote from the third paragraph:
I wonder how our fundamentalist friends would view that statement... the 10 commandments are not divinely inspired .... <chuckle> .... priceless.
Yes, the 'False Witness' extends to the court of law, as the surmon states, that is widely accepted. But there are other, deeper meanings too. Of course, I don't want to get into a 'meaning or scripture' debate because we can always find links that trump each other ... but a quick look found this ... By MARTIN LUTHER (I am thinking this is from THE Martin Luther)
http://www.peacemakers.net/peace/notbarefalsewitness.htm
I have noticed that you have not claimed the woman was raped. But it we look at the title of the thread, that claim was made right out of the blocks. Claiming "rape", when not substantiated, is, in my unenlighted point of view, 'bearing false witness' ... somebody has got a hair across his or her *** and wants to plunge the needle deeper, faster.
I have also noticed that you have not made a 'kill him' statement or pre-judgement. However, there are statements on this thread about how it is unfortunate we can't "get a rope" and hang him. Further, his execution would be "justice delayed". Apparently some are impatient for justice.
And, I love the fact we are now turning to the Unitarian Universalist church for guidance on the 10 Commandments. I especially like this quote from the third paragraph:
It is clearly not now, nor has it ever been my intention to suggest that the commandments are the products of a divinely inspired supernatural act which resulted in a set of immutable laws to which we should submit.
Yes, the 'False Witness' extends to the court of law, as the surmon states, that is widely accepted. But there are other, deeper meanings too. Of course, I don't want to get into a 'meaning or scripture' debate because we can always find links that trump each other ... but a quick look found this ... By MARTIN LUTHER (I am thinking this is from THE Martin Luther)
http://www.peacemakers.net/peace/notbarefalsewitness.htm
to avoid this vice we should note that no one is allowed publicly to judge and reprove his neighbor, although he may see him sin, unless he have a command to judge and to reprove. For there is a great difference between these two things, judging sin and knowing sin. You may indeed know it, but you are not to judge it. I can indeed see and hear that my neighbor sins, but I have no command to report it to others. Now, if I rush in, judging and passing sentence, I fall into a sin which is greater than his. But if you know it, do nothing else than turn your ears into a grave and cover it, until you are appointed to be judge and to punish by virtue of your office.
Similar threads
