Crime Eric Clanton, Antifa "Professor Bike Lock" Attacker Arrested!

Not in my experience, unless you call conspiracy theorists "the left".
Big difference between calling someone a Nazi or a fascist and accusing them of rape or assault though.
The difference between mischaracterising their beliefs, and accusing them of a crime.
No most conspiracy theorists are right wing nut jobs in my experience.
As to the bolded statement no there isn't I have been called a Nazi/Alt right person on these very boards (I'm Hebrew/Australian/mongrel) it's used as a way to slander and smear people and to lump us all together with extremists.
And it is always the Leftists who do it.
 
http://www.dvc.edu/directory/profiles/clanton-eric/index.html

"Eric has been teaching at DVC since 2015. He teaches introduction to philosophy with a background in teaching ethics, critical thinking, and comparative philosophy East/West. His primary research interests are ethics and politics. His work in political philosophy also centers on mass incarceration and the prison system. He is currently exploring restorative justice from an anti-authoritarian perspective."
 
No most conspiracy theorists are right wing nut jobs in my experience.
As to the bolded statement no there isn't I have been called a Nazi/Alt right person on these very boards (I'm Hebrew/Australian/mongrel) it's used as a way to slander and smear people and to lump us all together with extremists.
And it is always the Leftists who do it.

I guess you missed that whole phase of Hitler comparisons from the right and the argument that the Nazis were leftists. Glenn Beck used it extensively.
Pretty meaningless in my opinion though, the basis for "Godwin's Law". Likewise with "fascist". Hyperbole.
Far different from accusing people of rape, assault, pedophilia etc.
 
That first guy though..

"Back the fuck up or i'll treat you like a man"
 
That was a great story. I can't verify if they actually found the "secret" location with their "weaponized autism" or not, but if they did, it goes to show the power of numbers. When you get hundreds of people putting their minds into one endeavor you get some tower of Babel type stuff.

"weaponized autism" - lmao
 
They must have run out of coloring books and puppies and he felt left out!
 
It's a shame the bike lock attacker didn't get his head caved in with a flag pole at the event.
 
Those nerds have pretty crazy electronic detective skills. Didn't they find Shia Leboef's "secret location" in bumfuck, Tennessee by checking contrails and flight times, then finding a diner, then had a guy honk his horn around the area until it was audible on the stream, then found the "he will not divide us" flag in a field and replaced it with a MAGA tee-shirt?
They just found him again in Finland. <43>
 
I wasn't disputing what @oldshadow was saying in any way, the spirit of the post was identical to his, it's just a vocabulary thing.

In AZ it would be Aggravated Assault with a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument in one sentence.

13-1204. Aggravated assault; classification; definitions

A. A person commits aggravated assault if the person commits assault as prescribed by section 13-1203 under any of the following circumstances:

2. If the person uses a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument.

The difference would be a deadly weapon was designed for the purpose of harm, while a dangerous implement would be something used while doing harm, but its original purpose was for something else, like a baseball bat to play baseball with.

There are times when you legally have to tell police if you have a deadly weapon such as a traffic stop. If you had a crowbar, a bat, and wanderlei silva under your seat and police found out, they might not be happy, but they couldn't charge you just for that.

I'd like to see a tuba murder.

lol at a tuba. Hard to sneak up on somebody with one of those. :)

But yeah, I was just wondering what weapons weren't considered "deadly" when used in an attack or whatever.
 
They just found him again in Finland. <43>

Yeah, I went there and did the "Nelson Haha!" to him.

latest
 
If that really is the guy and they can prove it somehow, I hope he gets convicted of something that puts him in jail for at least 10 years. The idea of somebody hiding in a crowd, masked, and coming out to whack a guy on the skull is infuriating to me. I have a visceral reaction to seeing stuff like that, it's so incredibly cowardly and dangerous.

I wonder if they could put an attempted murder charge on him. Assault with a deadly weapon at least. Those bike locks are no joke. May as well have cracked him in the skull with an aluminum baseball bat.
 
I wonder if they could put an attempted murder charge on him. Assault with a deadly weapon at least. Those bike locks are no joke. May as well have cracked him in the skull with an aluminum baseball bat.

Can't imagine a responsible jury convicting him on that. Where's the evidence of intent?
 
Can't imagine a responsible jury convicting him on that. Where's the evidence of intent?

I don't know how these things work, I'm not a lawyer or anything. But I think they try to pick charges that will actually stick, instead of going for the highest possible charge. So if they look at their evidence and decide to go for attempted murder, it would have to be because they truly think they have the evidence to support it.

To me, it sounds like assault with a deadly weapon is the charge that most closely fits this situation. I just read a bit about it, out of curiosity, and it seems to describe this situation perfectly. In Maryland, that can put you in jail anywhere from 3-25 years.
 
I wonder if they could put an attempted murder charge on him. Assault with a deadly weapon at least. Those bike locks are no joke. May as well have cracked him in the skull with an aluminum baseball bat.

Heck, I remember in the board game Clue, they had horseshoes and candlesticks act as murder weapons. If those in the jury played that game, then sure why not.
 
Can't imagine a responsible jury convicting him on that. Where's the evidence of intent?

I'm no lawyer, but I would imagine intent would also come down to what weapon you were using, as well as where you were aiming it. He was clearly going for the head, and if the weapon is deadly, I think you could argue intent to kill.
 
I'm no lawyer, but I would imagine intent would also come down to what weapon you were using, as well as where you were aiming it. He was clearly going for the head, and if the weapon is deadly, I think you could argue intent to kill.

The possibility of the result isn't necessarily intent. People can easily argue how someone could be killed by a single blow here, but I doubt anyone would expect that outcome. The guy took one swipe and ran. Had he laid an extended beatdown on the victim and didn't stop until being ripped away then I could see it.
 
I'm no lawyer, but I would imagine intent would also come down to what weapon you were using, as well as where you were aiming it. He was clearly going for the head, and if the weapon is deadly, I think you could argue intent to kill.
There's mens rea and actus rea. Actus rea is the actual act.. mens rea is the mental capacity/intent.

He could probably get dinged with a Class A assault with a dangerous weapon type charge.
 
I'm all for this guy getting life in prison (if it's him). I can't fathom how a college professor who is versed in philosophy and ethics, who teaches about equality, can go around assaulting unsuspecting victims with a metal pipe- not once, but multiple times- for absolutely no reason. No way this guy should be walking around with civilized society, and he knows that.
 
Back
Top