Crime Headlining Crime Megathread Vol 4.

[Broke Lester]

You seem to be misunderstanding me. I wanted to know if this is indeed a problem and not just something right wingers grabbed on to. Like when I go to China most people are happy and want to stay there but Charlie Kirk says everyone wants out. Sometimes these incidents are far more rare than we imagine and it might not be something people there think is a problem that’s all I’m saying. I just want to know how widespread it is

I understand there is a problem, and you’re trying to put a right wing face on it. But yes it’s all the Swedish right wingers doing the complaining, I mean, after all the lefties are bomb proof, nothing to worry about. Mostly likely it’s an imported in-fighting incident.

 

[IamStryker]

Nope, moving their car isn't stealing it. Stealing requires an intent to keep it or to not return it.

So as long as you return it you never stole it lol. Brilliant.

Moving it to prevent the assaulter from escaping the police would be considered justified. Obviously, you don't believe them but if that's their claim, it's a defensible one.

It's really weird you are so immediately wanting to defend the killers here. Did you post this thinking that really might have happened? The "assaulters" as you are calling them were calling 911 trying to save their friend. Those poor people just defending themselves moved the car preventing driving the beaten up kid to the hospital and then fled the scene themselves and had to be tracked down. So the moronic argument that they moved it to prevent the "assaulters" from leaving was pulled right from that posters ass.

 

[IamStryker]

You already answered my questions, no point changing it now.

I asked you what they knew. You acknowledged, indirectly, that they didn't know these things.

If you're going to change your position to saying that they knew with certainty these things, please source it. Short of that, I'll stick with your initial responses where they didn't know.

Derp. They knew it was liquid from a toy gun. They couldn't have known exactly what liquid.

 

[panamaican]

So as long as you return it you never stole it lol. Brilliant.

Lol, tell me that you can't understand what you've read without telling me that can't understand what you've read.

Intent. It's a pretty basic component of criminal law, it is not the same thing as "action". I'll give you an introductory example. If I take your tennis racket with the intent of returning it, it's not stealing (might be another crime though). If I take it with the intention of keeping it, it's stealing, even if I bring it back later. Intent.

It's really weird you are so immediately wanting to defend the killers here. Did you post this thinking that really might have happened? The "assaulters" as you are calling them were calling 911 trying to save their friend. Those poor people just defending themselves moved the car preventing driving the beaten up kid to the hospital and then fled the scene themselves and had to be tracked down. So the moronic argument that they moved it to prevent the "assaulters" from leaving was pulled right from that posters ass.

I'm not defending the killers. I'm outlining how the law looks at the situation. Not how your feelings look at it. They said that they moved it to keep the people from leaving the scene. Don't you read your own links?

The really weird thing is that you seem to believe that the individual who assaulted complete strangers, who were minding their own business, is somehow the victim of a series of events that he initiated.

 

[panamaican]

Derp. They knew it was liquid from a toy gun. They couldn't have known exactly what liquid.

Which is what I asked -- did they know what they were being shot with? Your answer then and your answer now: No, they didn't know what they were being shot with.

Is the derp for yourself?

 

[IamStryker]

Lol, tell me that you can't understand what you've read without telling me that can't understand what you've read.

Intent. It's a pretty basic component of criminal law, it is not the same thing as "action". I'll give you an introductory example. If I take your tennis racket with the intent of returning it, it's not stealing (might be another crime though). If I take it with the intention of keeping it, it's stealing, even if I bring it back later. Intent.

You are trying to argue that if I get into someone's car and move it, let's say down the street, then I didn't steal it while I was driving it. That is retarded and you know it. I don't care what crime that might technically fall under. It's still stealing.

I'm not defending the killers. I'm outlining how the law looks at the situation. Not how your feelings look at it. They said that they moved it to keep the people from leaving the scene. Don't you read your own links?

They fled the scene themselves and had to be tracked down to be arrested. Why would you bring up such a nonsensical lie?

The really weird thing is that you seem to believe that the individual who assaulted complete strangers, who were minding their own business, is somehow the victim of a series of events that he initiated.

The kid who was murdered was the victim and it shows your character that you think otherwise.

 

[panamaican]

You are trying to argue that if I get into someone's car and move it, let's say down the street, then I didn't steal it while I was driving it. That is retarded and you know it. I don't care what crime that might technically fall under. It's still stealing.

We're not discussing legal issues anymore?

They fled the scene themselves and had to be tracked down to be arrested. Why would you bring up such a nonsensical lie?

That has nothing to do with why they said they moved the car. I see that you're struggling with the idea that 2 things can both be true.

The kid who was murdered was the victim and it shows your character that you think otherwise.

No one was murdered, lol. Get off your emotional roller coaster, you're just embarrassing yourself.

 

[Zazen]

I understand there is a problem, and you’re trying to put a right wing face on it. But yes it’s all the Swedish right wingers doing the complaining, I mean, after all the lefties are bomb proof, nothing to worry about. Mostly likely it’s an imported in-fighting incident.

I meant Americans.

 

[IamStryker]

Which is what I asked -- did they know what they were being shot with? Your answer then and your answer now: No, they didn't know what they were being shot with.

Is the derp for yourself?

They had information. Just not all of it. Obviously what I was saying.

 

[panamaican]

They had information. Just not all of it. Obviously what I was saying.

So they didn't know -- if they lack all of the relevant information then they can't know.

The question was straightforward. Your answer is equally straightforward.

 

[IamStryker]

We're not discussing legal issues anymore?

Some of it is legal and some is our takes on it. The point is you know it's still a crime to take what doesn't belong to you which most of us call "stealing".

That has nothing to do with why they said they moved the car. I see that you're struggling with the idea that 2 things can both be true.

The idea you take that BS seriously says a lot about you. They beat this kid unconcious stomping on his body and then fled the scene so they wouldn't be caught by police but you think when they moved the car they were worried about the other two WHO WERE CALLING 911 running from police? Yeah they were so concerned about that lol.

No one was murdered, lol. Get off your emotional roller coaster, you're just embarrassing yourself.

Oh but you are just explaining law and not defending them lol. You are a joke.

 

[IamStryker]

So they didn't know -- if they lack all of the relevant information then they can't know.

The question was straightforward. Your answer is equally straightforward.

It's relevant what they did know. Obviously.

 

[panamaican]

It's relevant what they did know. Obviously.

horrible reading comprehension.

 

[IamStryker]

horrible reading comprehension.

Yours is pretty bad.

 

[panamaican]

Some of it is legal and some is our takes on it. The point is you know it's still a crime to take what doesn't belong to you which most of us call "stealing".



The idea you take that BS seriously says a lot about you. They beat this kid unconcious stomping on his body and then fled the scene so they wouldn't be caught by police but you think when they moved the car they were worried about the other two WHO WERE CALLING 911 running from police? Yeah they were so concerned about that lol.



Oh but you are just explaining law and not defending them lol. You are a joke.

I see that dealing with the law upsets you when it runs contrary to your emotional outbursts. It's not surprising.

 

[panamaican]

Yours is pretty bad.

lol.

 

[IamStryker]

I see that dealing with the law upsets you when it runs contrary to your emotional outbursts. It's not surprising.

I'm sure "the law" is why you are desperately trying to defend the killers here.

 

[Broke Lester]

I meant Americans.

Spoiler

 

[oldshadow]

It was a 3 on 1 fight where they knocked him out and then stomped on him and broke his neck and left shoe imprints on his chest after he was unconscious, then stole his car so his friends couldn't take him to the hospital. Not quite a minor scuffle and an accident.

Then I misunderstood the situation as I thought it was he was punched and fell and hit his head.

 

[Source]

Then I misunderstood the situation as I thought it was he was punched and fell and hit his head.

He had a broken Occipital bone, not a broken neck. As far as I have read it was considered a result of the fall not from being stomped.


https://www.cleveland19.com/2022/06...s-stomped-had-fractured-skull/?outputType=amp