Dumb White Guy Slaps the Wrong Woman

[Esmeralda]

Instead of believing this obviously biased report that sounds pretty fishy to begin with, like the rest of the drones in this thread, why don't you show some independent thinking and wait for the other side of the story? Maybe because you're the type who believes everyone is guilty until proven innocent?

You like to claim wisdom all the time, why don't you show some, or do you think you can make a judgement with only half the story?

So, the guy slaps a US judge and spits on her and you think that she is probably lying or that the guy was just having a NEGRO flashback?

Don't accuse me of being the type who believes everyone is guilty until proven innocent, because that could not BE any more wrong, sir.

Women falsely accuse men all the time, I get that. I seriously doubt that a US judge would put her career on the line just because a guy looked at her funny.

Also, I am not very quick to play the race card, I think most of the time, it's hogwash. In this case the guy made a racially based statement. It boils down to who I believe, the guy or the judge.

At this time, I'm going to avoid the X-mass rush and side with the judge, as I do not believe she would have concocted this.

Oh my: reason? It will probably have no impact with this crowd, but you are perfectly right -- a judge is not going to put her career or her reputation on the line for something like this.

 

[Esmeralda]

So the cigarette smoke had nothing to do with it? I don't know the whole story, but I'm keeping an open mind. Have you ever been in the nearby an impolite smoker? Ever jump to an incorrect conclusion?

I think the assumption the attacker jumped to was that an elder woman, perhaps especially an elderly black woman, would have no power, that he could smack her and say something racially insulting and nothing would happen to him because she's just an old black lady.

He jumped to an incorrect conclusion, and that is what this thread is about. Don't assume just because someone is black, or a woman, or old that they have no power.

You interpretation of what happen is very possible. However having power is not the same thing as truth. That is a small but reasonable possibility that this little old lady judge likes to push people around. Power corrupts you know!

And maybe the dude called the woman "Rosa Parks" because she looks like Rosa Parks.

Oh, come on, seriously? What does Rosa Parks look like? There are photos of her in history books, but she was a middle aged woman then and very ordinary looking, very nondescript. This woman, the one he hit, is almost 80 years old: I doubt, even if this guy knows what Parks looked like at 40, he would think an 80 year old woman resembled her

 

[BobPlumb]

I think the assumption the attacker jumped to was that an elder woman, perhaps especially an elderly black woman, would have no power, that he could smack her and say something racially insulting and nothing would happen to him because she's just an old black lady.

He jumped to an incorrect conclusion, and that is what this thread is about. Don't assume just because someone is black, or a woman, or old that they have no power.

You interpretation of what happen is very possible. However having power is not the same thing as truth. That is a small but reasonable possibility that this little old lady judge likes to push people around. Power corrupts you know!

And maybe the dude called the woman "Rosa Parks" because she looks like Rosa Parks.

Oh, come on, seriously? What does Rosa Parks look like? There are photos of her in history books, but she was a middle aged woman then and very ordinary looking, very nondiscript. This woman, the one he hit, is almost 80 years old: I doubt, even if this guy knows what Parks looked like at 40, he would think an 80 year old woman resembled her.

That is a good point. However I'm sticking to the notion that calling her Rosa Parks is not enough for the hate crime part.

1. The story says that they were arguing because he didn't like her smoking near him.
2. He got in her face and said something to the effect of "Rosa Parks" move and he spit in her face.
3. He turned and walked away. She follow so that he wouldn't get away calling for others to help. Then is when he turned and slapped her open handed.

So even according to story they were arguing because he was mad at her because she was smoking, not because she's black.

Did the guy spit on her on purpose or was it a case of spitting while talking angrily? Have you ever heard the phrase spitting mad?

When he was walking away, did she touch him? She was trying to stop him from leaving! Slapping her was a stupid thing to do, but the guy was leaving.

All I'm saying is there is another sided to the story. It shouldn't be case closed just because the lady is a judge. And calling a black lady Rosa Parks should not be enough to elevate an argument gone too far into a hate crime.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

You interpretation of what happen is very possible. However having power is not the same thing as truth. That is a small but reasonable possibility that this little old lady judge likes to push people around. Power corrupts you know!

And maybe the dude called the woman "Rosa Parks" because she looks like Rosa Parks.

Oh, come on, seriously? What does Rosa Parks look like? There are photos of her in history books, but she was a middle aged woman then and very ordinary looking, very nondiscript. This woman, the one he hit, is almost 80 years old: I doubt, even if this guy knows what Parks looked like at 40, he would think an 80 year old woman resembled her.

That is a good point. However I'm sticking to the notion that calling her Rosa Parks is not enough for the hate crime part.

1. The story says that they were arguing because he didn't like her smoking near him.
2. He got in her face and said something to the effect of "Rosa Parks" move and he spit in her face.
3. He turned and walked away. She follow so that he wouldn't get away calling for others to help. Then is when he turned and slapped her open handed.

So even according to story they were arguing because he was mad at her because she was smoking, not because she's black.

Did the guy spit on her on purpose or was it a case of spitting while talking angrily? Have you ever heard the phrase spitting mad?

When he was walking away, did she touch him? She was trying to stop him from leaving! Slapping her was a stupid thing to do, but the guy was leaving.

All I'm saying is there is another sided to the story. It shouldn't be case closed just because the lady is a judge. And calling a black lady Rosa Parks should not be enough to elevate an argument gone too far into a hate crime.

Some of these points are very good ones, Bob.

For example, his friends say that he's always a perfect gentlemen. Customers of his said that he is always nice and polite.

The fact that this was all over her smoking 'near' him leads me to think that maybe he just kind of snapped, though. If someone smokes too close to me, I just give them the quickly dissipating, half-smile as a polite reminder that I breath the same air that they do. It would be pretty rude for me to start something over that - especially regarding an elderly lady.

 

[Esmeralda]

You interpretation of what happen is very possible. However having power is not the same thing as truth. That is a small but reasonable possibility that this little old lady judge likes to push people around. Power corrupts you know!

And maybe the dude called the woman "Rosa Parks" because she looks like Rosa Parks.

Oh, come on, seriously? What does Rosa Parks look like? There are photos of her in history books, but she was a middle aged woman then and very ordinary looking, very nondiscript. This woman, the one he hit, is almost 80 years old: I doubt, even if this guy knows what Parks looked like at 40, he would think an 80 year old woman resembled her.

That is a good point. However I'm sticking to the notion that calling her Rosa Parks is not enough for the hate crime part.

1. The story says that they were arguing because he didn't like her smoking near him.
2. He got in her face and said something to the effect of "Rosa Parks" move and he spit in her face.
3. He turned and walked away. She follow so that he wouldn't get away calling for others to help. Then is when he turned and slapped her open handed.

So even according to story they were arguing because he was mad at her because she was smoking, not because she's black.

Did the guy spit on her on purpose or was it a case of spitting while talking angrily? Have you ever heard the phrase spitting mad?

When he was walking away, did she touch him? She was trying to stop him from leaving! Slapping her was a stupid thing to do, but the guy was leaving.

All I'm saying is there is another sided to the story. It shouldn't be case closed just because the lady is a judge. And calling a black lady Rosa Parks should not be enough to elevate an argument gone too far into a hate crime.

I'm not sure, but I think spitting on someone is considered assault. Whether it was just him 'spitting' mad, well, the court will decide that. Calling her Rosa Parks may indicate she was arguing her 'right' to smoke outside, and that is why he called her that: because she was arguing rights and because she is black. Using those words doesn't seem like a hate crime, but the implication that he was treating her a certain way shows racism. However, if he did not attack her because of her race, then it isn't a hate crime. The court will decide.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Does a criminal act go from a misdemeanor into a felony when a judge is the victim?

Assault and battery is not a misdemeanor. This woman was 79 years old. What kind of man spits on anyone? And what kind of man hits a 79 year old person? As well, he made a racist comment while doing so. Hate crime and assault and battery on an elderly person? Far more than a misdemeanor.

It is usually a misdemeanor, but the punishment can be up to 15 years.

1st degree assault is usually reserved for stabbings or severe beatings.

 

[BobPlumb]

Oh, come on, seriously? What does Rosa Parks look like? There are photos of her in history books, but she was a middle aged woman then and very ordinary looking, very nondiscript. This woman, the one he hit, is almost 80 years old: I doubt, even if this guy knows what Parks looked like at 40, he would think an 80 year old woman resembled her.

That is a good point. However I'm sticking to the notion that calling her Rosa Parks is not enough for the hate crime part.

1. The story says that they were arguing because he didn't like her smoking near him.
2. He got in her face and said something to the effect of "Rosa Parks" move and he spit in her face.
3. He turned and walked away. She follow so that he wouldn't get away calling for others to help. Then is when he turned and slapped her open handed.

So even according to story they were arguing because he was mad at her because she was smoking, not because she's black.

Did the guy spit on her on purpose or was it a case of spitting while talking angrily? Have you ever heard the phrase spitting mad?

When he was walking away, did she touch him? She was trying to stop him from leaving! Slapping her was a stupid thing to do, but the guy was leaving.

All I'm saying is there is another sided to the story. It shouldn't be case closed just because the lady is a judge. And calling a black lady Rosa Parks should not be enough to elevate an argument gone too far into a hate crime.

I'm not sure, but I think spitting on someone is considered assault. Whether it was just him 'spitting' mad, well, the court will decide that. Calling her Rosa Parks may indicate she was arguing her 'right' to smoke outside, and that is why he called her that: because she was arguing rights and because she is black. Using those words doesn't seem like a hate crime, but the implication that he was treating her a certain way shows racism. However, if he did not attack her because of her race, then it isn't a hate crime. The court will decide.

And the court will hear both sides, if it goes that far. The article linked in the OP is clearly one sided. That one side may be the gospel truth........but then again, perhaps not.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

That is a good point. However I'm sticking to the notion that calling her Rosa Parks is not enough for the hate crime part.

1. The story says that they were arguing because he didn't like her smoking near him.
2. He got in her face and said something to the effect of "Rosa Parks" move and he spit in her face.
3. He turned and walked away. She follow so that he wouldn't get away calling for others to help. Then is when he turned and slapped her open handed.

So even according to story they were arguing because he was mad at her because she was smoking, not because she's black.

Did the guy spit on her on purpose or was it a case of spitting while talking angrily? Have you ever heard the phrase spitting mad?

When he was walking away, did she touch him? She was trying to stop him from leaving! Slapping her was a stupid thing to do, but the guy was leaving.

All I'm saying is there is another sided to the story. It shouldn't be case closed just because the lady is a judge. And calling a black lady Rosa Parks should not be enough to elevate an argument gone too far into a hate crime.

I'm not sure, but I think spitting on someone is considered assault. Whether it was just him 'spitting' mad, well, the court will decide that. Calling her Rosa Parks may indicate she was arguing her 'right' to smoke outside, and that is why he called her that: because she was arguing rights and because she is black. Using those words doesn't seem like a hate crime, but the implication that he was treating her a certain way shows racism. However, if he did not attack her because of her race, then it isn't a hate crime. The court will decide.

And the court will hear both sides, if it goes that far. The article linked in the OP is clearly one sided. That one sided may be the gospel truth........but then again, perhaps not.

And that should always be the case. Fortunately, I'm not on jury this week, so my opinion has no meaning other than being my humble 2 cents.

I will offer it up, but who really knows?

Would not be the first time a mountain got made out of a mole hill.

 

[BobPlumb]

I'm not sure, but I think spitting on someone is considered assault. Whether it was just him 'spitting' mad, well, the court will decide that. Calling her Rosa Parks may indicate she was arguing her 'right' to smoke outside, and that is why he called her that: because she was arguing rights and because she is black. Using those words doesn't seem like a hate crime, but the implication that he was treating her a certain way shows racism. However, if he did not attack her because of her race, then it isn't a hate crime. The court will decide.

And the court will hear both sides, if it goes that far. The article linked in the OP is clearly one sided. That one sided may be the gospel truth........but then again, perhaps not.

And that should always be the case. Fortunately, I'm not on jury this week, so my opinion has no meaning other than being my humble 2 cents.

I will offer it up, but who really knows?

Would not be the first time a mountain got made out of a mole hill.

You got that right.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Oh boy, another race baiting thread from Assracist. If the guy had been black, and the woman judge white, he probably would have beaten her into a coma. Then Al Sharpton would have staged a protest and Jesse Jackson would have launched a legal defense fund drive, both claiming he was a victim of white racist prosecution.

The facts of the matter show that the white guy was a racist coward for striking and spitting on this beautiful, influential, elderly, Black woman. Thats one of the main reasons he has a 90K bond. If he had been black then that would be another thread. You two must be know each other as you both are cowardly. Surely he would not have done this to Black man.

Beautiful? So you're into old ladies?
I'm sure there's a name for this particular fetish...

 

[Asclepias]

You are discussing hate crime with me. Just can't help yourself can you? Apparently you do care what I think, otherwise you would just move along.

No I'm telling you what you think has no relevance on the law. I care enough to inform you about that.

But you said that no one cares what I think! You can't have it both ways.

Do you think people shouldn't discuss things they can't change? That would really limit what people discuss!

I've read your post enough to know what you are trying to do....be a rude asshole. And you are doing a great job of that.

Yes I can have it both ways. Thats why I told you I was clarifying my remark and you still missed it. No one with the power to prosecute this coward cares what you think. The law is already in affect. Nothing you say here can change that as you pointed out yourself. You are powerless.

 

[BobPlumb]

No I'm telling you what you think has no relevance on the law. I care enough to inform you about that.

But you said that no one cares what I think! You can't have it both ways.

Do you think people shouldn't discuss things they can't change? That would really limit what people discuss!

I've read your post enough to know what you are trying to do....be a rude asshole. And you are doing a great job of that.

Yes I can have it both ways. Thats why I told you I was clarifying my remark and you still missed it. No one with the power to prosecute this coward cares what you think. The law is already in affect. Nothing you say here can change that as you pointed out yourself. You are powerless.

Just as powerless as you are.

 

[Asclepias]

Oh boy, another race baiting thread from Assracist. If the guy had been black, and the woman judge white, he probably would have beaten her into a coma. Then Al Sharpton would have staged a protest and Jesse Jackson would have launched a legal defense fund drive, both claiming he was a victim of white racist prosecution.

The facts of the matter show that the white guy was a racist coward for striking and spitting on this beautiful, influential, elderly, Black woman. Thats one of the main reasons he has a 90K bond. If he had been black then that would be another thread. You two must be know each other as you both are cowardly. Surely he would not have done this to Black man.

Beautiful? So you're into old ladies?
I'm sure there's a name for this particular fetish...

Projecting I see. Funny you think of fetishes when you hear "old lady"? What prompted you to associate "fetish" with this? Be specific....if you can.

 

[Tank]

Young negros are raping and killing old white women everyday.

 

[Asclepias]

But you said that no one cares what I think! You can't have it both ways.

Do you think people shouldn't discuss things they can't change? That would really limit what people discuss!

I've read your post enough to know what you are trying to do....be a rude asshole. And you are doing a great job of that.

Yes I can have it both ways. Thats why I told you I was clarifying my remark and you still missed it. No one with the power to prosecute this coward cares what you think. The law is already in affect. Nothing you say here can change that as you pointed out yourself. You are powerless.

Just as powerless as you are.

Not really. I was not the one debating the merits of the law. My power lies with the judge.

 

[Mad_Cabbie]

Young negros are raping and killing old white women everyday.

No I'm not, I'm busy driving a cab.

 

[BobPlumb]

Yes I can have it both ways. Thats why I told you I was clarifying my remark and you still missed it. No one with the power to prosecute this coward cares what you think. The law is already in affect. Nothing you say here can change that as you pointed out yourself. You are powerless.

Just as powerless as you are.

Not really. I was not the one debating the merits of the law. My power lies with the judge.

The judge doesn't even know that you exist. No one in power cares any more what you think than they care about what I think. Does that stop either of us from discussing the case on USBD? Of course not. You remark needed no clarification as that it was irrelevant. There was no suggestion I believed I had any power over the outcome of this case.

I've been responding to your attempts to aggravate because I find you amusing. Have a nice day!

 

[Asclepias]

Just as powerless as you are.

Not really. I was not the one debating the merits of the law. My power lies with the judge.

The judge doesn't even know that you exist. No one in power cares any more what you think than they care about what I think. Does that stop either of us from discussing the case on USBD? Of course not. You remark needed no clarification as that it was irrelevant. There was no suggestion I believed I had any power over the outcome of this case.

I've been responding to your attempts to aggravate because I find you amusing. Have a nice day!

Yeah she does know me. I've worked with her in the past and she has spoken at a one of my organizations functions. Again I was not telling you not to discuss it. I was telling you that no one with power cared what you thought about the law already in place.

 

[Tank]

Yeah she does know me. I've worked with her in the past and she has spoken at a one of my organizations functions.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

If it really went down like the judge said? I would have paid to be there to see the look on the guys face when he found out he slapped a judge.

Talk about your Homer Simpson moment. Doh!!