Selurcspi, thanks for the additional details. What I see in your details is substantially the same as the news reports, except your info has the dad being more aggressive initially and questions the initial 'lewd' act. That's all great and I don't doubt it one bit.

I'm going to go out on a limb with a slightly different 'what if' and say that I don't care if there was no initial abuse of the daughter and the dad was the initial aggressor without any provocation. For a group of 8 men to then beat the guy to near death is still inexcusable. Pull him off their friend... yep. Apply equivalent force to keep him from continuing aggression... sure. But to gang up and stomp on his head while he's lying there almost unconscious has no justification. No honorable human would go that far. These people have gang mentality and act like animals. They don't deserve to be in society. Ever again.

BB

Mark,

Have you ever been involved in some work or perhaps driving and you must complete the task in hand and not be deflected. When you see something happening that you could get involved in but your current task is more important? This was the situation for this staffer. The staffer was involved in other duties that could not be dropped, but had the presence of mind to make the radio call.
Your above post shows the exact thing that I'm trying to point out, by stating that "you would do X, Y or Z but you don't have all the facts to make that decision for yourself, let alone the individual involved.

My whole point in saying what I have said several times, most recently above, is that we (and I include myself) keyboard commandos talk big online, but because we are not privy to all of the details we type "so much garbage". We make these judgments in good faith from our comfortable chairs, but we're ill informed and not truly capable of placing ourselves in the situation and judging correctly.

Big Blue,

My personal feeling for the scumbags I will not publish online, but they are similar enough to yours that we are not walking in opposite directions down the same road on this one.
As I explained above, my comments are supposed to show that we’re making judgments without the facts, which is dangerous, not only in our own perception of these situations but it is possible that if we’re ever involved in a situation like this, some overzealous prosecutor could take our comments published here and twist them into something we never meant to say.

With that I will go back to work and leave this alone, if anyone want to take it any further please consider YOU WEREN’T THERE!

ETA - Selurcspi, PM sent. Honestly, no offense intended. I think you'll see why I'm wondering when you read the PM.

-Mark

Sure. Most people weren't there -- wherever there is -- when most things happen. And I, speaking for myself, am entirely willing to listen to any alternative narratives, backed up by information, about what supposedly happened at Valleyfair that day, and if you've got any information that you feel would persuade me that the conventional narrative is wrong -- not just incomplete; of course it's incomplete -- but wrong, feel free to share it.

And, if not, that's fine, too.

Unless I'm persuaded otherwise, though, I'll continue to think that the Valleyfair security folks did a lousy job that day, as evinced by the crippling beatdown in the parking lot. I guess I -- and they -- will just have to live with that.

I would just like to point out that this is the same thing said by soldiers and cops. It is interesting that when one has a more personal stake in a matter, how the defense of the response tends to turn to, "you weren't there". I am not necessarily criticizing, as that shoe certainly fits me as well.

Sure. On another matter, I've been doing a bit of that, myself -- although I'm neither -- on a minor thing, of late. So the shoe pinches many of us. And, unlike you, I am criticizing -- even though my finger has to, upon occasion, point back at myself.

And I don't even mind the "you weren't there," bit to attempt to explain a disagreement -- as opposed to justify behavior -- particlar when it's followed by something like the following: "I was, and while I can't explain to you why [whatever] because [reason that one can't explain], and I'll more than understand if you disagree with me on that, as I don't have any business trying to persuade you just by trying to dazzle you with the brilliant shine on my intellect and integrity."

or, "I'd love to talk about it, but I need to speak to my attorney, and I do not consent to any search."

In my defense I am a founding member of the elite 101st Fighting Keyboardists.

Quote from the judge, per the Star Trib

"You screw up on probation, I'm sending you [to prison] for the rest of the time," he said. "I don't care if it's a jaywalking ticket or spitting on the sidewalk. You're gonna be gone. That is not a threat. That is a promise that I am making to you."


We will have to wait and see. Maybe we will get lucky and they will break probation and go away for a while!

Any of the lawyers out there know if/when the court records of this case will be made available to the public?

So.......you're carrying, you're alone, and you see this guy being stomped by eight guys.

What you gonna do? Just walk away?

Myself Not exactly, I'll call the police as I walk away.

I carry for my family's protection, not yours or anyone else's, I feel other no obligations.

Hell, no. With my long-practiced draw stroke, I'll whip out my IPhone, and dial 911.

You and 100 other people.

Sure. On the other hand, a fair number of the folks who talk so bravely about what they would have done had they been at the Valleyfair thing might not have found themselves all that happy with the results of a shootout with the Evans family, which is what it easily could have turned into.

But, hey, if you want to look for opportunities to play hero, it's your choice.

Did I say I wanted to be a hero?

I just asked a question.

Okay, first and probably last warning: chill. You're either going to do that, step up your game beyond the jejeune, or be gone. Trust me.