You are on page 1of 122

08-20-2009, 08:45 PM

Join Date: Jul 2008


Posts: 123
PithHelmeteer Thanks: 10
Junior Member Thanked 129 Times in 43 Posts

Disturbing video of "Mentally Challenged Man Beaten to Death" by karate blackbelt

Near the end of this video is pretty brutal, so be warned. This has hit the internet recently and is
making a lot of waves. It's from 1984. Make no mistake about the type of world we live in.

**Mod note** Youtube has removed the video, here's an alternative link:
LiveLeak

The side of the Youtube video had this to say:

"In a shocking discovery, this brutal and graphic video has just not been posted to the internet.
It is a video supposedly taken from December of 1984 in which Bobby J Blythe, a karate
"master instructs his student to brutally beat an individual who is seriously mentally ill. This
man was later discovered dead in a dumpster and Blythe was never charged."

Last edited by SOLIDUS; Yesterday at 02:08 AM.. Reason: Please see mod note.

PithHelmeteer
View Public Profile
Send a private message to PithHelmeteer
Find all posts by PithHelmeteer
Add PithHelmeteer to Your Contacts

#2
08-20-2009, 08:56 PM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 184
Your Funeral Thanks: 52
Junior Member Thanked 150 Times in 62 Posts

Thats disgusting to say the least. Handicapped or not someone should have stepped in. I can't
imagine how those bastards that just stood there could go to sleep at night knowing they let that
guy get beaten down like that. I almost couldn't even finish the video because its so infuriating.

I hope they find those pieces of **** and put everyone of them on trial. Thats ****ing
despicable.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r

S
a
y
s

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

Y
o
u
r

F
u
n
e
r
a
l

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

S3S33R
#3
08-20-2009, 08:58 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
anchorbanger Location: VA
Squiddus Maximus Retired Posts: 1,157
Thanks: 1,051
Thanked 811 Times in 425 Posts

Pretty sick.... Good thing the statute of limitations doesn't apply to murder. I hope they nail
him.
__________________
"You have enemies?
Good, it means you stood up for something you believe in"

"People and nations are forged in the fires of adversity" J. Adams.

#4
08-20-2009, 08:59 PM
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Florida
letsgetreal Posts: 1,089
Realist Thanks: 468
Thanked 302 Times in 219 Posts

Didn't show vid....says I have to sign in or up, which I won't do....oh well.
#5
08-20-2009, 09:01 PM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 123
PithHelmeteer Thanks: 10
Junior Member Thanked 129 Times in 43 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Your Funeral


Thats disturbing to say the least. Handicapped or not someone should have stepped in. I can't
imagine how those bastards that just stood there could go to sleep at night knowing they let
that guy get beaten down like that. I couldn't even finish the video because its too infuriating.

Well at the end the guy gets his head stomped against a concrete floor and you can clearly see
blood oozing out. There seems to be some debate online as to whether he lived or not.
Regardless, it illustrates what can happen to you if you find your self surrounded by unfriendlies.
This is the kind of stuff that happens daily in prisons, schools, street corners, living rooms, etc.
it's very sad.

By the way I was going to embed the video but was unable to. Are we still allowed to? Maybe
I'm missing something.

Last edited by PithHelmeteer; 08-20-2009 at 09:13 PM..


#6
08-20-2009, 09:17 PM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 184
Your Funeral Thanks: 52
Junior Member Thanked 150 Times in 62 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by PithHelmeteer


Well at the end the guy gets his head stomped against a concrete floor and you can clearly see
blood oozing out. There seems to be some debate online as to whether he lived or not.
Regardless, it illustrates what can happen to you if you find your self surrounded by
unfriendlies. This is the kind of stuff that happens daily in prisons, schools, street corners,
living rooms, etc. it's very sad.

By the way I was going to embed the video but was able to. Are we still allowed to? Maybe I'm
missing something.
I ended up watching it and modifying my original post. I understand stuff like this happens but
these guys should have known better. In my mind I just couldn't stand around and watch a fellow
human get his head stomped in and dragged out like an animal. There is no way I would be able
to sleep if I turned my cheek to something like that and I can't believe not one of them had the
integrity, compassion, honor, or balls to step in.
I just can't fathom how those people would stand around and do nothing much less film it!? I've
trained in various martial arts since I was a child and this behavior goes against everything I was
ever taught. I love a good fair fight and I even enjoy participating in a good fair fight, but when
someone has had enough and the victor doesn't stop someone should intervene. These men have
no honor and I hope they get whats coming to them.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to


Your Funeral For This Useful Post:
2012, Highlander, monet108
Your Funeral
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Your Funeral
Find all posts by Your Funeral
Add Your Funeral to Your Contacts

#7
08-20-2009, 09:24 PM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 123
PithHelmeteer Thanks: 10
Junior Member Thanked 129 Times in 43 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Your Funeral


I ended up watching it and modifying my original post. I understand stuff like this happens
but these guys should have known better. In my mind I just couldn't stand around and watch
a fellow human get his head stomped in and dragged out like an animal. There is no way I
would be able to sleep if I turned my cheek to something like that and I can't believe not one
of them had the integrity, compassion, honor, or balls to step in.
I just can't fathom how those people would stand around and do nothing much less film it!?
I've trained in various martial arts since I was a child and this behavior goes against
everything I was ever taught. I love a good fair fight and I even enjoy participating in a good
fair fight, but when someone has had enough and the victor doesn't stop someone should
intervene. These men have no honor and I hope they get whats coming to them.
My thoughts exactly. Like it or not, I'm sure this kind of violence is a daily occurrence. The
little articles we read in the newspaper about such things really don't tell the story that well. A
picture is a worth a thousand words. Videos like this are worth millions.

#8
08-20-2009, 10:32 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Florida
BJJ_Grappler Posts: 1,997
A Founders' Patriot Thanks: 811
Thanked 1,432 Times in 665 Posts

I bet the karate black belt felt like he was the 'man'. what a ****ing idiot. he continued to NECK
stomp him after he was unconscious. this was NOT a street fight.

#9
08-20-2009, 10:40 PM
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: South Texas
Henrygt Posts: 230
HOPE4BEST&PREP4WORST Thanks: 67
Thanked 103 Times in 69 Posts

In my opinion the killer and his accomplises are more mentally ill that the victim. Those are
some sick, inferiority complex suffering scum buckets.

#10
08-20-2009, 10:44 PM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 797
Hatch Thanks: 88
Trapper Thanked 517 Times in 281 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by BJJ_Grappler


I bet the karate black belt felt like he was the 'man'. what a ****ing idiot. he continued to
NECK stomp him after he was unconscious. this was NOT a street fight.
Yep!

Not to mention every dojo I have ever been a student at has taught that discipline is rule #1, not
pounding down some idjit, and one time while in a gym, a mom and pop shop, some krazy
freakin dude came in yelling about wanting to make sure the weights were of proper
"calibration"...

nobody beat him to death.

That video we just saw was murder. 2nd degree.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to


Hatch For This Useful Post:
monet108, S3S33R
Hatch
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Hatch
Find all posts by Hatch
Add Hatch to Your Contacts

#11
08-20-2009, 10:48 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Florida
BJJ_Grappler Posts: 1,997
A Founders' Patriot Thanks: 811
Thanked 1,432 Times in 665 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatch


Yep!

Not to mention every dojo I have ever been a student at has taught that discipline is rule #1,
not pounding down some idjit, and one time while in a gym, a mom and pop shop, some
krazy freakin dude came in yelling about wanting to make sure the weights were of proper
"calibration"...

nobody beat him to death.

That video we just saw was murder. 2nd degree.

I have been sparring at different dojos / training halls for years and every once in a while you
run across a guy like the one in the white gi. Thinks he is bruce lee incarnate and he has to
prove it to everyone. Usually those type of people are very insecure and not anywhere near as
good as they claim/think they are. Those people have the potential to end up comitting the
same type of offense and they have NO business being trained how to fight.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r

S
a
y
s

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

B
J
J
_
G
r
a
p
p
l
e
r

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

monet108

#12
08-20-2009, 11:39 PM
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 270
S3S33R Thanks: 1,003
333 Member Thanked 183 Times in 107 Posts

Absolutely Sickening.

It is safe to say that what occurred in that video is humanity at it's worst. How a person kill
another human being, let alone in that fashion, is beyond me. Absolutely disgusting and I hope
the people involved, yes, even those who did nothing to help him, have never forgotten what
has occurred and have lived a life in a personal hell. Then again, those sick people probably

didn't care that a life was lost.


#13
Yesterday, 12:00 AM
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: My bunker
Posts: 100
TippmanPaintball Thanks: 267
Junior Member Thanked 57 Times in 19 Posts

that is a disgrace to both the American and Japanese flags hanging on the wall.

#14
Yesterday, 12:32 AM
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Heartland of Idaho
DaggerD Posts: 243
Recent Blog: My Tanzanian Top Bar Hive Thanks: 67
Junior Member Thanked 186 Times in 77 Posts

I watched this video a second ago and then when I went to look at it again it said,"This video has
been removed due to terms of use violation"/ What's up with that?

What was disturbing was how fast they drug the body out. Nobody even attempted to see if they
could help him, they just pulled him out into the alley as fast as they could. And then the way the
guy was talking about the blood trail....f-ing disgrace to humanity.

The Following User Says Thank You to


DaggerD For This Useful Post:
Highlander
DaggerD
View Public Profile
Send a private message to DaggerD
Find all posts by DaggerD
Add DaggerD to Your Contacts

#15
Yesterday, 12:45 AM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 797
Hatch Thanks: 88
Trapper Thanked 517 Times in 281 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by TippmanPaintball


that is a disgrace to both the American and Japanese flags hanging on the wall.
No it's not. It's a damn shame they are displayed in a brazen display of homicide, but it's a
tribute to a society that allows people to post videos, try that in China, NK, etc etc...

It's not the fault of the US or Japanese citizens or governments this happened or that their flags
were portrayed. It is a problem with the sicko's that participated in this video, and they should
all be incarcerated for manslaughter at the minimum. If the camera suddenly dropped and you
saw a guy running to stop the guy in the white gi, I'd say okay... he doesnt go to prison, but that
doesn't happen does it.

Dont blame guns, flags, cars, etc etc etc... none of that makes anything happen. I blame
PEOPLE. A person killed that person. At least 2 others were watching and allowed it to
happen.

It may be unpopular in Kommiefornia but I believe in accountability.


Yesterday, 12:50 AM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 797
Hatch Thanks: 88
Trapper Thanked 517 Times in 281 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by BJJ_Grappler


I have been sparring at different dojos / training halls for years and every once in a while
you run across a guy like the one in the white gi. Thinks he is bruce lee incarnate and he has
to prove it to everyone. Usually those type of people are very insecure and not anywhere near
as good as they claim/think they are. Those people have the potential to end up comitting the
same type of offense and they have NO business being trained how to fight.
reminds me of someone who showed up claiming to be a brown belt from a dojo I had
previously trained at (although many years before) and the sensei told me to test him.

I defeated him by stomping my foot, he looked down at it, and then I took him apart in about 2
seconds. Needless to say, he was learning kata with white belts for about a week or two before
he disappeared.

Hatch
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Hatch
Find all posts by Hatch
Add Hatch to Your Contacts

#17
Yesterday, 06:47 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322
2009 Posts
Survival of the Wittest Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 3

From a prosecutor's point of view there's no criminal case here. The man in street clothes
started a fight that by his action he pressed on and made into a life death situation. The man in
the gee used the force necessary to stop a clearly dangerous man who threatened his life. At
some point it became not instruction but of self-defense. The fellow in street clothes could have
stopped his "lesson" at any time but did not. He pressed on. As long as the man in street clothes
could get up he was a deadly threat, particularly if he was indeed mentally ill. Also, as a
bystander one is not required to stop a fight or get anyone medical help. That might be callow
but it is not against the law. Watching someone drown and not getting help is perfectly legal.
One may not like what they did or how they handled it, but no prosecutable crimes were
committed.

#18
Yesterday, 06:50 AM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 123
PithHelmeteer Thanks: 10
Junior Member Thanked 129 Times in 43 Posts

There's a long thread about the video over at Bullshido:

http://www.bullshido.net/forums/showthread.php?t=88535
The incident seems to have touched a nerve. A lot of effort is being made to find out where these
people are today and to get law enforcement involved.

#19
Yesterday, 06:54 AM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 123
PithHelmeteer Thanks: 10
Junior Member Thanked 129 Times in 43 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


From a prosecutor's point of view there's no criminal case here. The man in street clothes
started a fight that by his action he pressed on and made into a life death situation. The man in
the gee used the force necessary to stop a clearly dangerous man who threatened his life. At
some point it became not instruction but of self-defense. The fellow in street clothes could have
stopped his "lesson" at any time but did not. He pressed on. As long as the man in street clothes
could get up he was a deadly threat, particularly if he was indeed mentally ill. Also, as a
bystander one is not required to stop a fight or get anyone medical help. That might be callow
but it is not against the law. Watching someone drown and not getting help is perfectly legal.
One may not like what they did or how they handled it, but no prosecutable crimes were
committed.
How can you say that? The guy got his head stomped against concrete near the end after clearly
being dazed and out of it. Plus they covered the whole thing up by dragging him out the backdoor
and making fun of the blood trail.

The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to


PithHelmeteer For This Useful Post:
BJJ_Grappler, Highlander, S3S33R, SOLIDUS, sticks65
PithHelmeteer
View Public Profile
Send a private message to PithHelmeteer
Find all posts by PithHelmeteer
Add PithHelmeteer to Your Contacts

#20
Yesterday, 07:00 AM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,587
Thanks: 750
trixie
Thanked 1,551 Times in 797 Posts
thread saver

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


From a prosecutor's point of view there's no criminal case here. The man in street clothes
started a fight that by his action he pressed on and made into a life death situation. The man
in the gee used the force necessary to stop a clearly dangerous man who threatened his life.
At some point it became not instruction but of self-defense. The fellow in street clothes could
have stopped his "lesson" at any time but did not. He pressed on. As long as the man in street
clothes could get up he was a deadly threat, particularly if he was indeed mentally ill. Also,
as a bystander one is not required to stop a fight or get anyone medical help. That might be
callow but it is not against the law. Watching someone drown and not getting help is
perfectly legal. One may not like what they did or how they handled it, but no prosecutable
crimes were committed.
its obvious that "straight" razor hates blacks. to him there was no crime, just an animal being
killed.
#21
Yesterday, 09:23 AM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Middle Tennessee
svxak47 Posts: 138
Junior Member Thanks: 5
Thanked 135 Times in 55 Posts

Everyone involved is responsible. Looks like a typical "karate kid" dojo which there are plenty of
in the 80's. They took advantage of someone to make a point and they were killed. This type of
"dojo" hurts the reputations of the ones who teach non agression. We had one of these types of
dojos near me and were using broomhandles to beat the back of the kids to toughen them up. Lets
just say its no longer open.

#22
Yesterday, 01:12 PM
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: My bunker
Posts: 100
TippmanPaintball Thanks: 267
Junior Member Thanked 57 Times in 19 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatch

Dont blame guns, flags, cars, etc etc etc... none of that makes anything happen. I blame
PEOPLE. A person killed that person. At least 2 others were watching and allowed it to
happen.

It may be unpopular in Kommiefornia but I believe in accountability.

I did not blame the flags for what happened and don't know where the hell you got it from that I
did. I simply was saying that those pencil dicks in there and what they did were a disgrace to
those flags.

#23
Yesterday, 01:43 PM
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cornville, Hoosierland
HotPrepper Posts: 917
woefully unprepared Thanks: 206
Thanked 456 Times in 290 Posts

Sucks that this happened, but it would be particularly nice if this jakaz got popped from his own
bragging.

They could just get some 11th or 12th degree belts from the state hospital if this was not
challenging enough for them. Notice how quickly any veneer of dicipline or training slips away
to reveal the ghetto talk. Complete with head stomp.

H
V
S
F
A
#24
Yesterday, 01:52 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by trixie


its obvious that "straight" razor hates blacks. to him there was no crime, just an animal being
killed.
No, it's called three years of law school and several years in law. It is not against the law to act
like low-life jerks. The question is whether the homicide was illegal. Was it murder or was it self-
defense? A prosecutor will look at the evidence, see where the weight lies, and.. and this is an
important "and"... decide whether he has a 90% probablility of winning based on the evidence
because every one has a limited budget and prosecutors don't try cases they don't have a 90%
chance of winning. In this situation an excellent case can be made for self-defense in that the
fellow in street clothes was no slouch in the ring and interjected himself into the situation. More
so it is also totally reasonable to think the fellow in street clothes would have killed his opponent
had he not been fatally stopped. Only a prosecutor with money to waste would file this case
because it is doubtful he would get a guilty verdict. You see, it is not what we think of what
happened that will rule the day. It is whether certain clear thresholds were crossed or not. If the
victor were my client I would not be concerned. It was a display of lousy behavior but that is a
totally different issue than whether a murder was committed. As for a cover up, if there was one
the first thing they would have done was get rid of the tape. That the tape exist demolishes any
cover up argument.

As for "straight razor"... I shave with a straight razor.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Yesterday at 02:10 PM..


#25
Yesterday, 02:06 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
anchorbanger Location: VA
Squiddus Maximus Retired Posts: 1,157
Thanks: 1,051
Thanked 811 Times in 425 Posts

From what i saw, they mental guy was trying to give up while saving some face but got
hammered...to death.
__________________
"You have enemies?
Good, it means you stood up for something you believe in"

"People and nations are forged in the fires of adversity" J. Adams.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to


anchorbanger For This Useful Post:
S3S33R, sticks65
anchorbanger
View Public Profile
Send a private message to anchorbanger
Find all posts by anchorbanger
Add anchorbanger to Your Contacts

#26
Yesterday, 02:09 PM
Join Date: Aug 2008
Highlander Location: McKinney, TX
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Posts: 4,449
Thanks: 5,408
Thanked 5,088 Times in 1,875 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


No, it's called three years of law school and several years in law. It is not against the law to
act like low-life jerks. The question is whether the homicide was illegal. Was it murder or
was it self-defense? A prosecutor will look at the evidence, see where the weight lies, and..
and this is an important "and"... decide whether he has a 90% probablility of winning based
on the evidence. In this situation an excellent case can be made for self-defense in that the
fellow in street clothes was no slouch in the ring and interjected himself into the situation.
More so it is also totally reasonable to think the fellow in street clothes would have killed his
opponent had he not been fatally stopped. Only a prosecutor with money to waste would file
this case because it is doubtful he would get a guilty verdict. You see, it is not what we think
of what happened that will rule the day. It is whether certain clear thresholds were crossed
or not. If the victor were my client I would not be concerned.

As for "straight razor"... I shave with a straight razor.

SR, As was clearly indicated at the beginning the the video, the guy in street clothes was
seeking an exhibition. He clearly stated that he did not intend on touching the black belt. The
black belt student struck first with a blow to the groin. The guy in street clothes asked him not
to do that yet the black belt student continued to press the full contact match.

It would be the dojo masters responsibility to stop the match/fight, mutual combat or whatever
you wish to call it.
He failed to do that.

At a minimun, I see unintentional manslaughter and accessory to manslaughter here.

Depending on what else was said off video, conspiracy charges should have been filed as well.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

H
i
g
h
l
a
n
d
e
r

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l
P
o
s
t
:

BJJ_Grappler, monet108

#27
Yesterday, 02:19 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322
2009 Posts
Survival of the Wittest Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by anchorbanger


From what i saw, they mental guy was trying to give up while saving some face but got
hammered...to death.
Well, to be Devil's Advocate, how do we know he was mental? Because he got his instructions
from Jesus? That would make half the people on this site mental. The key questions are 1) was
the fight out of control and 2) was each men capable of killing the other? If you answer yes to
each then either man could have killed the other in self-defense. Legally, it would not make
any difference which one died. What if the man in the gee was killed? It actually would make
no difference.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to


Straight Razor For This Useful Post:
Gisys, Highlander
Straight Razor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Straight Razor
Find all posts by Straight Razor
Add Straight Razor to Your Contacts

#28
Yesterday, 02:22 PM
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Pahrump, NV.
Irishwarlord Posts: 880
Unlocked and loaded Thanks: 750
Thanked 410 Times in 308 Posts

Sad state of affairs.

I couldn't watch it, obvious mental case get killed by some Karate jerk. Where is the sport, or
even fun in that? Michael Vick go's to prison for dog fights. Give me a break.

Keep your senses sharp and your weapon clean, loaded and ready. Whacko's like this out there,
we may need it without a shtf situation. God bless

I
V
S
F
A
#29
Yesterday, 02:24 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Highlander

At a minimun, I see unintentional manslaughter and accessory to manslaughter here.


I agree that if a prosecutor were going to take the case the best he could hope for was some kind
of manslaughter judgment. I think it would be a hard sell to a jury. All the guy in the Gee would
have to say was "he wouldn't stop and I thought he was going to kill me." It's not a neat, cut and
dried murder case at all.

On the other hand, maybe all of the principles are dead and it is a moot point, and that is why the
video is around now.

The Following User Says Thank You to


Straight Razor For This Useful Post:
Highlander
Straight Razor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Straight Razor
Find all posts by Straight Razor
Add Straight Razor to Your Contacts

#30
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 327
sojurn87 Thanks: 46
Prepared Thanked 197 Times in 121 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


From a prosecutor's point of view there's no criminal case here. The man in street clothes
started a fight that by his action he pressed on and made into a life death situation. The man
in the gee used the force necessary to stop a clearly dangerous man who threatened his life.
At some point it became not instruction but of self-defense. The fellow in street clothes could
have stopped his "lesson" at any time but did not. He pressed on. As long as the man in street
clothes could get up he was a deadly threat, particularly if he was indeed mentally ill. Also,
as a bystander one is not required to stop a fight or get anyone medical help. That might be
callow but it is not against the law. Watching someone drown and not getting help is
perfectly legal. One may not like what they did or how they handled it, but no prosecutable
crimes were committed.
You're a fuggin idiot

Yesterday, 02:55 PM
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Lake County
angeryamerican Posts: 682
Hiker Thanks: 223
Thanked 531 Times in 247 Posts

No he's a lawyer.
The Following User Says Thank You to angeryamerican For This Useful Post:
Denny367

View
First
Unrea Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Display Modes
d

#31
Yesterday, 02:58 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
voyuer1 Location: wildwoods of wisconsin
Misanthropist 3rd degree Posts: 904
Thanks: 915
Thanked 596 Times in 342 Posts

Hopefully, Karma worked its wonders and killed everyone involved, would be even better if
they suffered for a long time before being put out.
__________________

I like to watch.

The Following User Says Thank You to


voyuer1 For This Useful Post:
sticks65
voyuer1
View Public Profile
Send a private message to voyuer1
Find all posts by voyuer1
Add voyuer1 to Your Contacts

#32
Yesterday, 03:01 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by angeryamerican


No he's a lawyer.
Which would explain alot.

#33
Yesterday, 03:07 PM
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cornville, Hoosierland
HotPrepper Posts: 917
woefully unprepared Thanks: 206
Thanked 456 Times in 290 Posts

You'd make a "good" lawyer.


Do you actually believe this stuff? The guy said there would be no contact when he initiated the
match.
" Well, I won’t demonstrate on him-I will demonstrate around him..."

"You can just stand there, do not make any movement whatsoever I will not touch you"

"I just wish to teach you, I don’t wish to hurt you"

Billy Bad kicked him in the groin and I'm pretty sure the "demonstration" shouldve ended at that
point. Up until that point there was ZERO indication that there would be any physical contact
perpetrated by the victim.

Self defense? Please...the Red belt was retreating, saying "You got it, ok? You got it. You got it."
He was clearly not a physical threat (nor was he ever) to Willis at the point he was dazed on the
ground. If he was in fear for his life there was AMPLE opportunity to flee.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to


HotPrepper For This Useful Post:
BJJ_Grappler, monet108
HotPrepper
View Public Profile
Send a private message to HotPrepper
Find all posts by HotPrepper
Add HotPrepper to Your Contacts

#34
Yesterday, 03:28 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


From a prosecutor's point of view there's no criminal case here. The man in street clothes
started a fight that by his action he pressed on and made into a life death situation. The man
in the gee used the force necessary to stop a clearly dangerous man who threatened his life.
At some point it became not instruction but of self-defense. The fellow in street clothes could
have stopped his "lesson" at any time but did not. He pressed on. As long as the man in street
clothes could get up he was a deadly threat, particularly if he was indeed mentally ill. Also,
as a bystander one is not required to stop a fight or get anyone medical help. That might be
callow but it is not against the law. Watching someone drown and not getting help is
perfectly legal. One may not like what they did or how they handled it, but no prosecutable
crimes were committed.
This is the dumbest interpretation of events I have ever read...I don't give a rat's anus if you
have been or ever were a lawyer.

The simple fact that you are able to understand or comprehend what took place in the video
gives credence to the fact that you have no idea what you are talking about.

Here's some advice...

If someone were to ever ask your opinion about the law as it is written....

Keep your mouth shut.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

s
o
j
u
r
n
8
7

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l
P
o
s
t
:

Denny367, HotPrepper, monet108, SLCLee,


SOLIDUS
#35
Yesterday, 05:10 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322
2009 Posts
Survival of the Wittest Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojurn87


This is the dumbest interpretation of events I have ever read...I don't give a rat's anus if you
have been or ever were a lawyer. The simple fact that you are able to understand or
comprehend what took place in the video gives credence to the fact that you have no idea
what you are talking about. Here's some advice... If someone were to ever ask your opinion
about the law as it is written....Keep your mouth shut.
Well... there are opinions and there is reality. The video shows lousy behavior -- no argument
there -- but that is a different issue than successfully prosecuting murder. How we feel about
what we see is different than proving the necessary elements needed for a murder conviction.
There is a list of things one must prove beyond a doubt to sustain a murder conviction. It is
more than opinion or overall impression. It is the weight of facts, and if one cannot muster the
facts, there is no conviction. What you feel about the video is not relevant in the courtroom. It
is what you can prove that is relevant. Law, for better or worse, is a game. It is a game won by
provable facts, not opinions.

The best a prosecutor could hope for is manslaughter, and that would be iffy. In real life this
case would be pled out. The deal probably would be probation or a few months jail time, no
more than a year. That is reality.
And if one bothered to stand back and notice, all the disagreements are personal... I am a racist,
I am stupid, I am incompetent et cetera. Not one of you who disagrees addesses the facts. Make
a legal case FOR murder. Look at the video. Give legal reasons why it is murder. Prove your
position rather than issuing childish insults.

The man in street clothes says one thing but does another, he says he will back off but does not.
He continues the attack. Ask oneself is it not reasonable that the man in the gee thought at
some point it was kill or be killed? For a defense attorney this case is a no brainer. The guy in
street clothes knew what he was doing. He could have walked away at any time, but he pressed
the attack physically while saying he wasn't. That is deception.

Legally this is not a murder case. Morally it might be, but not legally. That is reality. That may
suck, but that is reality. Law is not about truth, or being right. It is a game, and the game is won
by following the game rules. It is truly lousy what happened to the man, but that is a totally
different issue than whether it was illegal or prosecutable.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Yesterday at 05:18 PM..

S
V
S
F
A

#36
Yesterday, 05:12 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by HotPrepper


If he was in fear for his life there was AMPLE opportunity to flee.
Only in Massachuttes is one legally required to flee -- the so called safe harbor rule. In that state
if an armed burglar enters your home at night you are legally required to flee. You cannot defend
your home or your family. You must flee. Shooting the burglar, however, is legal in 49 other
states.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Yesterday at 05:19 PM..

The Following User Says Thank You to


Straight Razor For This Useful Post:
BJJ_Grappler
Straight Razor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Straight Razor
Find all posts by Straight Razor
Add Straight Razor to Your Contacts

#37
Yesterday, 05:58 PM
Join Date: Sep 2007
Maurepas Location: Louisiana
trois pour cent Posts: 5,204
Thanks: 1,856
Thanked 4,590 Times in 1,986 Posts

I saw a man who continued to stomp the other guys head into the cement even after he was
clearly incapacitated. That guy clearly went for the kill at the end as I viewed it.

I know we all have our opinions, but is there anyone here on the board ACTUALLY an
attorney? If so, I'd love to hear their opinion and rationale.

I'll be the first to say, I am not an attorney. But to continue using lethal force beyond what is
necessary for self defense would seem to be prosecutable to me. Then, not only did they fail to
call for medical care, they drug him outside and dumped him?

Quote:

Murder Law & Legal Definition


A person commits the crime of murder if with intent to cause the death of another person, he
causes the death of that person or of another person,or under circumstances manifesting
extreme indifference to human life, he recklessly engages in conduct which creates a
grave risk of death to a person other than himself, and thereby causes the death of
another person. Murder may also be committed when a person commits or attempts to
commit arson, burglary, escape, kidnapping, rape, robbery, sodomy or any other felony
clearly dangerous to human life and, in the course of and in furtherance of the crime that he
is committing or attempting to commit, or in immediate flight therefrom, he, or another
participant if there is any, causes the death of any person.

A person may be found not to have committed murder if he or she was moved to act by a
sudden heat of passion caused by provocation recognized by law, and before there had been a
reasonable time for the passion to cool and for reason to reassert itself. However, a killing
with such provocation does not preclude a conviction of, manslaughter or other crime.
Both aggravated murder and simple murder have the element of purposely causing the death
of another. Aggravated murder contains the additional element of prior calculation and
design.
__________________

"I t i s t o se cur e our r ig ht s th at we re so rt t o go ver nm en t a t a ll ."


--Th oma s Je f ferson to F ranc oi s D' Iver no is, 1795

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

M
a
u
r
e
p
a
s

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

BJJ_Grappler, Denny367, HotPrepper, monet108,


rifle man, SOLIDUS, sticks65, voyuer1

#38
Yesterday, 06:32 PM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,587
Thanks: 750
trixie
Thanked 1,551 Times in 797 Posts
thread saver

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Only in Massachuttes is one legally required to flee -- the so called safe harbor rule. In that
state if an armed burglar enters your home at night you are legally required to flee. You
cannot defend your home or your family. You must flee. Shooting the burglar, however, is
legal in 49 other states.
man razor you are so full of it, the only kind of lawyer you were/are is a sh!thouse lawyer.

there are few states that require you to flee. the video makes it very obvious that that black kid
was murdered. theres dialogue, and no question as to what transpired there.

if craphouse lawyer is correct, then anyone in a martial arts exhibition, or any sparring match is
in dread peril and can respond with deadly force up to and including stomping the victim's
head and neck after a knock out. idiotic.

The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to


trixie For This Useful Post:
BJJ_Grappler, monet108, voyuer1
trixie
View Public Profile
Send a private message to trixie
Find all posts by trixie
Add trixie to Your Contacts

#39
Yesterday, 07:09 PM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England & Eire
Posts: 7,925
sticks65 Thanks: 16,210
The Ancient Briton Thanked 7,113 Times in 3,195 Posts
Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 2

The guy was out cold and the other guy stomped him simple as that.

Despicable and cowardly.


__________________
Proud Infidel

Last edited by sticks65; Yesterday at 07:27 PM..

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

s
t
i
c
k
s
6
5

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

HotPrepper, Maurepas, monet108, rifle man,


SOLIDUS, voyuer1

#40
Yesterday, 07:10 PM
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Nor Cal
Denny367 Posts: 304
Rescue Ranger Thanks: 442
Thanked 268 Times in 104 Posts

This whole event was a set up from minute one! Short of the mental health issues of the victim,
every one there knew what they did was wrong, which is why they were in such a hurry to drag
him out of the dojo. He apparently recieved no medical attention, just tossed outside.

I'm no lawyer, but where I come from, these folks would have been arrested for conspiracy to
commit, felony assault, attempted murder, (as the suspect probably had no intent), and
unlawful disposal of a body, not to mention a host of lessor charges. Then the civil suit begins!

In my martial arts training, I have never heard of such a thing. These pukes are thugs of the
highest order.
The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to
Denny367 For This Useful Post:
BJJ_Grappler, HotPrepper, Maurepas, monet108, sticks65, voyuer1
Denny367
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Denny367
Find all posts by Denny367
Add Denny367 to Your Contacts

#41
Yesterday, 07:12 PM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England & Eire
Posts: 7,925
sticks65 Thanks: 16,210
The Ancient Briton Thanked 7,113 Times in 3,195 Posts
Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


No, it's called three years of law school and several years in law. It is not against the law to
act like low-life jerks. The question is whether the homicide was illegal. Was it murder or
was it self-defense? A prosecutor will look at the evidence, see where the weight lies, and..
and this is an important "and"... decide whether he has a 90% probablility of winning based
on the evidence because every one has a limited budget and prosecutors don't try cases they
don't have a 90% chance of winning. In this situation an excellent case can be made for self-
defense in that the fellow in street clothes was no slouch in the ring and interjected himself
into the situation. More so it is also totally reasonable to think the fellow in street clothes
would have killed his opponent had he not been fatally stopped. Only a prosecutor with
money to waste would file this case because it is doubtful he would get a guilty verdict. You
see, it is not what we think of what happened that will rule the day. It is whether certain clear
thresholds were crossed or not. If the victor were my client I would not be concerned. It was
a display of lousy behavior but that is a totally different issue than whether a murder was
committed. As for a cover up, if there was one the first thing they would have done was get
rid of the tape. That the tape exist demolishes any cover up argument.

As for "straight razor"... I shave with a straight razor.


Wow a lawyer as well.

You've done it all haven't you LOL


Attached Thumbnails

__________________
Proud Infidel

Last edited by sticks65; Yesterday at 07:26 PM..

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k
Y
o
u

t
o

s
t
i
c
k
s
6
5

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

rifle man, SOLIDUS


#42
Yesterday, 07:35 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
voyuer1 Location: wildwoods of wisconsin
Misanthropist 3rd degree Posts: 904
Thanks: 915
Thanked 596 Times in 342 Posts

Straight razor, god damn good thing, Normative jurisprudence does not reside in your hands
alone. You are talking schitt, and that is that, all opinion, all commentary.
Then again, ignorant, working class people such as I have no sense. 3 years of law school? If
you paid for that, I'd demand a refund.
__________________

I like to watch.

The Following User Says Thank You to


voyuer1 For This Useful Post:
Kregener
voyuer1
View Public Profile
Send a private message to voyuer1
Find all posts by voyuer1
Add voyuer1 to Your Contacts

#43
Yesterday, 08:51 PM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 184
Your Funeral Thanks: 52
Junior Member Thanked 150 Times in 62 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


From a prosecutor's point of view there's no criminal case here.
It is patently obvious from your faulty analysis that you are not a prosecutor and therefore are
not qualified to speak from that point of view.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


The man in street clothes started a fight that by his action he pressed on and made into a life
death situation. The man in the gee used the force necessary to stop a clearly dangerous man
who threatened his life. At some point it became not instruction but of self-defense.
Apparently you are watching a different video than the rest of us did. The man in the gi struck
the first blow and initiated the "heat of passion" in the victim. Had the man in street clothes
been the "victor" in the same manner after being struck first, the most he would be able to be
convicted on would be voluntary manslaughter. There was no offer to commit harm by the man
in the street clothes, he CLEARLY stated that it was an "exhibition" and accordingly did not
strike the man in the gi until he was being murdered by him.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


The fellow in street clothes could have stopped his "lesson" at any time but did not. He
pressed on. As long as the man in street clothes could get up he was a deadly threat,
particularly if he was indeed mentally ill.
So if a cop shoots a man with a knife and he drops the knife, makes no further offensive
moves, but is capable of standing, should the cop finish him off? Think that would fly? So let
me understand this, the man in the street clothes could have stopped the man in the gi from
striking him at anytime? If he could have then he would not be dead! The "lesson" stopped
when the man in the street clothes was assaulted, any action he took to stop the attack was
defensive in nature. Your logic is sorely lacking if you state that his mental illness caused him
to be elevated to a "deadly threat". If that is the case why don't the police go summarily execute
mentally ill people regardless of whether or not they're combative? As long as he could "get
up" he is a threat? Show me the legal precedent for THAT statement. In fact the LAPD officers
in the Rodney King case tried that at their federal civil rights violations trial, to no avail. No
sir, as soon as the threat is over then you stop. Perhaps you remember the recent story of the
pharmacist who shot the downed robber who is now being charged with murder.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Straight Razor
Also, as a bystander one is not required to stop a fight or get anyone medical help. That
might be callow but it is not against the law. Watching someone drown and not getting help is
perfectly legal. One may not like what they did or how they handled it, but no prosecutable
crimes were committed.
First, there is a vast difference between watching a person drown and watching a felonious
assault that results in death. What law school did you attend that didn't teach you about
misprision of a felony? It is a crime to not report a felony crime. Even security guards get that
knowledge in their training. Additionally, most states have compulsory laws as it relates to
rendering aid in certain situations, and four states—Louisiana, Rhode Island, Vermont, and
Wisconsin—have enacted Good Samaritan legislation, more properly termed failure-to-act
legislation, applicable to all citizens, not just physicians, that assigns an affirmative duty to aid
a victim in need. Violation of these laws is punishable criminally. As for the culpability of the
others in a crime, there is a legal concept known as "the hand of one is the hand of all", look it
up. They could be charged as principals in the crime or as accessories after the fact for failure
to report it and by moving the man outside.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


No, it's called three years of law school and several years in law. It is not against the law to
act like low-life jerks. The question is whether the homicide was illegal. Was it murder or
was it self-defense? A prosecutor will look at the evidence, see where the weight lies, and..
and this is an important "and"... decide whether he has a 90% probablility of winning based
on the evidence because every one has a limited budget and prosecutors don't try cases they
don't have a 90% chance of winning.
Where? At Cracker Jack University? I guarantee you that a prosecutor would look at two slam-
dunk pieces of evidence against this guy, first being the video and second the autopsy results.
This case has "PLEA BARGAIN" written all over it!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


In this situation an excellent case can be made for self-defense in that the fellow in street
clothes was no slouch in the ring and interjected himself into the situation. More so it is also
totally reasonable to think the fellow in street clothes would have killed his opponent had he
not been fatally stopped.
The victim was struck first by the man in the gi! How is it reasonable to assume that by
demonstrating his moves without actually striking the man in the gi constitutes a threat that
requires lethal force? Especially AFTER the victim clearly follows through on his promise not
to strike Mr.Gi. Are you mad? It is MORE reasonable to think, if we are to believe that the man
in the gi was actually in danger, for him to stop STOMPING the prone victim when it was clear
he could no longer "assault" Mr. Gi. Death is only justified when the level of threat requires it.
A prone man on the mat does not require the continued application of force!
Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Only a prosecutor with money to waste would file this case because it is doubtful he would
get a guilty verdict. You see, it is not what we think of what happened that will rule the day. It
is whether certain clear thresholds were crossed or not. If the victor were my client I would
not be concerned.
The prisons are bursting at the seams with people who had lawyers that made a gamble as
stupid as that one would be.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


It was a display of lousy behavior but that is a totally different issue than whether a murder
was committed. As for a cover up, if there was one the first thing they would have done was
get rid of the tape. That the tape exist demolishes any cover up argument.
Obviously not. Failing to call 911 to report the "crime" of the man in the gi getting assaulted
and dragging the man out without reporting it stinks to high heaven of cover up. You can't have
it both ways. You want to say that this is such an egregious assault by the mentally ill man that
the man in the gi just HAD to stomp him to death. Then if the man in the gi used that argument
he would in essence have to admit that he failed to report that felony assault. If it was self
defense then he'd have reported it, that he didn't obviously demonstrates his intent from the
start, as if the video showing them reiterating the victim's statements in a mocking tone doesn't
do a bang up job by itself. The video doesn't have to be destroyed to show a cover up, the fact
it hasn't surfaced for over twenty years makes that case quite well, actually.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Well, to be Devil's Advocate, how do we know he was mental? Because he got his
instructions from Jesus? That would make half the people on this site mental. The key
questions are 1) was the fight out of control and 2) was each men capable of killing the
other? If you answer yes to each then either man could have killed the other in self-defense.
No, actually it would be the age old question of who initiated the assault and was there a threat
present. If so, was the force used proportionate to the threat. There was no fight until the legal
provocation was induced in the victim by the first blow being struck by Mr. Gi. Another legal
term they probably didn't teach you at Cracker Jack U. is "Heat of passion", look it up. Put it
this way, if a man is in the street and threatening to kill a cop and he has a knife in his hand, is
he capable of killing the officer? Yes. But if there is no jeopardy in addition to the ability, i.e.
he is 50 feet away, then the officer can not fire. Likewise, just because the victim may have had
the ability ("no slouch in the ring"), it does not excuse Mr. Gi due to the fact that being prone
on the mat took away the element of jeopardy.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Straight Razor
Legally, it would not make any difference which one died. What if the man in the gee was
killed? It actually would make no difference.
I agree that if a prosecutor were going to take the case the best he could hope for was some
kind of manslaughter judgment. I think it would be a hard sell to a jury. All the guy in the
Gee would have to say was "he wouldn't stop and I thought he was going to kill me."
The man in the gi COULD say that, but the tape clearly contradicts that assertion.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


It's not a neat, cut and dried murder case at all.On the other hand, maybe all of the
principles are dead and it is a moot point, and that is why the video is around now.
Well... there are opinions and there is reality. The video shows lousy behavior -- no argument
there -- but that is a different issue than successfully prosecuting murder. How we feel about
what we see is different than proving the necessary elements needed for a murder conviction.
There is a list of things one must prove beyond a doubt to sustain a murder conviction. It is
more than opinion or overall impression. It is the weight of facts, and if one cannot muster
the facts, there is no conviction. What you feel about the video is not relevant in the
courtroom.
I assure you that what a jury would feel about that video would most assuredly be relevant in
the courtroom, it would be the crux of the case and it does not paint a bright future for this guy
should he be charged, which I hope happens.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


It is what you can prove that is relevant. Law, for better or worse, is a game. It is a game
won by provable facts, not opinions.

The best a prosecutor could hope for is manslaughter, and that would be iffy. In real life this
case would be pled out. The deal probably would be probation or a few months jail time, no
more than a year. That is reality.

The man in street clothes says one thing but does another, he says he will back off but does
not. He continues the attack. Ask oneself is it not reasonable that the man in the gee thought
at some point it was kill or be killed?
Absolutely not. The evidence of that is the massive opposition to your ridiculous defense. The
jurors that would be empaneled would share the sentiment of the people here. Here on this
board you have people who eat, drink and breathe the concept of self defense and understand it
better than the average citizen. Imagine what the soccer mom, the mailman and the nice old
lady next door would think. If you can't get the survivalists to buy your argument you DAMN
sure won't get Joe Six Pack to buy it!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Straight Razor
For a defense attorney this case is a no brainer. The guy in street clothes knew what he was
doing. He could have walked away at any time, but he pressed the attack physically while
saying he wasn't. That is deception.
So let me get this straight, the man who was killed could walk away at any time but the man in
the gi couldn't? Absurd. You clearly have painted yourself into a corner by claiming to be a
lawyer because you have displayed a staggering ignorance of fundamental legal doctrine as it
pertains to self defense, duty to render aid, reporting crimes and use of force. The prosecution
would CRUCIFY this guy. As a black belt he has a higher degree of knowledge and could
reasonably be expected to defuse a REAL assault without killing someone, let alone allowing a
delusional man to be tricked into launching a dementia induced "exhibition" as a pretense for a
vicious, unprovoked beating. It is obvious beyond belief by the language and attitude of Mr. Gi
and the others in the video that they knew the deceased was mentally ill, goaded him into
committing an action and then used that as the basis to "defend" himself. That is immoral AND
illegal. It would be no different than a police officer handing a mentally ill man a pipe and
inviting him to swing it around and conduct a demonstration, then shooting him and saying "I
feared for my life". I guarantee you even a deaf, blind, half-wit prosecutor could make that
comparison stick in the mind of a jury.

Last edited by Your Funeral; Yesterday at 09:15 PM..

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

1
3

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

Y
o
u
r

F
u
n
e
r
a
l

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

BJJ_Grappler, Denny367, Highlander, HotPrepper,


Kregener, Maurepas, monet108, NCDoberman,
SLCLee, SOLIDUS, sticks65, TippmanPaintball,
voyuer1

#44
Yesterday, 09:03 PM
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: People's Republic of New York
Posts: 966
Ls1 Thanks: 166
Two White Horses In Line Thanked 416 Times in 248 Posts

Sometimes I feel our justice system takes too long. Way too much horrible crap in our country
goes on with no justice.

This "Karate master" should probably be found, and taken care of, no questions asked.

L
V
S
F
A

#45
Yesterday, 09:28 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by sticks65


Wow a lawyer as well.

You've done it all haven't you LOL


Well, I'm nearly 60. That's a long time to do a lot of things, though I actually started law school in
96. Now I suppose senile will be added to the list of insults.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Yesterday at 10:00 PM..

Straight Razor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Straight Razor
Find all posts by Straight Razor
Add Straight Razor to Your Contacts
Previous
left arrow key Next
right arrow key Close Move

Page 3 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Page 4 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >


View
First
Unrea Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Display Modes
d

#46
Yesterday, 09:29 PM
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Cornville, Hoosierland
HotPrepper Posts: 917
woefully unprepared Thanks: 206
Thanked 456 Times in 290 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Your Funeral


It is patently obvious from your faulty analysis that you are not a prosecutor and therefore
are not qualified to speak from that point of view...
.... I guarantee you even a deaf, blind, half-wit prosecutor could make that comparison stick
in the mind of a jury.

Had to log in to thank that post! Not much wiggle room left after that.

What does the fact that he was murdered or not matter anyway? I think you just post things like
this for your personal enjoyment.

The Following User Says Thank You to


HotPrepper For This Useful Post:
Your Funeral
HotPrepper
View Public Profile
Send a private message to HotPrepper
Find all posts by HotPrepper
Add HotPrepper to Your Contacts
#47
Yesterday, 09:37 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322
2009 Posts
Survival of the Wittest Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Your Funeral


It is patently obvious from your faulty analysis that you are not a prosecutor and therefore
are not qualified to speak from that point of view.
.
I was involved with prosecutions for four years. The two things one would have to prove for
murder would be premeditation and or intent. Noting presented in that video rises to that level.
That leaves manslaugter. The only wiggle room is excessive force, but that is very subjective
particularly among men who are deadly combatants. I think a state's attorney would offer a
plea bargain rather than go to trial. In the office I worked in we had to have a 90 percent
probablity of conviction before we filed a case. If it had a 50 to 89 percent probabilty of
conviction we offered a plea bargain. If it was under 50% the case was dropped. Spending
money to lose cases was simply not allowed. Informally we may call what we saw on the video
murder, and we may be offended by it. But the reality is a crime has to have certain elements
and if they are not there, or not strong enough, the case does not go to trial.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Today at 06:45 AM..

S
V
S
F
A

#48
Yesterday, 09:45 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by trixie


if craphouse lawyer is correct, then anyone in a martial arts exhibition, or any sparring match
is in dread peril and can respond with deadly force up to and including stomping the victim's
head and neck after a knock out. idiotic.
That is exactly what happens in the ring from time to time. One punch too many, or two, or three.
Such deaths rarely result in prosecution. Such incidents are not legally in the same league as a
street fight or the like.

S
V
S
F
A

#49
Yesterday, 09:53 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Straight Razor Posts: 6,535
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanks: 426
2009 Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
Survival of the Wittest Awards Showcase
Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maurepas

I'll be the first to say, I am not an attorney. But to continue using lethal force beyond what is
necessary for self defense would seem to be prosecutable to me. Then, not only did they fail to
call for medical care, they drug him outside and dumped him?
"Excessive force" would be the only hope for a prosecutor for a manslaughter conviction. But in
fights with accomplished people that could be hotly contested. An autopsy could be helpful or
harmful.

Not providing medical care is not illegal (excluding parental responsibilities.) It is inhumane and
a lot of other moral failings but not helping someone is not a crime. Indeed, doctors often refuse
to offer medical care at accidents if their state does not have a good samaritan law.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Yesterday at 10:20 PM..

The Following User Says Thank You to


Straight Razor For This Useful Post:
KaBar67
Straight Razor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Straight Razor
Find all posts by Straight Razor
Add Straight Razor to Your Contacts

#50
Yesterday, 10:04 PM
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Along Clearwater River in Idaho
Idaho Posts: 1,277
town hall protestors rule Thanks: 2,299
Thanked 680 Times in 343 Posts
I miss ogrish.com

I
V
S
F
A

#51
Yesterday, 10:15 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Your Funeral


I guarantee you even a deaf, blind, half-wit prosecutor could make that comparison stick in the
mind of a jury.
Well... they didn't, and they won't, successfully. That is the reality beyond opinions here. Most of
the opinions I have seen here are based on ficitional concepts of the law, not in the reality of the
law.

Legally I think there might be a case for manslaughter, but it would not be a cake walk. Indeed, it
would not have been easy in 1984 and would be nearly impossible now. An autopsy now would
probably be useless so the state of incapacitation during the fight and cause of death would be
fuzzy at best. That is not enough to convict. We might be outraged at what we see but that is a
different issue than prosecuting. It was a lousy display of humanity but that is a different issue
than whether it was legally murder. And a manslaughter conviction is not heavy time usually. In
fact, one case I know very well resulted in only a year in the local jail, and the bum served the
time while waiting for trial. So he was convicted and went home.

One reason why I got out of law was the guilty walk too often.

S
V
S
F
A

#52
Yesterday, 10:31 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by voyuer1


Straight razor, god damn good thing, Normative jurisprudence does not reside in your hands
alone. You are talking schitt, and that is that, all opinion, all commentary.
Then again, ignorant, working class people such as I have no sense. 3 years of law school? If
you paid for that, I'd demand a refund.
It cost me $105,000... plus at the time an expensive lap top as the school went totally non-paper.
And I agree with you, it was a waste of time and money. Law schools are just fronts for banks.
Volunteering for the Army in 69 was probably the most stupid life-threatening thing I ever did,
law shool was the most financially stupid thing I ever did. Law is fascinating. Lawyering is not.
The difference between law and lawyering is like falling in love with the most beautiful woman
you have ever seen and then finding out on your wedding night she is the worst human you have
ever met.... and you're married... and there ain't no quick fix.... and it's too bad because law is
truly fascinating and often exceptionally brilliant. But the practice of law is as ugly as the law is
beautiful. And that is why most lawyers want to drop out of law. The subject is enticing, the
practice disgusting.
Last edited by Straight Razor; Yesterday at 10:50 PM..

The Following User Says Thank You to


Straight Razor For This Useful Post:
KaBar67
Straight Razor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Straight Razor
Find all posts by Straight Razor
Add Straight Razor to Your Contacts

#53
Yesterday, 10:41 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322
2009 Posts
Survival of the Wittest Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 3

My point is, it is rarely a slam dunk in prosecutions. What one see is not always what one
thinks happened. And with that I rest my case.

#54
Yesterday, 11:34 PM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

So jerk "a" walks into a dojo to "teach", and gets into a fight with jerk "b".

Grinning "super macho man" with 'stash takes great joy and eggs on jerk "a" . Just words, but
still a jerk. Macho man snickers like the Sheriff to a Boss Hog joke and gets out of the way for
jerk "b".

Jerk "a" gives jerk "b" a pretty good thrashing, and even knocks him down.
In fact, in parts he's the aggressor. Apparantly, jerk "a" actually died after this fight. (The video I
saw probably late in the game did not show him being ragged out of the dojo). Super "macho"
looking dude witht the 'stash, salivates on egging on jerk "a" .

Jerk "a" could have quit, left, called out for his mommy, yelled "STOP", slapped the mat three
times etc. or shown some sort of clear sign he was done. He did not. He did not get the chance.
Insted he fought. Fight when on a few kicks too long.

So straightrazor is 100% right. Do you slappy happy lawyer wanna be's think jerk b should have
just shut it off when jerk a went down? It that the crime you see here?
When you consent to a fight, you may get hurt or killed. Didn't you know that? Self defense is
why most of us carry. You can even use deadly force in response to a fist fight. That is not a
crime at all. There are may dead bar room brawlers where winner is not prosecuted at all.

You ae thinking boxing rules, not for a street fight or self defense. That is not any crime at all.
Good case for civil court. I saw no pads, guards, prectition of any sort. This was not sparring.
This was not match. Forget the rule book, this was a street fight. It may not have been meant by
jerk a to start or end like this, but man he fought hard.

Jerk a's family will own that dojo if they sue. Macho man can stay on to clean floor in bathrooms.
Grinning macho man with 'stash does not appear at the end of the video I saw. Did he drag off
body? Sick f.

Even Bernnie Goetz (our NYC subway vigilante) would probably have gotten off he kept his yap
shut, evenafter shooting guy after attack ended, but he said and admitted saying, "You don't look
to bad, here's another" or something close to that. Self defense was over before he shot last shot.
Jerk b could barely breath before he gave last (maybe) fatal kick. IMHO, Straightrazor gets the
A, you all fail.
#55
Yesterday, 11:41 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


So jerk "a" walks into a dojo to "teach", and gets into a fight with jerk "b".

Grinning "super macho man" with 'stash takes great joy and eggs on jerk "a" . Just words, but
still a jerk. Macho man snickers like the Sheriff to a Boss Hog joke and gets out of the way for
jerk "b".

Jerk "a" gives jerk "b" a pretty good thrashing, and even knocks him down.
In fact, in parts he's the aggressor. Apparantly, jerk "a" actually died after this fight. (The
video I saw probably late in the game did not show him being ragged out of the dojo). Super
"macho" looking dude witht the 'stash, salivates on egging on jerk "a" .

Jerk "a" could have quit, left, called out for his mommy, yelled "STOP", slapped the mat three
times etc. or shown some sort of clear sign he was done. He did not. He did not get the chance.
Insted he fought. Fight when on a few kicks too long.

So straightrazor is 100% right. Do you slappy happy lawyer wanna be's think jerk b should
have just shut it off when jerk a went down? It that the crime you see here?
When you consent to a fight, you may get hurt or killed. Didn't you know that? Self defense is
why most of us carry. You can even use deadly force in response to a fist fight. That is not a
crime at all. There are may dead bar room brawlers where winner is not prosecuted at all.

You ae thinking boxing rules, not for a street fight or self defense. That is not any crime at all.
Good case for civil court. I saw no pads, guards, prectition of any sort. This was not sparring.
This was not match. Forget the rule book, this was a street fight. It may not have been meant by
jerk a to start or end like this, but man he fought hard.

Jerk a's family will own that dojo if they sue. Macho man can stay on to clean floor in
bathrooms. Grinning macho man with 'stash does not appear at the end of the video I saw. Did
he drag off body? Sick f.

Even Bernnie Goetz (our NYC subway vigilante) would probably have gotten off he kept his
yap shut, evenafter shooting guy after attack ended, but he said and admitted saying, "You
don't look to bad, here's another" or something close to that. Self defense was over before he
shot last shot. Jerk b could barely breath before he gave last (maybe) fatal kick. IMHO,
Straightrazor gets the A, you all fail.
Another brilliant analysis.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to


sojurn87 For This Useful Post:
SOLIDUS, Your Funeral
sojurn87
View Public Profile
Send a private message to sojurn87
Find all posts by sojurn87
Add sojurn87 to Your Contacts

#56
Yesterday, 11:49 PM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojurn87


Another brilliant analysis.
And a brilliant reply!

I love the dude who posts "but jerk b started it." Did that even work with your Mom?

Both engaged in fight. Like "who started it" matters when both are standing in fighting
positions trading blows evenly a second later. If jerk a walked away,ran, said stop it, end of
story. Instead he goes Bruce Lee. Now he's dead.

#57
Today, 12:00 AM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

Check out this link to help see self defense theory in practice just a few days ago. 20 year old is
in his car. 18 year old (lets call him jerk a) attacks with fists 20 year old in car which in in street,
running (call guy in car jerk b). 20 year old (jerk b) stops engine, gets out of car, grabs knife and
stabs jerk a to death. Jerk a unarmed. No police charges. Self defense. I'm sure jerk a did not
think jerk b would get out of car, grab a knife and kill em when he strted the fight that led to his
death. And I'll bet jerk a started the fight to "save face". In fact, jerk a probalby felt pretty safe
(like a dojo) when he hit jerk b who was stuck in a car. Jerk a hit jerk b throught the open car
window!

http://readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=150297

In video, jerk a went into a dojo looking for fight! Far worse facts. Over time, he fought as both
aggressor and victim.

Still laughing at dude who wrote long thread as if who starts a fight matters. Priceless. "He
started it". I heard that like 100 times this summer from kids.

Last edited by KaBar67; Today at 12:12 AM..

#58
Today, 12:21 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

I watched that video for a second time and it sickens me even more to see responses a few
individuals who claim to "higher understanding" about the law and that some how this was self
defense from the guy in the white gi.

Go watch the fight again if you can stand it and tell me and the whole world that what you saw
was at the end was a stunned man lying on the ground....

then receive several stomps on the neck and throat while he laid there helpless...

For nearly 8 - 10 seconds.

Then let's talk about the language....There is a certain point and even in the beginning that the
individual who gets stomped did not want to continue the fight and offered no resistance as he
was thrown to the ground and proceeded to be stomped...

while he lay there defenseless for nearly 10 seconds.

The man outstretched his arms before he was thrown to the ground and opened his hands
attempting to de escalate a situation where he realized perhaps at that point in time his life might
actually be in danger.

Said thug missed with several stomps but proceeded anyway till he got the one that was the
"home run"
And as if stomping the life out of a defenseless person wasn't enough....

These dirtbags added insult to injury at the end of the video (not shown) "this is what we do"

there's more commentary that I can't recall...

I can't believe this needs to be pointed out.

The Following User Says Thank You to


sojurn87 For This Useful Post:
Your Funeral
sojurn87
View Public Profile
Send a private message to sojurn87
Find all posts by sojurn87
Add sojurn87 to Your Contacts

#59
Today, 12:32 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Check out this link to help see self defense theory in practice just a few days ago. 20 year old
is in his car. 18 year old (lets call him jerk a) attacks with fists 20 year old in car which in in
street, running (call guy in car jerk b). 20 year old (jerk b) stops engine, gets out of car,
grabs knife and stabs jerk a to death. Jerk a unarmed. No police charges. Self defense. I'm
sure jerk a did not think jerk b would get out of car, grab a knife and kill em when he strted
the fight that led to his death. And I'll bet jerk a started the fight to "save face". In fact, jerk a
probalby felt pretty safe (like a dojo) when he hit jerk b who was stuck in a car. Jerk a hit
jerk b throught the open car window!
http://readingeagle.com/article.aspx?id=150297

In video, jerk a went into a dojo looking for fight! Far worse facts. Over time, he fought as
both aggressor and victim.

Still laughing at dude who wrote long thread as if who starts a fight matters. Priceless. "He
started it". I heard that like 100 times this summer from kids.
That situation is not even remotely similar to this one...

A man reaching into your car punching and slamming your face into the steering wheel allows
you to respond in self defense untill the attack stops.

he stabbed the guy and got away....

It would be a different story if he got out of the car and proceed to stab the guy multiple times.

to draw a comparison to this situation is stupid.

#60
Today, 12:50 AM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojurn87


I watched that video for a second time and it sickens me even more to see responses a few
individuals who claim to "higher understanding" about the law and that some how this was self
defense from the guy in the white gi.

Go watch the fight again if you can stand it and tell me and the whole world that what you saw
was at the end was a stunned man lying on the ground....

then receive several stomps on the neck and throat while he laid there helpless...

For nearly 8 - 10 seconds.

Then let's talk about the language....There is a certain point and even in the beginning that the
individual who gets stomped did not want to continue the fight and offered no resistance as he
was thrown to the ground and proceeded to be stomped...

while he lay there defenseless for nearly 10 seconds.

The man outstretched his arms before he was thrown to the ground and opened his hands
attempting to de escalate a situation where he realized perhaps at that point in time his life
might actually be in danger.

Said thug missed with several stomps but proceeded anyway till he got the one that was the
"home run"

And as if stomping the life out of a defenseless person wasn't enough....

These dirtbags added insult to injury at the end of the video (not shown) "this is what we do"

there's more commentary that I can't recall...

I can't believe this needs to be pointed out.


You can watch it 50 times. You only are seeing what you want to see, in 8-10 second increments.
No one is claiming superior knowledge to you. You have demonstrated your superior knowledge
in your witty sarcasm.

"Attempting to de escalate..." are you kidding. Jerk a is in a fight. He does not quit, run, yell stop
etc. How is that "de escalating?" It is way to late to "de escalate". He should have quit.

Re read the Philly story. YOU GOT IT BACKWARDS. I'm going to make the Philly story simple
for you. Of course its different than a dojo fist fight, ITS FAR WORSE an example. Jerk a hit
jerk b while he was in a running car. Jerk b got out of the car and stabbed a to death. No charges
against jerk from car-murderer. Jerk b could have ended assault by driving off. Jerk a was a
ZERO threat to jerk b in car. Even you must recognize in dojo video jerk a was some sort of a
threat to jerk b (murderer). Of course its different genius, its worse!

What do you care if someone has "superior knowledge to you". Do you read the papers? Search
the news or wait a few days and you'll see a story where the either one or the other is killed in a
fight, no charges pressed. Who started it is not the issue. Kinda, sorta de escalating a problem you
stated or maybe did not start is not an issue. You enter into a fight, you better win and have a civil
lawyer ready. Criminal matter, probably no. You Tube post , f'in horrible.

"Attempted to de escalate" is like kinda, sorta slowing down a car crash, NOT STOPPING. Its
like asking a cop to wait to give a criminal time to reload, as a courtesy.Not as fnny as "he started
it" legal theory, but close. I know you don't understand any of this and do not read so good, so......

SARCASM GO!

KaBar67
View Public Profile
Send a private message to KaBar67
Find all posts by KaBar67
Add KaBar67 to Your Contacts
Previous
left arrow key Next
right arrow key Close Move

Page 4 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Page 5 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

View
First
Unrea Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Display Modes
d

#61
Today, 01:04 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

Quote:
Originally Posted by KaBar67
You can watch it 50 times. You only are seeing what you want to see, in 8-10 second
increments. No one is claiming superior knowledge to you. You have demonstrated your
superior knowledge in your witty sarcasm.

"Attempting to de escalate..." are you kidding. Jerk a is in a fight. He does not quit, run, yell
stop etc. How is that "de escalating?" It is way to late to "de escalate". He should have quit.

I'm going to make the Philly story simple for you. Of course its different than a dojo fist fight,
ITS FAR WORSE an example. Jerk a hit jerk b while he was in a running car. Jerk b got out
of the car and stabbed a to death. No charges against jerk from car-murderer. Jerk b could
have ended assault by driving off. Jerk a was a ZERO threat to jerk b in car. Even you must
recognize in dojo video jerk a was some sort of a threat to jerk b (murderer). Of course its
different genius, its worse!

What do you care if someone has "superior knowledge to you". Do you read the papers?
Search the news or wait a few days and you'll see a story where the either one or the other is
killed in a fight, no charges pressed. Who started it is not the issue. Kinda, sorta de
escalating a problem you stated or maybe did not start is not an issue. You enter into a fight,
you better win and have a civil lawyer ready. Criminal matter, probably no. You Tube post ,
f'in horrible.

"Attempted to de escalate" is like kinda, sorta slowing down a car crash, NOT STOPPING.
Its like asking a cop to wait to give a criminal time to reload, as a courtesy.Not as fnny as
"he started it" legal theory, but close. I know you don't understand any of this and do not
read news so......

SARCASM GO!
I can clearly see what kind of person you are.

I'm indifferent to whether or not you care...but young individuals who see this will think this is
fine...it was the heat of battle.

the law will protect me...I'll be out in 5 and I'm a bad ass....better yet maybe they'll make a
video about them stomping on some guys neck and tossing him in the dumpster and they won't
have to worry about serving any time for it at all.

That guy laid helpless on the ground for a long time. He was not going to get back up and
reload or continue to be a threat....

But it's obvious that you are ignorant of that.

sojurn87
View Public Profile
Send a private message to sojurn87
Find all posts by sojurn87
Add sojurn87 to Your Contacts

#62
Today, 01:09 AM
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Phoenix, Az
Posts: 2,799
Kregener Thanks: 390
Doomsayer Thanked 3,214 Times in 1,224 Posts

Bobby Joe has a plane for sale too!

http://www.trade-a-plane.com/specs?clsfdnum=792879

Oh, and all the half-**** 'attempts' to paint this as anything other than the murder it was is
completely amoral.

They lured the homeless guy into the...'dojo'...to SPAR.

They intended exactly what occurred.

They should fry for it.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r

S
a
y
s

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

K
r
e
g
e
n
e
r

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

monet108

#63
Today, 01:38 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


You can watch it 50 times. You only are seeing what you want to see, in 8-10 second
increments. No one is claiming superior knowledge to you. You have demonstrated your
superior knowledge in your witty sarcasm.

"Attempting to de escalate..." are you kidding. Jerk a is in a fight. He does not quit, run, yell
stop etc. How is that "de escalating?" It is way to late to "de escalate". He should have quit.

Re read the Philly story. YOU GOT IT BACKWARDS. I'm going to make the Philly story
simple for you. Of course its different than a dojo fist fight, ITS FAR WORSE an example.
Jerk a hit jerk b while he was in a running car. Jerk b got out of the car and stabbed a to
death. No charges against jerk from car-murderer. Jerk b could have ended assault by
driving off. Jerk a was a ZERO threat to jerk b in car. Even you must recognize in dojo
video jerk a was some sort of a threat to jerk b (murderer). Of course its different genius,
its worse!

What do you care if someone has "superior knowledge to you". Do you read the papers?
Search the news or wait a few days and you'll see a story where the either one or the other is
killed in a fight, no charges pressed. Who started it is not the issue. Kinda, sorta de
escalating a problem you stated or maybe did not start is not an issue. You enter into a fight,
you better win and have a civil lawyer ready. Criminal matter, probably no. You Tube post ,
f'in horrible.

"Attempted to de escalate" is like kinda, sorta slowing down a car crash, NOT STOPPING.
Its like asking a cop to wait to give a criminal time to reload, as a courtesy.Not as fnny as
"he started it" legal theory, but close. I know you don't understand any of this and do not
read so good, so......

SARCASM GO!
Quote:

The 20-year-old was with his girlfriend in his car when he saw his ex-girlfriend's sister and
stopped to talk to her.

He drove around the block and stopped again to continue talking.

The 18-year-old ran to the car and started punching him and slamming his face into the
steering wheel.

The 20-year-old pulled out a knife, stabbed the man, drove away and called 9-1-1 to report
what had happened.
Please point out to me when does the 20 year old get out of the car to stab the guy?

I do believe he stabbed the guy while he was inside the car being assaulted by the guy who ran
up to the car and proceeded punch and slam his head into the steering wheel.

Did I miss something?

The story offers nothing more.

Maybe you should go back and read it again.

s
V
S
F
A

#64
Today, 05:42 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojurn87


I watched that video for a second time and it sickens me even more to see responses a few
individuals who claim to "higher understanding" about the law and that some how this was self
defense from the guy in the white gi.
It is not a higher understanding. It is reality. What is relevant is how the law would look at it not
what we feel about it. Disgust is not enough. One does not convict with feelings. You convict
with facts and how they fit with the law. The death was not prosecuted in 1984. Like it or not that
should tell you something: It was not a prosecutable case. Was not then, would not be now. As it
was black on black, race is irrelevant so there were no civil rights issues (and I suspect exactly
why the dojo master did not take the guy on himself.)

Here's the take away: Law is a game, a very serious one. The defendant is the ticket to the game
but it is always the law that is on trial. The fighters are the lawyers. The judge is really the referee
and the jury is the judge. The entire game moves on evidence and rules. They are equally
important. Truth is irrelevant. Do you understand that? Truth is irrelevant. The guilty walk and
the innocent get convicted because truth is irrelevant. The important part is how the game is
played. And, once the game starts there will be a winner and a loser, and truth, reality is totally
irelevant.

Prosecutors only play the game when they are guaranteed a high probability of success. They are
paid to win, not lose. They limit their losses by not taking cases that do not offer a near slam
dunk success. Winning is how they justify spending tax dollars. If they lose a lot they are
replaced.

As hideous as this incident is, to the legal eye it is not a good case to prosecute. There are too
many places open to defense interpretation, and who knows, the defense might be right.
Consider something as simple as a speeding ticket. Once you get the ticket whether you were
speeding or not is irrelevant, completely irrelevant. You are in the game, and you will win or lose.
If you play better than the other guy you win, if you don't you lose. Essentially prosecutors stack
the deck, nearly every one they charge did the crime and there is a boat load of clear evidence.
All that is left is to play the game and win. They clearly thought they could not win this one and
did not play. That is reality.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Today at 05:54 AM..

The Following User Says Thank You to


Straight Razor For This Useful Post:
KaBar67
Straight Razor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Straight Razor
Find all posts by Straight Razor
Add Straight Razor to Your Contacts

#65
Today, 06:03 AM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 86
Saberman Thanks: 0
Member Thanked 53 Times in 27 Posts

Why wasn't that guy busted for that? I mean a murder took place on film with many witnesses.
People have been arrested for way less than that. I bet if it was a White guy that was killed it
would have been a different story. The karate master would have been in jail for the rest of his
life.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r

S
a
y
s

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

S
a
b
e
r
m
a
n

F
o
r

T
h
i
s
U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

monet108

#66
Today, 06:16 AM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England & Eire
Posts: 7,925
sticks65 Thanks: 16,210
The Ancient Briton Thanked 7,113 Times in 3,195 Posts
Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Well, I'm nearly 60. That's a long time to do a lot of things, though I actually started law
school in 96. Now I suppose senile will be added to the list of insults.
LMFAO.
If you see my reply as an insult you must be a lawyer

But i have to say i smell a big steaming pile of BS.

You get the BS flag of the month. congratulations.


Attached Images

__________________
Proud Infidel

s
V
S
F
A

#67
Today, 06:47 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by sticks65


LMFAO.

You get the BS flag of the month. congratulations.


Thank you for the award. With so much competition here, I am humbled.

The Following User Says Thank You to


Straight Razor For This Useful Post:
KaBar67
Straight Razor
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Straight Razor
Find all posts by Straight Razor
Add Straight Razor to Your Contacts

#68
Today, 07:09 AM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojurn87


I can clearly see what kind of person you are.

Reply: More of your personal bs attacks like threw at straitrazor, right. Boo hoo.

I'm indifferent to whether or not you care...but young individuals who see this will think this
is fine...it was the heat of battle.

Reply: No they will not. You individuals will read your thread and not get that once you
engage in fist fighting, it may get out of control and you may get dead. No crime, no foul, one
less jerk. You needed the reset button.

the law will protect me...I'll be out in 5 and I'm a bad ass....better yet maybe they'll make a
video about them stomping on some guys neck and tossing him in the dumpster and they
won't have to worry about serving any time for it at all.
Reply: More sarcasm?

That guy laid helpless on the ground for a long time. He was not going to get back up and
reload or continue to be a threat....

But it's obvious that you are ignorant of that.

Reply: I saw the video. A long time? That is debatable. The car example is not. Jerk in car
was in no real danger and he killed his opponant.
Edits made to above. I jumped in becasue you and a few others are putting out some bad intel.
When corrected you revert to name calling and sarcasm. (Ex. "I can see what sort of person
you are"). The same concept that allows us to use deadly force to defend lives, can yield some
crazy results such as the gun toting criminal claiming they "defended" themselves from the
police! 2 jerks fighting, one dies and no charges are brought is very very common. Only spin
here is its a dojo and they are fighting karate style, and on You Tube! Its sick, but it is not
sparring.

Last edited by KaBar67; Today at 07:24 AM..

#69
Today, 07:45 AM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 184
Your Funeral Thanks: 52
Junior Member Thanked 150 Times in 62 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Well, I'm nearly 60. That's a long time to do a lot of things, though I actually started law school
in 96. Now I suppose senile will be added to the list of insults.
Unless you consider astute legal analysis insulting I didn't insult you. You asked for a point by
point refutation of your argument without insult and I delivered handily. I cited several concepts
that are elementary, bedrock principles established by volumes of case law, that you conveniently
chose to ignore in your response.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HotPrepper


Had to log in to thank that post! Not much wiggle room left after that.
Not for any rational person who actually read it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


That is exactly what happens in the ring from time to time. One punch too many, or two, or
three. Such deaths rarely result in prosecution. Such incidents are not legally in the same
league as a street fight or the like.
There is a difference between a sanctioned match where two fighters, who are subject to physical
requirements agree to fight and have to sign waivers and contracts prior to bouts. Because this
crime ocured in a dojo does not cloak it in the same protections that a legally sanctioned event
would have. In fact that really isn't even worth mentioning because it isn't even relevant to this
debate.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


"Excessive force" would be the only hope for a prosecutor for a manslaughter conviction. But
in fights with accomplished people that could be hotly contested. An autopsy could be helpful
or harmful.

Not providing medical care is not illegal (excluding parental responsibilities.) It is inhumane
and a lot of other moral failings but not helping someone is not a crime. Indeed, doctors often
refuse to offer medical care at accidents if their state does not have a good samaritan law.
We've already covered this. For counsel on the matter you can refer to my post that you
selectively ignored on page three.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Straight Razor
Well... they didn't, and they won't, successfully. That is the reality beyond opinions here. Most
of the opinions I have seen here are based on ficitional concepts of the law, not in the reality of
the law.
I have clearly demonstrated that you lack even a basic understanding of the law, in fact if you
were on trial for being an attorney and your posts were entered into evidence you can rest assured
you'd be acquitted in record time.
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Both engaged in fight. Like "who started it" matters when both are standing in fighting
positions trading blows evenly a second later. If jerk a walked away,ran, said stop it, end of
story. Instead he goes Bruce Lee. Now he's dead.
So you're in essence saying that if you're accosted by a criminal and you end up killing him then
you agree you should be charged with a crime because by your own statement whether or not he
initiated the assault is irrelevant. WOW. The man stated he was going to engage in an exhibition
not a mutual form of combat. The only way you could possibly stretch this into a self defense
case for man B would be if the deceased had struck him first. Once man B struck the first blow
which after the deceased asked him not to and even still after being struck man A did not
immediately actively retaliate against man B and asked him not to continue, any claim of self
defense would be easily dismantled by a prosecutor in any state in the union, with of course the
exception being the great state of make believe.
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Check out this link to help see self defense theory in practice just a few days ago. 20 year old is
in his car. 18 year old (lets call him jerk a) attacks with fists 20 year old in car which in in
street, running (call guy in car jerk b). 20 year old (jerk b) stops engine, gets out of car, grabs
knife and stabs jerk a to death. Jerk a unarmed. No police charges. Self defense. I'm sure jerk a
did not think jerk b would get out of car, grab a knife and kill em when he strted the fight that
led to his death. And I'll bet jerk a started the fight to "save face". In fact, jerk a probalby felt
pretty safe (like a dojo) when he hit jerk b who was stuck in a car. Jerk a hit jerk b throught the
open car window!
Apples and oranges, the victim in the dojo case was lured into acting in an alleged aggressive
manner by sadistic thugs who did so with the intent to use his "aggressiveness" as an excuse to
assault him. BUT FOR the prompting of man B engaging the obviously mentally ill man by
playing into his delusions and agreeing to enter into what was supposed to be a "no touch"
exhibition, there would have been no "danger" to man B. A far cry from a self-initiated assault by
a person of sound mind, to say the least.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


In video, jerk a went into a dojo looking for fight! Far worse facts. Over time, he fought as both
aggressor and victim.
Quite incorrect, the mustachioed sadist lured him into acting aggressively by agreeing to allow
the victim to perform an "exhibition" under the stipulation that it would be "no contact". Man B
then violated the terms of the "exhibition" that he helped initiate (with demonstrable knowledge
he was doing so) by kicking the deceased in the groin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Still laughing at dude who wrote long thread as if who starts a fight matters. Priceless. "He
started it". I heard that like 100 times this summer from kids.
Just like judges in courts across the nation hear on a daily basis, wherein you can bet your last
dollar that very question is the heart of the matter. You can ignore the truth and try to couch it in
terms of kids fighting if you want, it only makes you look callous in addition to looking ignorant.
Are you really so obtuse you don't understand the difference between a fight between kids and a
savage beating death captured on tape? Wow, laugh away buddy, laugh away. Myself? I saw
nothing to laugh about, this video is one that I wish I could "unwatch".
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


You can watch it 50 times. You only are seeing what you want to see, in 8-10 second
increments.
Then I'd see the same facts 50 times, AS WOULD a JURY.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Attempting to de escalate..." are you kidding. Jerk a is in a fight. He does not quit, run, yell
stop etc. How is that "de escalating?" It is way to late to "de escalate". He should have quit.
He did tell him to stop several times. How should he have quit when he was getting his head
stomped in, pray tell? Was he still fighting when he was getting the life stomped out of him?
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Re read the Philly story. YOU GOT IT BACKWARDS. I'm going to make the Philly story simple
for you. Of course its different than a dojo fist fight, ITS FAR WORSE an example.. Jerk a hit
jerk b while he was in a running car. Jerk b got out of the car and stabbed a to death. No
charges against jerk from car-murderer. Jerk b could have ended assault by driving off. Jerk a
was a ZERO threat to jerk b in car. Even you must recognize in dojo video jerk a was some sort
of a threat to jerk b (murderer). Of course its different genius, its worse!
(sigh) Again, you're comparing a mentally ill man who was lured into acting in a certain fashion
to a willing combatant initiating an assault. Apples and oranges. Let me break it down for you
Barney style: Not even in the same universe, let alone the same ball park.
Furthermore you seem to have added a few things to your article as it doesn't state anything about
the car being cut off and the driver exiting the vehicle.
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Search the news or wait a few days and you'll see a story where the either one or the other is
killed in a fight, no charges pressed. Who started it is not the issue. Kinda, sorta de escalating
a problem you stated or maybe did not start is not an issue. You enter into a fight, you better
win and have a civil lawyer ready. Criminal matter, probably no. You Tube post , f'in horrible.
Google the term "totality of the circumstance", each case stands on it's own and I will wager that
the bulk of people in this thread and far more average Joe types would agree that this example is
unique and particularly heinous, if just for the fact that someone who obviously possesses such a
high level of specialized knowledge in inflicting damage and is supposed to be trained allowed
this "exhibition" to even start, let alone proceed to the point where an incapacitated man was
repeatedly stomped while prone. I have to believe that nobody could be this dumb, that you are
playing devil's advocate for the sheer entertainment it brings you.

Last edited by Your Funeral; Today at 08:22 AM..

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to


Your Funeral For This Useful Post:
Brother Buck, sticks65
Your Funeral
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Your Funeral
Find all posts by Your Funeral
Add Your Funeral to Your Contacts

#70
Today, 07:55 AM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,587
Thanks: 750
trixie
Thanked 1,551 Times in 797 Posts
thread saver
Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Well, I'm nearly 60. That's a long time to do a lot of things, though I actually started law
school in 96. Now I suppose senile will be added to the list of insults.

yeah guys dont forget razor has been a lawyer, a doctor, a fighter pilot, a college professor, a
journalist, the president of ABC, a CEO, the secretary of defense, an assassin, a soldier, a
stripper, an actor, a scientist, AND a lion tamer. im pretty sure he knows what he's talking
about here.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k
Y
o
u

t
o

t
r
i
x
i
e

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

Kregener, RECTIFIER

#71
Today, 08:03 AM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by trixie


yeah guys dont forget razor has been a lawyer, a doctor, a fighter pilot, a college professor, a
journalist, the president of ABC, a CEO, the secretary of defense, an assassin, a soldier, a
stripper, an actor, a scientist, AND a lion tamer. im pretty sure he knows what he's talking
about here.
And you change from one disturbing avatar to an even MORE disturbing avatar. I can't look at
the screen without remembering that clown picture in my room as a kid. STOP IT. STOP
LOOKING AT ME.

Leave the personal insults for another forum. He's an older member and has I beleive the right
answer.

K
V
S
F
A

#72
Today, 08:21 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3
Quote:

Originally Posted by Your Funeral


Unless you consider astute legal analysis insulting I didn't insult you. You asked for a point by
point refutation of your argument without insult and I delivered handily. I cited several
concepts that are elementary, bedrock principles established by volumes of case law, that you
conveniently chose to ignore in your response.
Not ignoring. I've had my legal say, no point in being tautological. I don't beat a horse dead.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Today at 08:41 AM..

#73
Today, 08:23 AM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

[QUOTE=Your Funeral;870173]

There is a difference between a sanctioned match where two fighters, who are subject to physical
requirements agree to fight and have to sign waivers and contracts prior to bouts. Because this
crime ocured in a dojo does not cloak it in the same protections that a legally sanctioned event
would have. In fact that really isn't even worth mentioning because it isn't even relevant to this
debate.

Reply: What is the poitn of this. Of course its not sparring.


I have clearly demonstrated that you lack even a basic understanding of the law, in fact if you
were on trial for being an attorney and your posts were entered into evidence you can rest assured
you'd be acquitted in record time.

Reply: No reply needed.

So you're in essence saying that if you're accosted by a criminal and you end up killing him then
you agree you should be charged with a crime because by your own statement whether or not he
initiated the assault is irrelevant.

Reply: Actually logic gives you opposite result, criminal death does not get other arrested b/c it
was self defense. Rethink this. It is the crux of your problem.

WOW. The man stated he was going to engage in an exhibition not a mutual form of combat. The
only way you could possibly stretch this into a self defense case for man B would be if the
deceased had struck him first. Once man B struck the first blow which after the deceased asked
him not to and even still after being struck man A did not immediately actively assault man B and
asked him not to continue, any claim of self defense would be easily dismantled by a prosecutor
in any state in the union, with of course the exception being great state of make believe.

Reply: Mostly mindless insults no need to reply. (Not funny either).


Where do you get idea it was an exhibition. Just cause Jerk A said so? Any touching is a criminal
battery, fear of touching an assault, civil standards) even if you say first "let me just demonstrate
this choke hold"... Huis conduct is what gort him killed not his words.

Apples and oranges, the victim in the dojo case was lured into acting in an alleged aggressive
manner by sadistic thugs who did so with the intent to use his "aggressiveness" as an excuse to
assault him. BUT FOR the prompting of man B engaging the obviously mentally ill man by
playing into his delusions and agreeing to enter into what was supposed to be a "no touch"
exhibition, there would have been no "danger" to man B. A far cry from a self-initiated assault by
a person of sound mind, to say the least.

Reply: "BUT FOR THE PROMPTING"...thats civil concept, not criminal. Each man is
responsible for his own conduct in criminal law. Are you mixing up entrapment?

"Obvious mentally ill" mental illness is a sliding scale too. This guy was pretty much in control
of his faculties and far from mentally incompetant. Stupid yes.

"No touch" did jerk b "agree to a no touching fight". Look again.

Quite incorrect, the mustachioed sadist lured him into acting aggressively by agreeing to allow
the victim to perform an "exhibition" under the stipulation that it would be "no contact". Man B
then violated the terms of the "exhibition" that he helped initiate (with demonstrable knowledge
he was doing so) by kicking the deceased in the groin.
Reply: "lured him into?" How did jerk a get into dojo?

Just like judges in courts across the nation hear on a daily basis, wherein you can bet your last
dollar that very question is the heart of the matter. You can ignore the truth and try to couch it in
terms of kids fighting if you want, it only makes you look callous in addition to looking ignorant.
Are you really so obtuse you don't understand the difference between a fight between kids and a
savage beating death captured on tape? Wow, laugh away buddy, laugh away. Myself? I saw
nothing to laugh about, this video is one that I wish I could "unwatch".

Reply: You started it. You started it. Think how silly that is. Did it work for you in grammer
school.
Then I'd see the same facts 50 times, AS WOULD a JURY.

He did tell him to stop several times. How should he have quit when he was getting his head
stomped in, pray tell? Was he still fighting when he was getting the life stomped out of him?

Reply: I did not see him tell him to stop. Not once. That would change everything. But it aint
there. Once he was getting his head stopped in it was too late. Rest is sarcasm, no need to reply.

(sigh) Again, you're comparing a mentally ill man who was lured into acting in a certain fashion
to a willing combatant initiating an assault. Apples and oranges. Let me break it down for you
Barney style: Not even in the same universe, let alone the same ball park.

Reply: Not funny or even inciteful. Too many assumptions.

Furthermore you seem to have added a few things to your article as it doesn't state anything about
the car being cut off and the driver exiting the vehicle.

Reply: Ok. He's still in a car. Hit gas, incident over. This is only one example. Look in the news
(very small stories of little newsworthiness). This is an everyday occurance. I looked for about a
minute.

Google the term "totality of the circumstance", each case stands on it's own and I will wager that
the bulk of people in this thread and far more average Joe types would agree that this example is
unique and particularly heinous, if just for the fact that someone who obviously possesses such a
high level of specialized knowledge in inflicting damage and is supposed to be trained allowed
this "exhibition" to even start, let alone proceed to the point where an incapacitated man was
repeatedly stomped while prone. I have to believe that nobody could be this dumb, that you are
playing devil's advocate for the sheer entertainment it brings you.

Reply: Yea. You called people who don't agree with you dumb. Ok. Cops in Philly dumb too,
maybe you should rethink self defense issues. Why would I google "totallity of the
circumstances" on an issue as narrow as self defense and consentual combat. Who agreed to an
"exhibition". Both fighters did pretty well.
You younger guys need to know if you decide to the difference between self defense and
concentual combat. If you engage in a fight on consent, (as this clearly was) you better (a) win
(b) if you decide to quit, YELL OUT NO MAS! Make your retreat and withdrawl clear. I did not
see that happen on this tape. The last stomp is questionable, but to me, not so long after they were
brawling at a fairly even pace.

Last edited by KaBar67; Today at 08:30 AM..

K
V
S
F
A

#74
Today, 08:33 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by trixie


yeah guys dont forget razor has been a lawyer, a doctor, a fighter pilot, a college professor, a
journalist, the president of ABC, a CEO, the secretary of defense, an assassin, a soldier, a
stripper, an actor, a scientist, AND a lion tamer. im pretty sure he knows what he's talking
about here.
Doctor? No, but I played doctor when I was a kid. Fighter pilot? No, but did take flying lessons.
College professor. I have taught at college. Journalist. Yeph, award-winning in fact, covered
courts and crime which got me interested in law school in the first place. President of ABC (not
me but I did drink a lot at ABC liquors) CEO? I preferred to look up through the glass ceiling at
all those dresses above me. Secretary of Defense. Secretary of the Incensed would be more
accurate. Assassin. Only of reputations. Soldier. I was that, 1969-72, volunteered. Stripper... I
wish.... actor... only in the bedroom... scientist...I like empirical thinking. lion tamer... if that
were the case Maurepas and I would be good friends

I started out a soldier then teacher, went to journalism then law and then settled on what I've
always liked, plants. That only took me 40 years. It's been a fun run, except for the Army part.
When you are shot at every day it only becomes a matter of time before you will get hit.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Today at 08:55 AM..

#75
Today, 09:33 AM
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: NE Scotland
Wook Posts: 440
Cautiously Optimistic Thanks: 125
Thanked 491 Times in 186 Posts

YouTube - Bobby Joe Blythe to be hunted down and...

Someone seems to have informed the cops. This could get interesting. I wonder why he would
post something that incriminated himself?

The Following 10 Users Say


Thank You to Wook For This Remove Your Thanks
Useful Post:
baa_baa, Filthy_McNasty, Highlander, HotPrepper, KaBar67, NCDoberman, NHCraigT,
sojurn87, sticks65, voyuer1
Wook
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Wook
Find all posts by Wook
Add Wook to Your Contacts
Previous
left arrow key Next
right arrow key Close Move

Page 5 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Page 6 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

View
First
Unrea Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Display Modes
d

#76
Today, 10:14 AM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67

Reply: Ok. He's still in a car. Hit gas, incident over. This is only one example. Look in the
news (very small stories of little newsworthiness). This is an everyday occurance. I looked
for about a minute.
Maybe you should have looked a bit longer to find one that better suited you argument.

And yes, it does happen everyday and the law interprets each circumstance when called upon
to do so to determine if laws had been broken.

Unless this is on record somewhere as having been investigated and showing the DA as unable
to bring charges forward it will remain an injustice to the law.

In the article, you linked to support your claims, you injected/made up events that did not
occur.....

And then have the audacity to say to others, and myself, we did not read the news story
correctly?

That is incredibly ignorant.

Which leads me to question your ability to understand what happened in the video from a legal
perspective.

And the fact that Straight Razor evades Your Funeral's posts leads me to question his ability to
interpret the law as it is written.

The best thing I could hope for at this point is the video turns out to be a hoax.

The Following User Says Thank You to


sojurn87 For This Useful Post:
Your Funeral
sojurn87
View Public Profile
Send a private message to sojurn87
Find all posts by sojurn87
Add sojurn87 to Your Contacts

#77
Today, 10:39 AM
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Parts Unknown
Filthy_McNasty Posts: 433
WOLVERINES! Thanks: 219
Thanked 237 Times in 138 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Wook


YouTube - Bobby Joe Blythe to be hunted down and caged

Someone seems to have informed the cops. This could get interesting. I wonder why he would
post something that incriminated himself?
There is a criminal investigation into this video because murder has no statute of limitations.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=915208

The skinny guy said he "gives up" several different times, yet they let him get stomped down.

The entire group should be charged with murder, and/or accomplice to murder.. That was a
cruel, cowardly thing to do

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

F
i
l
t
h
y
_
M
c
N
a
s
t
y

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

RECTIFIER, rifle man, SOLIDUS, sticks65, voyuer1,


Your Funeral

#78
Today, 10:52 AM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 184
Your Funeral Thanks: 52
Junior Member Thanked 150 Times in 62 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


The death was not prosecuted in 1984. Like it or not that should tell you something: It was
not a prosecutable case. Was not then, would not be now.
Oh really? Enjoy the video Wook posted while your humble pie is still hot.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wook


YouTube - Bobby Joe Blythe to be hunted down and caged

Someone seems to have informed the cops. This could get interesting. I wonder why he would
post something that incriminated himself?
Interesting indeed.

Quote:
Originally Posted by sojurn87
The best thing I could hope for at this point is the video turns out to be a hoax.
I agree, but if it isn't (which I believe) hopefully justice will be served.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


"BUT FOR THE PROMPTING"...thats civil concept, not criminal
I am firmly aware of the differing burdens of proof for the different courts. Are you? Criminal
cases require proof beyond a reasonable doubt. The "But for" rule is used primarily in civil
cases, which require a preponderance of the evidence. That being said, the logic of the "but
for" rule applies in both. Again you're trying to come off as eminently qualified to lecture me
on this discussion based on law, yet you cite absolutely NO law, either statutory or case law.
You WILL cite misrepresented versions of completely different stories from the internet and
then somehow expect we will make the stretch that your version of the specific analogy will fit
this situation, which I am SURE you will agree is most unique.
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Not funny or even inciteful. Too many assumptions
That you find it necessary to repeat that my observations are "not funny" tellingly illustrates
your worry that they are. I think the word you meant to use is "insightful", by the way.
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Yea. You called people who don't agree with you dumb
Not because you don't agree with me, but because you hold yourself out to be knowledgeable
in the law and you're not.. You are making arguments that are not born out by any legal concept
or even remotely rational interpretation of what is CLEARLY able to be seen. You blithely
ignore the obvious and then hide behind your droll line about "not funny, I'm not going to
respond". Clearly you won't respond because you realize you lack a strong position from which
you could. I think a quick glance at the "Thanks" quotient in our respective posts will tell you
that.
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


You started it. You started it. Think how silly that is. Did it work for you in grammer school.
I already dissected this pathetic argument, yet you bring it up again. When you can't make a
point repeat a cop out, yeah, talk about grammar school indeed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by KaBar67
You younger guys need to know if you decide to the difference between self defense and
concentual combat
Earth to Kabar, come in, Kabar! IF I AGREE TO ALLOW YOU TO PERFORM A "NO
TOUCH" EXHIBITION, AND THEN STRIKE YOU, THAT DOES NOT "CONCENTUAL"
COMBAT MAKE (THE ACTUAL WORD IS CONSENSUAL). It makes it an assault. You
have illustrated my argument perfectly and I hereby order that all future posts from you be
taken by the respective audience members with no more than one unrefined grain of natural
sodium iodide. And it is so ordered!

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to


Your Funeral For This Useful Post:
Filthy_McNasty, sticks65
Your Funeral
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Your Funeral
Find all posts by Your Funeral
Add Your Funeral to Your Contacts

#79
Today, 10:58 AM
Join Date: May 2009
Posts: 687
blackkitty Thanks: 40
Hiker Thanked 293 Times in 175 Posts

Perfect example of the Milgram Experiment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment

b
V
S
F
A

#80
Today, 11:26 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Your Funeral


Oh really? Enjoy the video Wook posted while your humble pie is still hot.
Twinkies reporting the video does not a prosecution or conviction make. When there is a murder
conviction and it is upheld then I will eat two servings of humble pie... but not a bite before...

Last edited by Straight Razor; Today at 06:14 PM..

S
V
S
F
A

#81
Today, 11:27 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Straight Razor Posts: 6,535
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanks: 426
2009 Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
Survival of the Wittest Awards Showcase
Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackkitty


Perfect example of the Milgram Experiment

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment
I'm surprised anyone remembers that. I had to study it in grad school a life time ago.

S
V
S
F
A

#82
Today, 11:34 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojurn87

And the fact that Straight Razor evades Your Funeral's posts leads me to question his ability to
interpret the law as it is written.
I'm not evading anyone's posts. I've had my say, saying more won't change any minds or make
any difference thus no point to it.

Last edited by Straight Razor; Today at 11:42 AM..

#83
Today, 12:40 PM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by sojurn87


Maybe you should have looked a bit longer to find one that better suited you argument.

And yes, it does happen everyday and the law interprets each circumstance when called upon
to do so to determine if laws had been broken.

Unless this is on record somewhere as having been investigated and showing the DA as unable
to bring charges forward it will remain an injustice to the law.

In the article, you linked to support your claims, you injected/made up events that did not
occur.....

And then have the audacity to say to others, and myself, we did not read the news story
correctly?

That is incredibly ignorant.

Which leads me to question your ability to understand what happened in the video from a legal
perspective.

And the fact that Straight Razor evades Your Funeral's posts leads me to question his ability to
interpret the law as it is written.

The best thing I could hope for at this point is the video turns out to be a hoax.

You mixed up jerk a and jerk b. Period.


"Hense, ispo fact, leads me, party of the first part, party of the second part, to beleive ....blah blah
blah."

#84
Today, 12:43 PM
Join Date: May 2008
Location: New York
KaBar67 Posts: 1,483
Hunter Thanks: 1,302
Thanked 648 Times in 372 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Filthy_McNasty


There is a criminal investigation into this video because murder has no statute of limitations.
http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=915208

The skinny guy said he "gives up" several different times, yet they let him get stomped down.

The entire group should be charged with murder, and/or accomplice to murder.. That was a
cruel, cowardly thing to do
I just saw the ending. Not on other video. God aweful
Last edited by KaBar67; Today at 04:59 PM..

#85
Today, 01:00 PM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England & Eire
Posts: 7,925
sticks65 Thanks: 16,210
The Ancient Briton Thanked 7,113 Times in 3,195 Posts
Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


I'm not evading anyone's posts. I've had my say, saying more won't change any minds or make
any difference thus no point to it.

No no point at all
Attached Thumbnails

__________________
Proud Infidel

The Following User Says Thank You to


sticks65 For This Useful Post:
Your Funeral
sticks65
View Public Profile
Send a private message to sticks65
Find all posts by sticks65
Add sticks65 to Your Contacts

#86
Today, 01:07 PM
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Phoenix, Az
Posts: 2,799
Kregener Thanks: 390
Doomsayer Thanked 3,214 Times in 1,224 Posts

I say everybody step back and let Straight Razor argue with himself.

THAT should bring some real entertainment.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

K
r
e
g
e
n
e
r

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:

sticks65, Your Funeral

#87
Today, 01:14 PM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 2,587
Thanks: 750
trixie
Thanked 1,551 Times in 797 Posts
thread saver

whats truly awsome or rediculous about razor (you decide). is that with all his claimed areas of
expertise he covers everything. wook posts a video that blows all of razors BS out the window,
and he claims that his journalistic expertise somehow nullifies it.

i hope that whole bunch of cobra kai wanna-be's gets life. they will probly find half of them
currently employed by blackwater international.

The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to


trixie For This Useful Post:
sticks65, Your Funeral
trixie
View Public Profile
Send a private message to trixie
Find all posts by trixie
Add trixie to Your Contacts
#88
Today, 05:07 PM
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Coastal NC
NCDoberman Posts: 1,040
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Thanks: 873
Thanked 914 Times in 464 Posts

How in the **** could anyone claim that was some how self defense. Any attempt to make
that claim, which was a weak claim in the first place, died as soon as they dragged that guys
limp body out the back door and left him for dead. Even in self defense you have a legal
responsibility to notify the authorities. It's the same as if someone breaks into your home, you
can defend yourself but if you shoot them and then leave their body by the curb or bury it in
the back yard then you have committed murder.

counselor approach the bench because you're ****ing fired.

T
h
e

F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
s

S
a
y

T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

N
C
D
o
b
e
r
m
a
n

F
o
r

T
h
i
s

U
s
e
f
u
l

P
o
s
t
:
sticks65, trixie, Your Funeral

#89
Today, 05:11 PM
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Coastal NC
NCDoberman Posts: 1,040
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Thanks: 873
Thanked 914 Times in 464 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


No, it's called three years of law school and several years in law.

I'm calling BS, prove it. I want to see a picture of your JD or LLM... cover your real name for
privacy and put a piece of paper in the pic that says "straight razor's credentials"

The Following User Says Thank You to


NCDoberman For This Useful Post:
Your Funeral
NCDoberman
View Public Profile
Send a private message to NCDoberman
Find all posts by NCDoberman
Add NCDoberman to Your Contacts

#90
Today, 05:37 PM
Join Date: Mar 2009
Posts: 184
Your Funeral Thanks: 52
Junior Member Thanked 150 Times in 62 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Twinkies reporting the video does not a prosecution or conviction make. When there is a
murder conviction and it is upheld then I will eat servicing of humble pie... but not a bite
before...
Nice try but I'm sure everyone here will agree that you've been force fed your humble pie, just
swallow hard and try to think before you post from now on.

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


I just saw the ending. Not on other video. God aweful
The video was originally posted here on the 20th in its entirety only to be taken down a few
hours later. Your first post in this thread from today states-
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


Jerk "a" could have quit, left, called out for his mommy, yelled "STOP", slapped the mat
three times etc. or shown some sort of clear sign he was done. He did not. He did not get the
chance. Insted he fought. Fight when on a few kicks too long.
and when everyone insisted that the man made multiple indications that he didn't want to fight
and that he'd had enough you stated-
Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


If you engage in a fight on consent, (as this clearly was) you better (a) win (b) if you decide
to quit, YELL OUT NO MAS! Make your retreat and withdrawl clear. I did not see that
happen on this tape. The last stomp is questionable, but to me, not so long after they were
brawling at a fairly even pace.
The fact that you continually stated the guy didn't wish to quit and actually wanted to fight
leads me to believe (as I previously thought) that you didn't even watch the video when you
posted your opinion on it. Nice work.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to
Your Funeral For This Useful Post:
sticks65, trixie
Your Funeral
View Public Profile
Send a private message to Your Funeral
Find all posts by Your Funeral
Add Your Funeral to Your Contacts
Previous
left arrow key Next
right arrow key Close Move

Page 6 of 7 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 >

Page 7 of 7 « First < 2 3 4 5 6 7

View
First
Unrea Thread Tools Search this Thread Rating: Display Modes
d

#91
Today, 05:57 PM
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 123
PithHelmeteer Thanks: 10
Junior Member Thanked 129 Times in 43 Posts

Here's another video of the Karate instructor. It's kind of weird. It shows him shooting a gun at
a karate demo in front of a bunch of kids.
shooting video video by littleoldme_2009 -...

Apparently there's a whole page of stuff on Blythe here:

http://s812.photobucket.com/albums/z...tleoldme_2009/

Last edited by PithHelmeteer; Today at 06:03 PM..

PithHelmeteer
View Public Profile
Send a private message to PithHelmeteer
Find all posts by PithHelmeteer
Add PithHelmeteer to Your Contacts

#92
Today, 06:19 PM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England & Eire
Posts: 7,925
sticks65 Thanks: 16,210
The Ancient Briton Thanked 7,113 Times in 3,195 Posts
Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 2

http://www.myspace.com/index.cfm?fus...eo10.flv%22%3E

Watch this video,this guy is a sociopath.


__________________
Proud Infidel
Last edited by sticks65; Today at 06:27 PM..

s
V
S
F
A

#93
Today, 06:26 PM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,535
Straight Razor Thanks: 426
Recent Blog: GREEN DEANE?S BLOGS Thanked 4,941 Times in 2,322 Posts
2009 Awards Showcase
Survival of the Wittest

Total Awards: 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by trixie


wook posts a video that blows all of razors BS out the window, and he claims that his
journalistic expertise somehow nullifies it.
Twinkies running a clip is not fait accompli. It is just twinkies running a clip. The only thing that
counts is a jury's verdict.

#94
Today, 06:34 PM
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: England & Eire
Posts: 7,925
sticks65 Thanks: 16,210
The Ancient Briton Thanked 7,113 Times in 3,195 Posts
Awards Showcase

Total Awards: 2

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Twinkies running a clip is not fait accompli. It is just twinkies running a clip. The only thing
that counts is a jury's verdict.
we have your measure and you are in deficit sir.

.
Attached Thumbnails

__________________
Proud Infidel

The Following User Says Thank You to


sticks65 For This Useful Post:
Your Funeral
sticks65
View Public Profile
Send a private message to sticks65
Find all posts by sticks65
Add sticks65 to Your Contacts

#95
Today, 06:42 PM
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Coastal NC
NCDoberman Posts: 1,040
ΜΟΛΩΝ ΛΑΒΕ Thanks: 873
Thanked 914 Times in 464 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


Twinkies running a clip is not fait accompli. It is just twinkies running a clip. The only thing
that counts is a jury's verdict.

Just stop.

That clip did blow your entire argument away. You spent several posts claiming that no
prosecutor would take this case because it was not winnable. Well obviously if several law
enforcement organizations are investigating it then someone thinks there is a case there. The
chief interviewed even said that, if found, the owner would face charges and anyone there
likely might as well. The people who actually PRACTICE and enforce the law do not agree
with your assessment.

It's time to man up or walk away.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straight Razor


A prosecutor will look at the evidence, see where the weight lies, and.. and this is an
important "and"... decide whether he has a 90% probablility of winning based on the
evidence because every one has a limited budget and prosecutors don't try cases they don't
have a 90% chance of winning.
And 25 year old cold cases are not investigated unless a prosecutor some where has given them
the go ahead.

T
h
e
F
o
l
l
o
w
i
n
g

U
s
e
r
S
a
y
s
T
h
a
n
k

Y
o
u

t
o

N
C
D
o
b
e
r
m
a
n

F
o
r
T
h
i
s
U
s
e
f
u
l
P
o
s
t
:
Your Funeral
N
V
S
F
A

#96
Today, 07:36 PM
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Washington State
Adapt Posts: 137
Good 2 Go Thanks: 51
Thanked 72 Times in 45 Posts

When I trained in Kajukenbo in the mid to late nineties our school used to have knuckleheads
come in out of the blue and test our style. I saw our head instructor beat a few asses and sent
them limping with their tails between their legs out the door.

But, he would have never ever taken that fight with a mentally disturbed person, no matter
what, if that guy would have not left the dojo my instructor would have called the cops to deal
with him.

This dip**** head instructor and his sidekick bully murderer should have been brought out
back of their dojo and shot on sight. The rest of his students who stood there and filmed and
watched this murder should still be sitting in prison.

BTW, the murderer's fighting skill lacked everything, that old style karate would get schooled
today. I cannot believe they actually used to fight like that in the 80's, the martial arts have
evolved so much over the years thanks to Bruce Lee, the Gracie Family, and other legit
systems. I know that school's **** wouldn't work on the streets or in combat, his student's
probably got there asses handed to them constantly.
#97
Today, 07:55 PM
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Banifornia
Brother Buck Posts: 4,914
Survivor Thanks: 1,094
Thanked 4,212 Times in 2,073 Posts

Murder.
Plain and simple. The deceased may or may have not have been a true nuisance but that was not
for Blythe to deal with unless there was an intrusion.
He baited, the deceased asked to stop being beaten and was executed.
To say it isn't prosecutable is very subjective but I showed this to a Lawyer friend who says he
would have no problem bringing this into a court.
We had a highly connected dude in the Sheriffs Dept. see his dopey kid sent to prison for rape for
video taping sex with the neighborhood pump when she was passed out.... just minutes after
telling him to do her.
That vid (the killing) shows an assault, shows a man in dire urgent need of medical attention
being dragged out the back door to avoid witness.....while taping the whole sordid affair.
They knew this was going to be a route. They brought this dude in and kicked him while he was
down after he asked to not be hit anymore.
Murder so fouls as it were.
#98
Today, 09:10 PM
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 335
sojurn87 Thanks: 47
Prepared Thanked 207 Times in 125 Posts

Quote:

Originally Posted by KaBar67


You mixed up jerk a and jerk b. Period.
"Hense, ispo fact, leads me, party of the first part, party of the second part, to beleive ....blah
blah blah."
I haven't mixed anything up...

I quoted the article directly...

The problem is that you fail at reading comprehension.

We can now make it official that you have no idea what you are talking about.

But don't let that slow you down.

This investigation is only beginning...

You'll have plenty of opportunity to discredit everything that comes out and paint it all with a
"white wash of sarcasm" to save face.