You are actually comparing this to domestic abuse?? Pray tell us how, over a long period of time, he intimidated them into not pressing charges?
On a related note, does anyone know of a word that means “silly” and “stupid”?
Legally, yes it does. The cops also don’t need the participation of rhe victims to prosecute DV anymore.
Not in the least. I am well aware how much this is worth to his opponent’s campaign, and what could happen if a connection is found between the “students” and said opponent.
Well criminality is what is being alleged all over the place. If we’re now admitting that there is no criminality, I’m happy to drop that issue and just talk about the likely political ramificatons.
Even if no conviction happens, we can still judge that the person did something wrong, though, no?
Times like this I wish Charlton Heston had sucker punched idealistic, nice Michael Moore at the end of Bowling for Columbine…
In other words, you’re admitting that your conclusion about what the video “clearly shows” is not actually supportable by the internet video alone.
Those kids weren’t physically attacked and they weren’t girls. If my kids ever go around trying to troll politicians with video cameras and trying to goad their tagets into yelling at them or grabbing their arms, then I’m not going to think they’ve been outraged, no.
By the way, I don’t see the alleged “victims” in this case complaining or alleging they’ve somehow been violated. I wonder why.
Not without something more than an edited video by anonymous “students”, no.
I’m sure you do.
How sad.
I do not use the same burden of proof that the state must attain for a conviction. And I’m willing to bet that most other people do not either.
But now that we know that you use that burden of proof.
I’m certainly not admitting that. It’s pretty obvious that there is criminality. I’m saying there will be no criminal conviction, because the “college students” aren’t going to press charges and risk blowing their “cover”.
Sure, but people are alleging criminality. That’s a separate thing. We can personally judge “right or wrong” even if there iS criminality.
Personally, I don’t think Etheridge did anything wrong. He yelled at a couple of punks.
Why? What did Michael poor do to poor little Charlton? Ask him some questions?
If it was so obvious, there would already have been an arrest.
I’m also willing to bet that no prosecutor would ever be willing to charge a guy with battery for the actions on this video. There are too many REAL violent crimes going on out there.
That’s nuts. There was probably a criminal act here, though for a number of reasons (evidence, de minimis, etc) it likely won’t be prosecuted. A great number of criminal acts aren’t - this doesn’t make the criminality dissapear into the ether, it just means there is not a case that can be prosecuted convincingly in court.
There could still be a civil case. There could still be political ramifications, as you admit. But these do not exist because the criminal case vanishes - they are present simultaneously and the difficulty of proceeding with the criminal case does not necessarily affect these.
…and grabbed one of them against his will. There, finished that for you.
Do the voices in your head tell you that nobody will notice it when you’re this disingenuous?
There isn’t any criminal case. There are no criminal allegations. There is no criminal investigation. There is no criminal complaint. There is nothing.
And a civil case? Are you serious? Seeking what damages.
There is no crime here, and there’s is never going to be a crime here.
But again, i really think you are conflating two separate issues here: the motivations of the questioners and the actions of the congressman.
Even if we accept, for the sake of argument, that the guys asking the questions were complete douchebags who went into the whole thing desperately hoping to provoke some sort of excessive reaction, this doesn’t excuse the reaction itself. You can say all you like that he just yelled at them, but that’s not what happened. He grabbed the guy, and didn’t let go despite repeated requests.
Yes, it’s possible that they guy could have gotten free on his own, and that he didn’t try very hard precisely because he was happy with the way things were going, but this again is a separate issue from the congressman grabbing and continuing to hold him. The fact that the guy should have been able to free himself doesn’t excuse the congressman grabbing him in the first place.
Enjoy your thread, Valteron.
It wasn’t against his will, and in my personal opinion, it wasn’t “wrong.” I don’t even think it would have been wrong if he’d smashed the camera and given them both a thorough asskicking. Illegal, maybe, but not wrong.
Reminder:
[QUOTE=Restricted language in the Pit]
The following expressions should not be directed at other posters.
fuck you
[/QUOTE]
Please remember for next time. No warning issued.
Gfactor
Pit Moderator
Er, that was a joke…
Shit. Sorry. I forgot.