You’re argument is counter-intuitive. Under most circumstances, people sitting in a vehicle backing out of a spot to leave, don’t usually stop the vehicle and both get out unless there is a compelling reason to do so.
Furthermore, it’s entirely reasonable to assume that the person who moved in behind the vehicle - the same person they were engaged in a heated argument with moments ago - was likely the one that caused them to stop and exit the vehicle in anger.
None of the above is remotely controversial or unreasonable to conclude. Feel free to challenge it if you must.
Nowhere in this thread have I endorsed or defended what followed. I challenge you to quote me saying otherwise.
It’s not counter-intuitive to me. What is entirely counter-intuitive to me is to assume that if somebody’s beating on your car this creates a compelling reason to get out of it. What is intuitive to me is that if somebody’s beating on your car this creates a compelling reason to stay in there.
It’s certainly possible that the person seen for one moment behind the vehicle was there longer than that, and was there long enough to cause them to stop the car. Possible does not equal certain.
It’s unreasonable to state a possibility as proven fact.
I didn’t say you endorsed or defended what followed, and do not feel required to meet a challenge to provide evidence for something that I didn’t say.
1 -2: You’re simply being argumentative and insist on having it your way. Fine with me. Not worth me getting out of my car to continue to argue with you about it.
3: I don’t believe I stated anything as “fact”, only what’s reasonable to assume or likely to be the case.
4: I thought that’s where this was headed. Retracted.
I share TL’s… misgivings about concluding a connection between the car blocking/pounding and the woman recording with her daughters. It could be that someone associated with the woman with the camera went around to block the car and beat on it as it started moving towards them.
BUT it could also be that, as the gun-toting thug-woman and her husband were in a rush to leave—flustered, if you will—and so they didn’t adequately check to ensure the way was clear before starting to back out, and that someone just happened to be crossing on foot behind them at that moment, and pounded at the vehicle/shouted to alert them to their presence as they jumped out of the way.
Whatever the gun-toting thug-woman may have concluded, for myself, I see no reason to conclude that either of the above is more or less likely to be true. I don’t know why you do, @QuickSilver.
Are you suggesting that the black woman in the purple (maroon?) top who is seen behind the car at about 1:22 in the OP’s video is a different black woman in a purple (maroon?) top from the one who is seen arguing with the white woman at the beginning?
Speaking for myself, I know that when I am agitated, for whatever the reason, I am more likely to do something stupid like start backing out of a spot without looking. It’s not “zebra’s running down Main Street”-crazy (my words) to imagine that someone just coincidentally happened to be passing behind the car as the gun-toting couple was making to back out. Because unlike zebras running down a city street—or even people pulling guns in parking lots—it really is not that uncommon for (1) pedestrians to be walking down a parking lot outside a fast food restaurant and (2) for distracted motorists not to see them right away.
No. It’s not entirely clear to me that they (the woman in purple) is the one behind the car because of how the camera moves around. Of note, it seems like everyone is walking away at that point, including both the purple woman and the woman with the camera. On closer examination, particularly around that time period, it could even be that the purple woman (if she is the one who is behind the car) was just about to walk back to her car and didn’t expect the gun-toting couple to pull out in such a hurry.
I acknowledge that possibility. The video quality is poor. There is banging sound but we don’t see who is making it. But what we do know - correct me if I’ve got the facts wrong - is that the man was fired from his job for brandishing a gun. Now, we see the woman doing so at one individual. I assume the man wasn’t pointing a gun as some random person who happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Additionally, since they were arrested, the police report must have contained complaint information about who he was pointing a gun at.
Now, is that me being argumentative or simply drawing reasonable conclusions?
I’m not 100% sure. I mean, I certainly don’t think it’s you being argumentative, I’m just not confident that we can import reason onto either the man or the woman’s actions. Exhibit (a) the part where the man (and I think you can see something in the man’s hand in the video, he just isn’t shown pointing it at anyone) and woman jump out of the car and at least one of them points a gun at the person who has been pestering them.
I see that the purple woman does seem to move around in that scene and may be the one who gets behind the car, but then I also get the sense that she may not be moving to deliberately block the car, but rather walking away and ending up behind the car as the couple makes to back out without looking. In particular, there’s the part where the woman taking the video or someone nearby yells “Mom, watch!”
Personally, I’m ready to abandon this whole line of argument because, so far as I can tell, a couple people in this thread (slackerinc and octopus) still seem to think that the white couple didn’t have any other choice but potentially drive over someone to get away, or jump out of the car with guns. That’s the real story: they should be expected to defend their positions most vigorously.
Well, in the video, you see Purple Woman start heading towards the back of the car/parking lot as Pregnant Woman rolls up the window. The videographer starts to walk away (in the opposite direction?) and then turns. At 1:33 in this video, it is clear to me that Purple Woman is behind the car as it is backing up (now accompanied by Blue Shirt Juvenile). We can’t really see what happens a Videographer runs over to Purple Woman.
It seem entirely contrary to the video to suggest that Blue Shirt Juvenile and Purple Woman Number 2 are different people one of whom “just coincidentally happened to be passing behind the car” (although it would certainly be curious if Pregnant Lady got into a verbal altercation with one purple-shirt wearing black woman and then pulled a gun on another identically-sounding purple-shirt wearing black woman). And, of course, that’s not what happened.
But, the reason I tend to think (but cannot prove) that Purple Woman went behind the car to block the egress is that Videographer (who I believe is her 15-year old daughter) started walking away in the other direction (and generally consistently with the idea that Purple Woman and Videographer were headed into the restaurant when they were “bumped”). And in the video as I see it, Purple Woman is standing stationary behind the car as it begins to move (I’m less positive about this because the movement of the camera affects my sense of the movement of the car).
But it is certainly possible that Purple Woman (who is obviously the same purple woman) was headed to the parking lot and happened to wind up behind the car.
