It’s bad enough what they did to the dad, but at least one guy was smashing in the mom’s window, trying to get access to her and the child. Bystanders started yelling at him to stop and leave them alone.
That deserves castration, and I didn’t think I’d ever say that.
He didn’t drive away from an accident, he drove away from a gang of angry thugs.
How many bikers would it take to actually impede a range rover from a stopped position? Could he have put it in reverse and successfully plowed through more? Unfortunately this was not attempted.
Mr Owl: Let’s find out.
1…2…3…crunch!
He didn’t drive away from an accident. He pulled over. Then the bikers started hitting his car and spiked his tires. THEN he fled, and rightfully so. He is entirely justified in running over a person when said person is part of an angry mob.
That was what I was wondering – when they were trying to bust into his vehicle when he was blocked by traffic in front of him, why didn’t he back up over the ones behind him? I sure as hell would have. Guess being a New Yorker he wasn’t used to having to plow backwards to get out of snowdrifts. Or perhaps he was too decent a person to maim more of his attackers.
I have to be my nine year old self and point out the way the URL was clipped certainly changes the meaning…
Maybe the idea didn’t come to him in the moment. Now that I have witnessed this and thought through the scenario I’m hoping that means less hesitation should the need arise. I would without remourse plow through thousands upon thousands of the angry mob of bikers blocking my way - the only thing stopping me would be having to refuel.
Sadly, unless you have a tracked vehicle, or Mad-Max your car with a cow catcher, I’d imagine you aren’t going to get more than a dozen or two before the bikes start to pile up and you end up high centered.
I figured as much. I wonder if this has been tried before. Mythbusters?
It depends on the vehicle. A powerful four wheel drive vehicle could probably climb over a pile of bikes and bodes, especially if you don’t care what kind of damage it is doing.
OK we really need to try this.
[Bender]A test! I demand a test! [/Bender]
Today the news is saying the off duty cop is on video smashing in the rear window, hitting the dad, and kicking him when he was on the ground.
Nice.
So, you’re saying that he was working? [rimshot]
According to theNY Posthe is seen on video hitting the car but not being involved in the assault. He is being arrested for criminal mischief.
Not child endangerment?
NY PL 260.10(1)
You are guilty of Endangering the Welfare of a Child if you act knowingly in such a way that is likely to cause an injury to the mental state, person of (physical) or moral welfare of a child. This child must be sixteen years old or younger.
The article says there was tinted glass. I find that unpersuasive. And the guy who brake checked says he was looking for his friends as he let off the throttle. How believable.
I don’t know the ins and outs of NY law. I know in NJ it would be a stretch to charge that. “Injury to the mental state” does not necessarily mean to scare. *
Of course the link does come from the Post. There may be other charges if it is true. If he tried to obstruct the investigation in any way there may be official misconduct and other charges.
*To clarify, if nothing shows that he personally tried to force the car off the road and the video just shows him coming up to it after it was stopped and banging on the window, anything else would be tough to get through the court.
I expect that the vehicle would eventually float up on the bikes, making it not possible to have any traction with the ground (similar to floating up and losing traction when wheeling in deep snow). Like Wolfman says, high centering.
The nice thing about many criminals is that the just don’t know when to shut up.
Yeah, I’m pretty sure I read it on abc.com but I checked just now and that article is gone. Or I hallucinated.