Homeless man $6 deadly flip

Quote: AxelWolf

Put up a fair O/U line on how much jail time he will get at -110 and let me choose if i want to take the over under for a few hundred. We will see just how strong of a case you think it is. Lets see if you have the balls to set it at ZERO.

I never said he wasn't going to jail

I said this wasn't as easy of a slam dunk as people believe.

He may very well serve time

And juries are susceptible to emotions.

But the law he is being charged with and the correlation to his actions seems weak.

A lot of opportunities for a defense attorney to pull apart what the DA proposes

I hope this guy has the $100,000 it will take to get a decent lawyer to go to trial.

Quote: billryan

I hope this guy has the $100,000 it will take to get a decent lawyer to go to trial.

Which is why I am skeptical it goes to trial.

Is suspect he is going to plea out for a lesser charge.

Also depends on his prior criminal background but I haven't heard anything so maybe he has a clean record

Quote: darkoz

so maybe he has a clean record

ROTFLMAO

Quote: AxelWolf

ROTFLMAO

You are basing that judgement on what?

The way he looks?

I am basing the possibility he has a small or clean record on

A) not one report has mentioned it which seems strange

B) He made bail which if charged with a crime resulting in a death was set low enough for him to make (I don't see him as wealthy nor receiving a lot of neighborhood support) then he could not have had too extensive a record.

Quote: darkoz

B) He made bail which if charged with a crime resulting in a death was set low enough for him to make (I don't see him as wealthy nor receiving a lot of neighborhood support) then he could not have had too extensive a record.

You are basing that on what?

The way he looks?

Well I will just come out and say it: I would be very surprised if this guy had a clean record.

And if you want to know what I am basing that on, it is the way he looked and talked....like he was on drugs as he made that video....made in the parking lot of a liquor store just north of downtown, where 20 something thugs, drunks and drug addicts hang out. He repeated himself 100 times like a person with dementia or totally drugged out. The very fact that he had no regard for human life, tells me he probably isn't an upstanding citizen with a spotless record.

And if you want to turn that into something racial....DON'T. I would feel the exact same way if he was white thug in his 20s, covered in tattoos, barely able to speak the English language.

I think you always get a trial, or at least an opportunity to plea out without a trial, or to plead guilty at trial, and that booking, arrest, arraignment, and trial are all part of the process. They arrested OJ, and maybe he did it (there - let's go off on that one why don't we), but he got a trial. Even after the verdict, "the jury is still out" on whether he actually did do it. But it's at trial that guilt or innocence, from a legal standpoint, is determined. That the guy was arrested does not assume guilt, or anything else. Wait for the trial, or some disposition of the case that determines legal guilt.

The goading part assumes some obvious awareness on the part of the goader that the goadee is incapable of performing the terms or has some limitation that makes it endangering. A back flip is not, on it's own, dangerous. It's not illegal. If our scumbag has some legal obligation to NOT make the bet or PREVENT the attempted backflip, doesn't a passerby, unrelated to the two parties, having the same knowledge and awareness as Mr. Scumbag about the condition of the flipper and the terms and location of the event have the same responsibility, and is therefore just as liable to be guilty of whatever is being alleged?

The focus seems to have moved from what he did AFTER the flip to what he did BEFORE it happened. It's a sad story, with a tragic outcome, with one sad individual victim and a despicable human being. But I don't think the guy is guilty of any violation of the law, even though he might plea out to a lesser charge to avoid the risk, and expense, of a trial.

Quote: kewlj

Well I will just come out and say it: I would be very surprised if this guy had a clean record.

And if you want to know what I am basing that on, it is the way he looked and talked....like he was on drugs as he made that video....made in the parking lot of a liquor store just north of downtown, where 20 something thugs, drunks and drug addicts hang out. He repeated himself 100 times like a person with dementia or totally drugged out. The very fact that he had no regard for human life, tells me he probably isn't an upstanding citizen with a spotless record.

And if you want to turn that into something racial....DON'T. I would feel the exact same way if he was white thug in his 20s, covered in tattoos, barely able to speak the English language.

Whenever a group of young men hang out at a liquor store parking lot during the middle of a work day, there is a good chance they are not upstanding citizens.

Also, they were not wearing masks.

You are right, its not a race issue, this would apply to any person, but you can tell by their actions and words they clearly have a low regard for the saftey of others (or of society). I don’t know about his record, except he has one now for sure.....

This is why stores should not allow loitering in parking lots.... Leads to nothing good.....

As Brad Majors said- Life is pretty cheap for that sort!

Quote: darkoz

You are basing that judgement on what?

The way he looks?

I am basing the possibility he has a small or clean record on

A) not one report has mentioned it which seems strange

B) He made bail which if charged with a crime resulting in a death was set low enough for him to make (I don't see him as wealthy nor receiving a lot of neighborhood support) then he could not have had too extensive a record.

I'm not basing it on looks, I'm basing it on how he acted in the video, the general location he was in and the other people around.

If I recall correctly in that video there was even a fight about the start where some chick was involved. I think it's pretty hard to be around that element and not end up getting in some type of trouble with the law.

Quote: AxelWolf

I'm not basing it on looks, I'm basing it on how he acted in the video, the general location he was in and the other people around.

If I recall correctly in that video there was even a fight about the start where some chick was involved. I think it's pretty hard to be around that element and not end up getting in some type of trouble with the law.

So far everyone has said he must have a previous criminal record because of where he hangs out, the way he acts, etc.

I'm looking at facts not supposition.

Is it the consensus on this forum that they arrested him, brought him in front of the judge and said, "the defendant has a serious criminal history involving multiple felonies and now is involved with a man dying due to his actions. Your honor, set this bail so low, the guy can post Bond and leave."

Or the judge set the bail really high and this guy had huge outpouring of support which raised his huge bail for him?

Or looking at who the guy is and his friends and how $6 seems so exciting they are wealthy and able to post a large Bond themselves?

Or that a guy with any type of serious criminal record would manage to make bail and not have his prior records be uncovered and discussed as news in a rather publicized case by any news agency?

Ask yourself those questions? Answer them.

As the famous line from Sherlock Holmes goes "eliminate the impossible, and whatever is left, HOWEVER IMPROBABLE, has to be the truth"

A black man is arrested for the death of a homeless man. I'm sure every news editor is assigning his best investigators to the story.

Darkoz, what you call supposition, some of us are using statistic and probability logic.

You seem to want to make this a fight about race. This guy was a sleaze ball regardless if he was black, white or green.

Now that said, I personally still don't see a crime.

Quote: kewlj

Darkoz, what you call supposition, some of us are using statistic and probability logic.

You seem to want to make this a fight about race. This guy was a sleaze ball regardless if he was black, white or green.

Now that said, I personally still don't see a crime.

I haven't mentioned his race once.

I have looked at how he posted bail in a day for a crime related to a man's death.

Everyone else is mentioning the "crowd" he hangs with. Bill Ryan just made a comment above about his race.

Ignore his race and ask yourself the same questions I posed about his bail, his ability to raise bail (making a big fuss over $6) and his lack of support from all people across the board to raise bail and you come to one conclusion.

He must have had a low bail.

And low bail isn't given generally to people with long serious felony records

I'm going by the facts of the case.

Statistics and probability are fine for gambling but shouldn't be applied in a situation with extenuating facts available that contradict

Quote: darkoz

I don't believe the money and request are the backbone of the charges.

It is wilful disregard and most likely is based on his post flip actions.

He just laughs maniacally for ten minutes, at one point telling bystanders NOT to call an ambulance.

It seemed like he didn't care a man just died on account of his enticement of a few dollars.

And that is what the charge is wilful disregard for life.

It didn't seem like the guy took the fall seriously and couldn't comprehend the injury in my opinion. I think the homeless man carries most of the negligence, he is the one who needs to know what his physical limitations include and should have chosen a safe area to land instead of concrete. Thirdly, the man doesn't control the other people, they can call an ambulance if they want and they don't have to listen to him.

In the audio, I heard a word that I know white people are not allowed to use, many, many times. My impression, I could be wrong, is that this word was repeated by the guy holding the camera. My conclusion is that, at a minimum, the person repeating that word many, many times was not white. Can't say if that person and Mr. Scumbag are the same person, or what color he was, assuming white is not a color.

Quote: darkoz

So far everyone has said he must have a previous criminal record because of where he hangs out, the way he acts, etc.

I'm looking at facts not supposition.

Is it the consensus on this forum that they arrested him, brought him in front of the judge and said, "the defendant has a serious criminal history involving multiple felonies and now is involved with a man dying due to his actions. Your honor, set this bail so low, the guy can post Bond and leave."

Or the judge set the bail really high and this guy had huge outpouring of support which raised his huge bail for him?

Or looking at who the guy is and his friends and how $6 seems so exciting they are wealthy and able to post a large Bond themselves?

Or that a guy with any type of serious criminal record would manage to make bail and not have his prior records be uncovered and discussed as news in a rather publicized case by any news agency?

Ask yourself those questions? Answer them.

As the famous line from Sherlock Holmes goes "eliminate the impossible, and whatever is left, HOWEVER IMPROBABLE, has to be the truth"

I'm not sure how old he is, but perhaps it's a juvenile record and since then he's learned how to not get caught. IMO there Zero chance the guy isn't a criminal.

Perhaps the judge is being lenient towards blacks right
now given the Floyd and Corona situation.

Look, the guy isn't charged with murder. He is charged with reckless endangerment, a much lessor crime. I don't know why Darkoz is expecting that bail would have been set at some higher amount as if the charge was murder?

Quote: kewlj

Look, the guy isn't charged with murder. He is charged with reckless endangerment, a much lessor crime. I don't know why Darkoz is expecting that bail would have been set at some higher amount as if the charge was murder?

I was patiently waiting for someone to post something that makes sense.

The charge is a CLASS C FELONY which has a maximum jail term of FIVE YEARS and a fine of no more than $10,000.

Kewlj is spot on. It's not murder. It's not even killing someone when drunk driving which can be 20 years in prison.

If the law says the man broke the law, then the law is wrong imo. If someone in the latter half of his life tries doing a back flip over concrete or a back flip at all, the grave is where he was going any way and in short time. If it wasn't a back flip, it would have been something else dangerous like trying to s*** his own d*** and breaking his neck that way.

The law may be an ass, but it still is the law.

Remember Keonte Jones? I think he got off free and clear. I say this because I could find nothing on the Internet with any word on his September 14th trial. But on his Facebook page "Dawayne Jones" posted what appears to be a message of relief.

Does anyone have better info?

Hard to have a trial in the middle of a pandemic. Who wants to be on a jury?

Quote: billryan

Hard to have a trial in the middle of a pandemic. Who wants to be on a jury?

I would love to be on that one...

Quote: billryan

Hard to have a trial in the middle of a pandemic. Who wants to be on a jury?

I have always wanted to be on a jury and have never had the opportunity.

I've been on two. First one was almost fun. It was a pretty simple case that you could tell was just part of a much larger one that the defense kept hinting at and the judge would warn them about. By luck of the draw, I was the foreman and it was very interesting how two out of six people consistently interpreted testimony differently than we did. There was one particular witness that myself and another juror insisted that he had said something and the others said no. When we asked the judge to have the testimony read, it wasn't anything like what I thought I heard.
The other time was a snooze fest. We were asked to leave the courtroom several times for the lawyers to conference and on the second day, as we returned from lunch we were kept out of court for an hour or so and when we were seated we were told the two sides had reached an agreement and our services were no longer required. In a day and a half, we still had no idea what the facts of the case were.
These were both minor affairs, with six person juries. The first one involved a man supposedly violating an order of protection, but it seemed pretty obvious this was part of a child custody dispute. The man was so arrogant we all agreed he needed a severe ass-kicking but the case against him wasn't proven. The funny thing was he had three lawers and they seemed to make the states case a few times.
I was pretty sure he did it, and the initial vote was 4-2 to convict but soon became 5-1 to acquit, with me being the last holdout.
Having to stand up and say we found him Not Guilty left a bad taste in m mouth. Getting a check for $72 for three days of work made it soooo much better.