Offduty motorcycle cop hits little girl > dad beats cop > cop kills dad

[lowthreeohz]

Aren't you doing the same?

No, i'm offering up valid counter arguments that are just as, if not more plausible than the story you've concocted.

[Sean88gt]

Has there been a pigment check on the dad?

[stevo]

Has there been a pigment check on the dad?

Black.

Stevo

[Jester]

No, i'm offering up valid counter arguments that are just as, if not more plausible than the story you've concocted.

i read that and pretended you had a tophat and monocle......and a pipe.

I say, good play old chap!

[lowthreeohz]

[347Mike]

Not really. Explain how you cannot stop a bike, traveling the speed limit (in this case I believe it's 35) in time to avoid hitting an idiot kid that runs in front of you. Oh, and not only cannot stop the bike, you purposely lay it down and it goes cartwheeling and hits said kid. Either he was going too fast, or something is up.

Because you don't know shit, youre assuming. Yeah, because a car in front of me making a sudden stop is comparable to not seeing any hazards or in this case a child unexpectedly in front of you while traveling 35 mph.

So you are basing on what could and could not have happened on your experience of riding a Harley and making a sudden stop? You don't know the conditions, you don't know if there was sand, a puddle of water or if he was turning slightly when the kid popped into his vision. If you think a bike can't flip at 35 mph you are mistaken as well. And if you think for a second something in front of you such as a truck makes a sudden stop is comparable to having a unexpected object, whether it is a kid or not is comparable, you are nuts.

[Forever_frost]

I am doing the same as everyone. Evaluating the story against personal experience and coming to a conclusion. And no, not a Harley. A Honda 1300. You also do not know the conditions so your indignation makes as much sense as my previous one.

[Forever_frost]

you are nuts.

I don't recall ever arguing this point.

[347Mike]

I am doing the same as everyone. Evaluating the story against personal experience and coming to a conclusion. And no, not a Harley. A Honda 1300. You also do not know the conditions so your indignation makes as much sense as my previous one.

No it's not because I'm not trying to pretend as if I know what happen or throw hypothetical scenarios and relate them to my personal experience..

[Forever_frost]

No it's not because I'm not trying to pretend as if I know what happen or throw hypothetical scenarios and relate them to my personal experience..

Really? Then using the facts presented, show me how I'm wrong in my statement. You HAD to inject "sand, gravel" and such into the story to provide possible reasons that the cop would flip a bike. Those are hypothetical scenarios you're putting into the situation trying to make sense. Same as what I am doing.

[347Mike]

Really? Then using the facts presented, show me how I'm wrong in my statement. You HAD to inject "sand, gravel" and such into the story to provide possible reasons that the cop would flip a bike. Those are hypothetical scenarios you're putting into the situation trying to make sense. Same as what I am doing.

You are wrong because you DON'T know what happened. All you know is the kid popped out quickly, the guy went down and his bike flipped, that is IT. You are going off of absolutely nothing other than your experience with stopping quickly and being able to control your 1300 and based on that alone you are trying to say it was avoidable when the two scenarios are completely different.

I didn't inject anything in there, I am simply stating with what was in the article you do not have enough information to say what went wrong. Quit trying to turn shit around....

[Big A]

I am doing the same as everyone. Evaluating the story against personal experience and coming to a conclusion. And no, not a Harley. A Honda 1300. You also do not know the conditions so your indignation makes as much sense as my previous one.

Evaluating a story that is based on second-hand information. The writer wasn't there.

[Big A]

I don't recall ever arguing this point.

ha ha ha at least he is honest.

[Kevin]

According to the article the little girl suffered "contusions and abrasions" aka scrapes and bruises. No broken bones or fatal injuries, so the bike must not have been traveling at a high rate of speed or must not have directly hit her.

Also according to the article the 18 year-old cousin was also hit by the motorcycle. I will assume he was not injured (due to the fact that he joined in on beating the cop).

Police officer seemed to be the only person injured after the initial stage of the incident, possible fractured leg and dislocated shoulder (also mentioned in article).

At this point my assumption is that the kid darted away from the cousin, the cousin chased after her. Runs out from behind a parked car, motorcyclist reacts quickly to avoid running over a child. Now the physics of how the bike reacted to this movement is unknown, as is the distance/time the rider had to react. The cop tumbles on the ground at 30-40mph, then finally comes to a stop. With the adrenaline of the situation he probably didn't consider his own injuries at first, especially since the last thing he saw before he went down was a little child in his path. For all he knows he just killed a toddler...

My question now: Was the little girl conscious? Was she bawling from the cuts, scrapes, and bruises?

Either way, the cop rushes (limps, crawls?) to tend to the kid. Then the Dad comes out and he's freaking out (understandable). As the cop, from his perspective, he just needs to convey that he is a Police Officer, and since the dad is losing it, he says "Take it easy."

From the Dad's perspective, I would think that his first concern would be his daughter's well-being. Not going after the guy that happened to be driving when his nephew let his daughter run out into a 4 lane street. (Just my opinion, I don't have any children but it seems like natural instinct).
UNLESS, the daughter was conscious and crying, and obviously not fatally wounded. Then he takes off after the guy who says he's a cop and starts beating him.


Let's take our facts from this point:
Daughter - scrapes and bruises.
Dad - enraged, no injuries.
Cousin - "Hit" by motorcycle, no injuries, (should realize it's his fault the kid was in the street)
Motorcyclist/Cop - recently crashed bike, one good leg, one good arm (I deduced this from the article stating that they were checking for possible broken leg and dislocated shoulder)

What happens here? The dad punches the cop, one hit would have been understandable, but decides to continue beating him. Then the 18 year old cousin starts kicking him (Cop must be on the ground at this point, and unable to defend against two attackers). Probably realizing that if he blacks out, these guys could literally beat him to death, he uses his only good arm and pulls out his only chance for survival at this point and fires one round.

Cop or not, what kind of person starts fighting someone who is already hurt? Not to mention the cousin that jumps in after the cop is on the ground...

That is the scenario I imagined when I first read the article. You guys can argue about whether he could have avoided the girl. But she must have been visibly okay if the dad wasn't concerned with her when he got out there. She had no major injuries (fact), so he must have done a decent job of avoiding her under the circumstances with which he was given.

[Jester]

Cop or not, what kind of person starts fighting someone who is already hurt?.

oh oh, i know i know! I wanna answer!

A black person?