• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Check out what happened at my local comic shop in STL...police stand off!

Started by Gary Strange,

101 posts in this topic

mrwoogieman

mrwoogieman

Posted
Posted
The presumption of innocence is for the courtroom, that standard doesn't apply in the court of public opinion. If you think someone's guilty of a crime based upon whatever slim "evidence" you have at your disposal, that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. You don't need a jury to validate your opinion and you don't have to defer until there's been a court proceeding.
(thumbs u

This is why i can still firmly believe OJ murdered Nicole.

 

The way some people talk around here you'd think I'd have to treat OJ like he wasn't a murderer if I ever met him rather than calling him out as the killer he is, regardless of what the jury ruled.

 

:screwy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Transplant

Transplant

Posted
Posted
The way some people talk around here you'd think I'd have to treat OJ like he wasn't a murderer if I ever met him rather than calling him out as the killer he is, regardless of what the jury ruled.

 

:screwy:

I love straw man arguments.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrwoogieman

mrwoogieman

Posted
Posted
The way some people talk around here you'd think I'd have to treat OJ like he wasn't a murderer if I ever met him rather than calling him out as the killer he is, regardless of what the jury ruled.

 

:screwy:

I love straw man arguments.

 

I'm not the one who brought up OJ. Anyway, is this better?:

 

The way some people talk around here you'd think I'd have to treat the man referred to in the news article like he wasn't a gun waving crackpot and possible child rapist if I ever met him rather than calling him out based upon my own opinion as to his moral worth, until such time as the prosecutor/judge in the event of a plea bargain or the jury in the event of a trial dictated my opinion to me.

 

:screwy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sakaridis

sakaridis

Posted
Posted
The way some people talk around here you'd think I'd have to treat OJ like he wasn't a murderer if I ever met him rather than calling him out as the killer he is, regardless of what the jury ruled.

 

:screwy:

I love straw man arguments.

 

I'm not the one who brought up OJ. Anyway, is this better?:

 

The way some people talk around here you'd think I'd have to treat the man referred to in the news article like he wasn't a gun waving crackpot and possible child rapist if I ever met him rather than calling him out based upon my own opinion as to his moral worth, until such time as the prosecutor/judge in the event of a plea bargain or the jury in the event of a trial dictated my opinion to me.

 

:screwy:

The comparison to OJ, anyway, is not a particularly apt one, because in the Juice's case there was a highly publicized trial, plus a series of TV specials and newspaper/magazine articles and reports, where pretty much everything related to the case was made public and of course, during all this (and with all the evidence presented to those interested enough), anyone and everyone could form an opinion on whether he was guilty or not.

 

In this particular case, we actually know very little so far. So the guy could very well be a child rapist (probable, considering his questionable conduct when confronted with the police and his character in general, as suggested by those who knew him), or he could be innocent (substantially less probable, one must admit).

 

So, if you meet OJ tomorrow (wait, isn't he in prison for some kinda fraud or something?), you can very much call him a murdered and shout at the top of your lungs that the justice system blew it. I know I probably would!

 

But if you actually meet the comic shop guy tomorrow (wait, isn't he in custody?), methinks it'd be wiser to withhold from expressing your thoughts and sentiments in a manner you may regret later on.

 

As a matter of fact, we had a similar case of child rape, here in Greece, about 12-13 years ago, with a lot of public outcry and even some politicians (and other public figures) appearing on the news -before the trial- asking for the guy's head on a platter. As it turned out, the guy that was charged WASN'T guilty, after all! The girl's father was the one who had molested her (repeatedly, as it was revealed later on), but she was afraid to say so, at first.

 

A right to an opinion? Of course! But it doesn't hurt to be an informed one. (thumbs u

Link to comment
Share on other sites
dupont2005

dupont2005

Posted
Posted

As a matter of fact, we had a similar case of child rape, here in Greece, about 12-13 years ago, with a lot of public outcry and even some politicians (and other public figures) appearing on the news -before the trial- asking for the guy's head on a platter. As it turned out, the guy that was charged WASN'T guilty, after all!

How long did his standoff last?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
SAGAT

SAGAT

Posted
Posted

Whats with these comic shop owners. Here in Toronto we had a guy install a peeping tom camera in the washroom of his LCS. Guy went to prison for a few years and now he's back and still running the same comic store.

 

Comic store is across the street from Wonderland amusement park with lots of kids too.

 

Weirdos.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
passion4comics

passion4comics

Posted
Posted

 

Children lie. It is not something that has to be taught - it is human nature.

 

I am not saying the guy is innocent or guilty - but it is just so $#@%ed up that the more sick the accusation - the easier it is for people with absolutely minimal information to make a judgement. Sad really.

 

How about if you wait for ALL the facts to come out before making a snap judgement on someone?

 

I'm pretty sure everyone here believes in the basic principle that you get your day in court and that you are innocent until proven guilty. It seems somewhat redundant to wave that flag here for everyone. I think people get it.

 

That said. There's enough "evidence" that this guy has some issues with mental stability. That and the fact that he ran a store that might draw kids in coupled with the fact that he likes to keep a gun on his person and threaten to use it is enough of a red flag for me to feel pretty good about locking his azz up for the time being. Maybe i'm crazy but I think the world just got a little more safer now that he's not sitting behind the counter.

 

Unfortunately the way the system is structured a lot of people that did not commit the crimes are compelled to plea out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
passion4comics

passion4comics

Posted
Posted

The standoff may have been him stating he was going to commit suicide. Who knows?

 

If you were a family man at work and the police are banging on your office door accusing you of molesting children an option would be to spare your family the embarrassment guilty or innocent and especially when in a state of panic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mrwoogieman

mrwoogieman

Posted
Posted
The way some people talk around here you'd think I'd have to treat OJ like he wasn't a murderer if I ever met him rather than calling him out as the killer he is, regardless of what the jury ruled.

 

:screwy:

I love straw man arguments.

 

I'm not the one who brought up OJ. Anyway, is this better?:

 

The way some people talk around here you'd think I'd have to treat the man referred to in the news article like he wasn't a gun waving crackpot and possible child rapist if I ever met him rather than calling him out based upon my own opinion as to his moral worth, until such time as the prosecutor/judge in the event of a plea bargain or the jury in the event of a trial dictated my opinion to me.

 

:screwy:

The comparison to OJ, anyway, is not a particularly apt one, because in the Juice's case there was a highly publicized trial, plus a series of TV specials and newspaper/magazine articles and reports, where pretty much everything related to the case was made public and of course, during all this (and with all the evidence presented to those interested enough), anyone and everyone could form an opinion on whether he was guilty or not.

 

In this particular case, we actually know very little so far. So the guy could very well be a child rapist (probable, considering his questionable conduct when confronted with the police and his character in general, as suggested by those who knew him), or he could be innocent (substantially less probable, one must admit).

 

So, if you meet OJ tomorrow (wait, isn't he in prison for some kinda fraud or something?), you can very much call him a murdered and shout at the top of your lungs that the justice system blew it. I know I probably would!

 

But if you actually meet the comic shop guy tomorrow (wait, isn't he in custody?), methinks it'd be wiser to withhold from expressing your thoughts and sentiments in a manner you may regret later on.

 

As a matter of fact, we had a similar case of child rape, here in Greece, about 12-13 years ago, with a lot of public outcry and even some politicians (and other public figures) appearing on the news -before the trial- asking for the guy's head on a platter. As it turned out, the guy that was charged WASN'T guilty, after all! The girl's father was the one who had molested her (repeatedly, as it was revealed later on), but she was afraid to say so, at first.

 

A right to an opinion? Of course! But it doesn't hurt to be an informed one. (thumbs u

 

You and your rational position!

 

 

Now what am I going to do with all these torches and pitchforks I've collected?!?!

 

BAH!

 

:sumo:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
sakaridis

sakaridis

Posted
Posted

As a matter of fact, we had a similar case of child rape, here in Greece, about 12-13 years ago, with a lot of public outcry and even some politicians (and other public figures) appearing on the news -before the trial- asking for the guy's head on a platter. As it turned out, the guy that was charged WASN'T guilty, after all!

How long did his standoff last?

There was no standoff in this case.

 

But that may have more to do with the fact that getting a gun in Greece is pretty darn tough and not everyone and his sister has one.

 

If he actually had a gun, though, it's probable that there would be one*.

 

When cornered and accused of something heinous, it's not rare for anyone to react violently and irresponsibly. Whether he's guilty or not.

 

*Of course, since our police guys are incompetent , the guy would probably kill them all, steal their uniforms, weapons and police cars, and probably take over the whole country in less than 2 hours. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites
500Club

500Club

Posted
Posted
UPDATE :

 

http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=230166&catid=3

 

 

He was shot to death before he needed to appear in court. I'll leave it up for debate on his guilt or innocence.

 

The article suggests he was shot and his car taken. The timing suggests suicide. hm

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DiceX

DiceX

Posted
Posted
UPDATE :

 

http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/story.aspx?storyid=230166&catid=3

 

 

He was shot to death before he needed to appear in court. I'll leave it up for debate on his guilt or innocence.

 

The article suggests he was shot and his car taken. The timing suggests suicide. hm

 

One report I watched said he was shot in the back of the head, but it also said he wrote his nephew a note the day before that sounds eerily like a suicide note.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing