Windshield murder case
ponyduck
testimony about how Mallard's friends were urging her to call 911, but
she refused. The thrust was to make Mallard look even more culpable
because she refused to get help for the guy despite urging from
friends.
Well & good--Mallard's a creep all right, no disputing that. But--why
the hell didn't any of the friends call 911 when Mallard wouldn't? I
mean, if I went over to a friend's house, and she told me there was a
live guy stuck in her windshield, I wouldn't be urging *her* to call
911--I would be calling them myself. Seems like the friends could be
charged with "failure to render aid" to some extent (or are the
"friends" who urged her the same guys who helped dispose of the body?
If so, I guess they've plea-bargained out any charges in exchange for
testimony). Whatever the case, the callousness of all these people is
absolutely chilling.
I have no doubt Mallard will be convicted of *something*. I'm just
curious what it will be. What are the options the jury has in this
case?
--pony
Lane Closure
instead of the more obvious choice of nickname:
http://www.dfw.com/mld/startelegram/news/local/6157583.htm
FORT WORTH - Chante Jawan Mallard was too intoxicated to drive.
And her best friend, Titilisee "T" Fry, who earlier that evening had split a
tab of the drug Ecstacy and smoked marijuana with Mallard, knew it.
So, Fry said, she slid behind the wheel of Mallard's 1997 gold Chevrolet
Cavalier at Joe's Big Bamboo Club in Arlington, drove the pair back to her Fort
Worth apartment and got out.
"I offered to follow Chante home," Fry testified Monday on the opening day of
Mallard's murder trial. "She walked around the car. She said she was OK. She
didn't need me to."
At 3:30 a.m., less than an hour later, Fry said, her phone roused her from her
slumber.
A frantic Mallard whispered, "'T, come pick me up,' " Fry said.
By then, a homeless man was dying in Mallard's garage, lodged in the windshield
of her car after she hit him along U.S. 287 near the Loop 820 split.
Fry, who has received immunity from prosecution in exchange for her testimony
against Mallard, gave her account of what happened in the early morning hours
of Oct. 26, 2001.
Mallard, a 27-year-old nurse's aide, is accused of letting Gregory Glenn Biggs,
37, bleed to death in her shattered windshield, then helping dump his body in
Cobb Park and burning one of the car's seats to conceal the crime.
Mallard pleaded not guilty to the murder charge shortly after the 14-member
jury, which includes two alternates and is being sequestered for the duration
of the trial, was seated in state District Judge James Wilson's court.
However, Mallard pleaded guilty to tampering with evidence by burning the seat,
a charge that carries a punishment range of two to 10 years in prison.
With the trial's start came beefed-up security and numerous satellite TV trucks
and vans. Reporters from CBS News, Fox News, all four local network affiliates
and a large print media contingent have set up shop in the entryway of the
Tarrant County Justice Center.
On the fifth floor outside the courtroom, pink and yellow signs stapled to the
wall read, "Quiet, Court TV Live Broadcast."
During opening statements, prosecutor Christy Jack, who is trying the case with
Richard Alpert and Miles Brissette, called Biggs' death "almost the perfect
crime."
At some point after Mallard hit Biggs, Jack said, she enlisted the help of
Clete Denel Jackson, her "sometime love interest" who had been at the Arlington
club that night. Jackson, in turn, called on his cousin, Herbert Tyrone
Cleveland.
Together, Jack maintained, the trio dislodged Biggs' body, wrapped it in a
blanket and dumped it in Cobb Park.
Afterward, Jack said, the only four people who knew what had happened that
night -- Mallard, Fry, Jackson and Cleveland -- vowed to keep silent.
Police "ran into a wall -- a wall of silence built by Ms. Mallard, her friends
and her associates," Jack said. "No one was talking. ... Days became weeks,
weeks became months."
But in the end, someone did talk. A 911 call, placed in February 2002 by
Mallard's friend, Maranda Daniel, led police to Mallard's doorstep and to the
garage, Jack said. Inside was the damaged and bloody Cavalier.
During his opening statement, however, defense attorney Jeff Kearney, who is
handling the case with Reagan Wynn, told jurors that Mallard was in an "altered
state of mind," under the influence of alcohol, marijuana and the drug Ecstasy,
when she struck Biggs. He suggested that Jackson was the mastermind behind
dumping Biggs' body.
Kearney described Mallard's panic when a 200-pound man crashed through her
windshield, with glass flying everywhere.
"Next to her is a body ... upside down, head in the floorboard, legs in
directions that no one thought was humanly possible. You can't imagine. You
can't imagine."
He told jurors that the accident had left Mallard "hysterical, terrorized and
confused."
When she called Fry and later Jackson for help, Mallard babbled and cried
uncontrollably, Kearney said. It was so bad, he said, that Jackson initially
thought Mallard was having a bad reaction to the drugs.
When he finally learned what had happened, Kearney said, Jackson came up with a
plan.
"Clete Jackson took charge immediately," Kearney said. "Clete Jackson is the
one who said, 'I know what to do.' And Clete Jackson is the one who told Chante
Mallard and 'T,' 'I will take care of this.'"
Jackson and Cleveland have pleaded guilty to tampering with evidence and are
expected to testify against Mallard. They received sentences of 10 and nine
years, respectively.
After opening statements, the prosecution called six witnesses, including an
off-duty firefighter who went to Cobb Park after two men alerted him that they
had found a man's body; the detective who arrested Mallard and took her
statement; and the mother of Maranda Daniel, the woman who tipped off police.
But perhaps the most compelling testimony came at the end of the day, when Fry
took the witness stand.
In response to prosecutor Alpert's questions, Fry, like Mallard a certified
nurse's aide, said she and Mallard had a drink and split a tab of Ecstasy at
her apartment before making the 20-minute trip to the Arlington club.
"She said she wanted to try it and I told her to just take half because it was
her first time," Fry said.
At the club, they met up with Jackson, a man whom she and Mallard knew as
"Vaughn." Jackson was with a group of friends, Fry said, including Cleveland,
his cousin.
It was 69-cent drink night at Joe's Big Bamboo and, Fry said, she and Mallard
drank at least three hurricanes each. When the bar closed, Fry said, she drove
instead of Mallard.
Less than an hour after Mallard left her apartment, Fry said, she received the
frantic call from Mallard and drove to Mallard's home. As she arrived, Fry
said, Mallard ran toward her car.
"She jumped in the car and started screaming for me to 'Just drive!' " Fry
said.
Fry said that Mallard was yelling that she had to find Terrance, her on-again,
off-again boyfriend. As they searched for him, Mallard sobbed.
"She told me she had hit someone and she didn't mean to do it," Fry said. "She
was just crying. She said she hit a guy and he was white, and she was sorry,
that she didn't mean to do it and she tried to get him off" her car.
During the drive, Fry said, Mallard was also desperately trying to call Vaughn.
When they couldn't locate either Vaughn or Terrance, Mallard and Fry returned
to Mallard's house, where Fry peered into the garage.
'I saw her car parked in the garage and the backside of a body, sort of lodged
out of the window," Fry said.
She said she told Mallard to call 911, but Mallard refused. As Fry headed to
her car, saying she didn't want "anything to do with this," Mallard followed
and jumped into Fry's car.
They spent the night at Fry's apartment. The next morning, Mallard borrowed
Fry's car and cellphone and left to try to find Vaughn, Fry said.
Later that day, Fry said, she found Mallard with Vaughn and Cleveland at her
apartment discussing how to get rid of the body.
Fry said she drove the trio to west Fort Worth and dropped them off, presumably
so Vaughn could borrow his girlfriend's car. Fry said she didn't see them again
until the wee hours of the next morning, when they returned, saying they had
dumped the body in Cobb Park.
After the men left, Fry said, Mallard told her not to say anything.
But Fry did. She eventually told her mother and a couple of other women,
including Daniel.
Still, they went on with their lives, she said. The following week, she and
Mallard went back to Joe's Big Bamboo and brought two men back to her
apartment.
Several months later, Fry heard from a friend that Mallard had been arrested.
When Mallard was released on bond that evening, Fry said, she and Mallard got
together and discussed their stories.
Mallard, she said, was mad because someone had turned her in and she didn't
know who it was, Fry said.
Eventually, Fry was brought in for questioning. She testified that she lied to
police, to prosecutors and even to a Tarrant County grand jury -- twice.
When prosecutors -- armed with Fry's telephone and work records -- threatened
to prosecute her for perjury, Fry said, she decided to tell the truth.
During cross-examination by defense attorney Kearney, Fry acknowledged that
Mallard was burdened, cried often, and had gone back to the club only at her
insistence. She said Mallard had even discussed surrendering to police.
She testified that Daniel, who tipped off police, heard about the accident only
from her. Daniel went to police, Fry said, because Daniel and Mallard were mad
at each other.
not_over_the_hill
>I just saw a brief report on the trial, and the reporter was relating
>testimony about how Mallard's friends were urging her to call 911, but
>she refused. The thrust was to make Mallard look even more culpable
>because she refused to get help for the guy despite urging from
>friends.
>
>Well & good--Mallard's a creep all right, no disputing that. But--why
>the hell didn't any of the friends call 911 when Mallard wouldn't? I
>mean, if I went over to a friend's house, and she told me there was a
>live guy stuck in her windshield, I wouldn't be urging *her* to call
>911--I would be calling them myself. Seems like the friends could be
>charged with "failure to render aid" to some extent (or are the
>"friends" who urged her the same guys who helped dispose of the body?
>If so, I guess they've plea-bargained out any charges in exchange for
>testimony). Whatever the case, the callousness of all these people is
>absolutely chilling.
Like I said b/4, if it had been a "brother" someone would had
done something to get help.
>
>I have no doubt Mallard will be convicted of *something*. I'm just
>curious what it will be. What are the options the jury has in this
>case?
Simple. It's first degree murder. I think even premedidated wouldn't
be too much of a stretch.
>--pony
Alex
news:hr3hfvgvekmfeqcfe...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 16:11:46 GMT, ponyduck wrote:
> >Well & good--Mallard's a creep all right, no disputing that. But--why
> >the hell didn't any of the friends call 911 when Mallard wouldn't? I
> >mean, if I went over to a friend's house, and she told me there was a
> >live guy stuck in her windshield, I wouldn't be urging *her* to call
> >911--I would be calling them myself. Seems like the friends could be
> >charged with "failure to render aid" to some extent (or are the
> >"friends" who urged her the same guys who helped dispose of the body?
> >If so, I guess they've plea-bargained out any charges in exchange for
> >testimony). Whatever the case, the callousness of all these people is
> >absolutely chilling.
>
> Like I said b/4, if it had been a "brother" someone would had
> done something to get help.
If it had been a homeless "brother", we wouldn't be reading about
it in the newspaper watching it on FNC. Especially if Mallard had
been white. A byline, perhaps, so let's not get hysterical.
I can already hear it. "But she was scared she was going to lose
her job..." Next case.
Alex
not_over_the_hill
wrote:
You don't read the papers much, huh?
Ever hear about the E.Texas boys that dragged
the black man?
SageJelly
>
>Ever hear about the E.Texas boys that dragged
>the black man?
>
White men killed black man. They got in trouble. Black woman kills white man.
She's in trouble. It all seems fair to me.
Alex
> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 20:21:41 +0200, "Alex" <avdeele...@wanadoo.nl>
> wrote:
>
> >"not_over_the_hill" <watch_t...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
> >news:hr3hfvgvekmfeqcfe...@4ax.com...
> >> Like I said b/4, if it had been a "brother" someone would had
> >> done something to get help.
> >
> >If it had been a homeless "brother", we wouldn't be reading about
> >it in the newspaper watching it on FNC. Especially if Mallard had
> >been white. A byline, perhaps, so let's not get hysterical.
> >I can already hear it. "But she was scared she was going to lose
> >her job..." Next case.
> >
>
> You don't read the papers much, huh?
>
> Ever hear about the E.Texas boys that dragged
> the black man?
Yeah, but that was on purpose and they were members
of the Aryan Brotherhood. This is about a hit and run accident
about a woman who was drunk and high.
Alex
not_over_the_hill
Wrong. White man got in big trouble. Going to die.
Black woman has problem and will probably be in jail a long time.
I guess the problem I got... is the hate-crime crap in general.
Seems to me that BOTH are hate crimes.
Sure wasn't a LOVE crime, was it?
SageJelly
>Seems to me that BOTH are hate crimes.
>Sure wasn't a LOVE crime, was it?
<shrug> I don't care much for the whole "hate crime" thing either. But I can't
figure out what else you're trying to say. Are you trying to say that killing a
black person will generally net you more time or a worse penalty than killing a
white person? One so often hears the exact reverse.
TCS
begin
On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:52:06 +0200, Alex <avdeele...@wanadoo.nl> wrote:
> "not_over_the_hill" <watch_t...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
> news:uj7hfvk0il8f10ato...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 20:21:41 +0200, "Alex" <avdeele...@wanadoo.nl>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >"not_over_the_hill" <watch_t...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
>> >news:hr3hfvgvekmfeqcfe...@4ax.com...
>
>> >> Like I said b/4, if it had been a "brother" someone would had
>> >> done something to get help.
>> >
>> >If it had been a homeless "brother", we wouldn't be reading about
>> >it in the newspaper watching it on FNC. Especially if Mallard had
>> >been white. A byline, perhaps, so let's not get hysterical.
>> >I can already hear it. "But she was scared she was going to lose
>> >her job..." Next case.
>> >
>>
>> You don't read the papers much, huh?
>>
>> Ever hear about the E.Texas boys that dragged
>> the black man?
>
> Yeah, but that was on purpose and they were members
> of the Aryan Brotherhood. This is about a hit and run accident
> about a woman who was drunk and high.
That's only half of it. The other part is of her letting her victim
die -- murder one.
Bo Raxo
Reality check: A woman hits a man with her car, he's embedded in the
windshield still alive, she drives home and let him lay there dying in
her garage.
You think that this wouldn't be a big news story under ANY
circumstances?!? This could have happened in Kazahkstan and it would
still make the news. The story is gruesome enough to be big news,
regardless of the race of the participants.
If you don't see that, you've got your race blinders on a bit too
tight.
not_over_the_hill
wrote:
>"not_over_the_hill" <watch_t...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
>news:uj7hfvk0il8f10ato...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 20:21:41 +0200, "Alex" <avdeele...@wanadoo.nl>
>> wrote:
>>
>> >"not_over_the_hill" <watch_t...@yahoo.com> schreef in bericht
>> >news:hr3hfvgvekmfeqcfe...@4ax.com...
>
>> >> Like I said b/4, if it had been a "brother" someone would had
>> >> done something to get help.
>> >
>> >If it had been a homeless "brother", we wouldn't be reading about
>> >it in the newspaper watching it on FNC. Especially if Mallard had
>> >been white. A byline, perhaps, so let's not get hysterical.
>> >I can already hear it. "But she was scared she was going to lose
>> >her job..." Next case.
>> >
>>
>> You don't read the papers much, huh?
>>
>> Ever hear about the E.Texas boys that dragged
>> the black man?
>
>Yeah, but that was on purpose and they were members
>of the Aryan Brotherhood. This is about a hit and run accident
>about a woman who was drunk and high.
>
>Alex
Over half those in Texas Prisons are members of Aryan Bro'hood.
Don't get me wrong. I think what they did was wrong,wrong,wrong...
JLplsSS
>die -- murder one.
I think the woman is a stupid bitch, but I don't think she will be convicted of
murder one - not without reasonable doubt. The doubt enters into this because
no one knows for sure how long the poor guy was alive for. She was wasted when
she hit him and when she drove him home and for awhile after that. That's
diminished capacity as far as I know it which means the intent one needs to
convict of murder 1 cannot be proved. I predict she'll be convicted of murder
2.
Donna
My opinions might have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
stargazer
"JLplsSS" <jlp...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20030625015446...@mb-m05.aol.com...
If I was on the jury, I think I'd convict her of murder one. IIRC, the
doctor said he would have lived had he gotten to the hospital. The man was
only in his mid to late thirties. By taking him home and hiding him in her
garage, she sealed his fate. She had the presence of mind to call her
friends, find her boy friend, etc. Her capacity wasn't diminished in that
respect. She knew she'd done something wrong by hiding it. That poor man
bled to death, probably went into shock, all alone in her closed up garage.
What a horrible slow death that must have been for him, impaled in her
windshield.
sg
>
>
Bo Raxo
"JLplsSS" <jlp...@aol.comnospam> wrote in message
news:20030625015446...@mb-m05.aol.com...
> >die -- murder one.
>
> I think the woman is a stupid bitch, but I don't think she will be
convicted of
> murder one - not without reasonable doubt. The doubt enters into this
because
> no one knows for sure how long the poor guy was alive for. She was wasted
when
> she hit him and when she drove him home and for awhile after that. That's
> diminished capacity as far as I know it which means the intent one needs
to
> convict of murder 1 cannot be proved. I predict she'll be convicted of
murder
> 2.
>
>
> Donna
Lots of people who have been drunk or high have been convicted of murder
one. Diminished capacity enters when you are SO out of it you don't know
the difference between right and wrong. The fact that she was worried about
getting caught shows she did know that difference.
Diminished capacity requires that you're so out of it you didn't even know
you were in a car or that there was a body sticking through your windshield.
She called "T" to help her figure out what to do, argued against calling 911
when "T" suggested it, and looked for her lover to handle the situation.
Nah, that's not diminished capacity. And a jury will be outraged, which is
all, in the end, that counts.
Bo
TCS
begin
>>The other part is of her letting her victim
>>die -- murder one.
>
> I think the woman is a stupid bitch, but I don't think she will be convicted of
> murder one - not without reasonable doubt. The doubt enters into this because
> no one knows for sure how long the poor guy was alive for. She was wasted when
He was alive. If she had called 911 he'd still be alive.
Because of her, he's dead. Her actions killed him and she had plenty of
time to do her crime. It is really not much different than getting
pissed off at someone, driving home to get a shotgun and returning to
commit the murder.
> she hit him and when she drove him home and for awhile after that. That's
> diminished capacity as far as I know it which means the intent one needs to
> convict of murder 1 cannot be proved. I predict she'll be convicted of murder
> 2.
probably. Locker her away till she's 50 will be good enough.
Alex
"TCS" <The.Central...@p.o.b.o.x.com> schreef in bericht
news:slrnbfjltd.1agc.The...@turing.kaosol.net...
> <html><input type crash></html>
> begin
> On 25 Jun 2003 05:54:46 GMT, JLplsSS <jlp...@aol.comnospam> wrote:
> >>The other part is of her letting her victim
> >>die -- murder one.
> >
> > I think the woman is a stupid bitch, but I don't think she will be convicted of
> > murder one - not without reasonable doubt. The doubt enters into this because
> > no one knows for sure how long the poor guy was alive for. She was wasted when
>
> He was alive. If she had called 911 he'd still be alive.
>
> Because of her, he's dead. Her actions killed him and she had plenty of
> time to do her crime
Has anyone determined whether _how_ she managed to hit him with
her car in the first place?
Was he walking in the middle of the road, crossing, etc?
If she could continue driving, I assume that he hit the passenger side?
So he could have been crossing the road (right to left, from the driver's
point of view)?
Alex
stargazer
"TCS" <The.Central...@p.o.b.o.x.com> wrote in message
news:slrnbfjltd.1agc.The...@turing.kaosol.net...
I'm not thinking too well right now, but I was listening to one of the legal
experts explain this yesterday and the felony murder charge isn't
necessarily one of 'intent', it comes to be because of the kidnapping
involved. Now when I've heard of other cases where kidnapping is charged,
one doesn't have to move the victim very far for a charge of kidnapping to
be invoked. Say a child molester takes a kid into the restroom to do the
deed, that in effect is kidnapping, taking the child from one place to
another. This woman in effect, kidnapped the man, legally speaking, and
stuck him in her garage. If I understand what I was listening to correctly
yesterday, the felony murder is because of the numerous charges to this one
event.
sg
Alex
First, the idea that he was still alive after he was hit,
comes from two sources. One, the coroner who is
testifying for the prosecution.
Secondly, the say so of the people who helped cover
up the accident, and who are testifying in exchange for
a lighter sentence or immunity.
So, if a pathologist for the defence testifies that
he was killed instantly (probably backed up by
the gruesome photos), all you have left is the
testimony that Mallard told her friends that he
was alive (and talked to her??).
If he was already dead when her friends got to
her, that might explain why they didn't call 911
either. They may be overstating their testimony,
in exchange for not being prosecuted for getting
rid of the body. Just a thought.
As for the her attorney, he hasn't exactly been helpful
to her case by emphasizing that she was drunk and high.
Or by letting a fireman testify about the medical state
of the victim.
Alex
"JLplsSS" <jlp...@aol.comnospam> schreef in bericht
news:20030625015446...@mb-m05.aol.com...
Luk
unusual. Surely it's a classic case, in that someone died because
another individual refused to pick up a telephone or render
any kind of assistance that was obviously needed. How unusual
can that be in court?
What normally happens in such cases? IMO, her inebriated
or drugged condition shouldn't be considered a factor in
her favor. She was not drugged against her will.
Luk
Luk
Bo Raxo wrote:
> The story is gruesome enough to be big news,
> regardless of the race of the participants.
>
> If you don't see that, you've got your race blinders on a bit too
> tight.
Race is not the issue in this case. No more to be said
on that.
Luk
Michael Snyder
> Ok, but what do we really know?
>
> First, the idea that he was still alive after he was hit,
> comes from two sources. One, the coroner who is
> testifying for the prosecution.
> Secondly, the say so of the people who helped cover
> up the accident, and who are testifying in exchange for
> a lighter sentence or immunity.
No -- the perp testified that he was alive, and not in exchange for immunity.
Michael Snyder
Sure it is. It for damned sure would be if the races were reversed.
The perp laughed when she told friends that she had hit a white man.
not_over_the_hill
I believe that there's a real good chance that you're right
on that point. (Especially if the races were reversed)
Can you imagine... 2 white men help one of the guy's girlfriend
get her car cleaned out and dispose of this "black vagrant"?
Tell me Jesse wouldn't be screaming right now.
Alex
and screetchings of Lisa Pinto, I could just make out that
the Court TV woman said that the victim was hit when
walking _on an interstate_??
He was _walking_ on the highway. And homeless.
He could have easily avoided his allegedly painful death
by sticking to the footpath.
Alex
Bo Raxo
8 states have the felony murder rule: you're committing another felony
(in this case, kidnapping, and a death results, you're down for murder
1.
Doesn't have to be intentional, doesn't even have to be by your own
hand. If you rob a bank, and the police are chasing, and a patrol
cruiser runs over a pedestrian on their way to join the chase, you
have committed felony murder.
HTH,
Bo Raxo
Michael Snyder
Do you happen to know whether
a) Texas (it is Texas, isn't it?) is among those 8, and
b) the charge of kidnapping has been pressed?
Michael Snyder
Don't believe everything you hear on TV. It is not known
whether he was on the shoulder or on the roadway. The only
witness is the perp -- and she was stoned out of her mind.
Alex
news:3EFA2CA6...@redhat.com...
What does she know? She was high and in shock!
She could have been talking to the car, for all we know.
By the way, it also came out that when she hit the man, she
was 4-6 minutes from her home, so it isn't as if she was
driving for hours with a guy stuck in her windshield.
You know, I've hit people walking on an unlit street
(not with my car of course) and it's pretty scary. And she
had alcohol and drugs in her, a woman alone...
Alex
Michael Snyder
Alex wrote in message <3efa62c6$0$28899$1b62...@news.euronet.nl>...
>"Michael Snyder" <msn...@redhat.com> schreef in bericht
>news:3EFA2CA6...@redhat.com...
>> Alex wrote:
>> > Ok, but what do we really know?
>> >
>> > First, the idea that he was still alive after he was hit,
>> > comes from two sources. One, the coroner who is
>> > testifying for the prosecution.
>> > Secondly, the say so of the people who helped cover
>> > up the accident, and who are testifying in exchange for
>> > a lighter sentence or immunity.
>>
>> No -- the perp testified that he was alive, and not in exchange for immunity.
>
>What does she know? She was high and in shock!
>She could have been talking to the car, for all we know.
She talked to him over several days.
>By the way, it also came out that when she hit the man, she
>was 4-6 minutes from her home, so it isn't as if she was
>driving for hours with a guy stuck in her windshield.
No -- it's as if she left the guy hanging upside down
from the windshield in her garage for hours -- oh wait --
it was days.
>You know, I've hit people walking on an unlit street
>(not with my car of course) and it's pretty scary. And she
>had alcohol and drugs in her, a woman alone...
Ah, there it is... don't blame her, she's a woman...
Michael Snyder
>On 25 Jun 2003 05:54:46 GMT, JLplsSS <jlp...@aol.comnospam> wrote:
>> she hit him and when she drove him home and for awhile after that. That's
>> diminished capacity as far as I know it which means the intent one needs to
>> convict of murder 1 cannot be proved.
Except that no intent needs to be proved. He died during the
commission of a felony -- that makes it murder one, automatically.
Michael Snyder
Luk wrote in message <3EFA0AED...@earthlink.net>...
>This situation makes me feel ignorant of the law - which isn't
>unusual. Surely it's a classic case, in that someone died because
>another individual refused to pick up a telephone or render
>any kind of assistance that was obviously needed. How unusual
>can that be in court?
It's way more than that. She's not just some bad samaritan who
happened upon the scene of an accident and failed to help.
In the first place, she caused (or at least was a participant in)
the accident. In the second place, she removed him from all
possible help. She made it impossible for him to be found
or helped. She actively prevented him from surviving, by
taking him home with her and locking him in her garage.
Alex
news:ubuKa.5603$%3.27...@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
> Luk wrote in message <3EFA0AED...@earthlink.net>...
> >This situation makes me feel ignorant of the law - which isn't
> >unusual. Surely it's a classic case, in that someone died because
> >another individual refused to pick up a telephone or render
> >any kind of assistance that was obviously needed. How unusual
> >can that be in court?
>
> It's way more than that. She's not just some bad samaritan who
> happened upon the scene of an accident and failed to help.
> In the first place, she caused (or at least was a participant in)
> the accident.
She didn't make him walk in the middle of the highway.
The prosecution never argued that it was her impaired
driving skills that caused the initial accident.
Alex
stargazer
"Dog3" <fur...@claqueDOT.net> wrote in message
news:p7tkfvk8qsasbukqo...@4ax.com...
> On 24 Jun 2003 17:06:42 -0700, Cheneys...@deathsdoor.com (Bo Raxo)
> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >
> >Reality check: A woman hits a man with her car, he's embedded in the
> >windshield still alive, she drives home and let him lay there dying in
> >her garage.
> >
> >You think that this wouldn't be a big news story under ANY
> >circumstances?!? This could have happened in Kazahkstan and it would
> >still make the news. The story is gruesome enough to be big news,
> >regardless of the race of the participants.
> >
> >If you don't see that, you've got your race blinders on a bit too
> >tight.
>
> into the garage and apologize to the victim? Would she not just leave
> him out there until he was dead and then dump the body? Gawd!
>
> Michael
I believe race was brought into the issue by the perp. It was testified to
that she 'laughed about hitting some white guy' at a party some four or five
months later. That's how she was caught. Someone at the party called the
cops and told them the story she had told about hitting the 'white guy' and
keeping him in her garage until he died. I'm not saying the issue 'is' race
related, merely trying to explain where the idea of race involvement came
from.
sg
>
Michael Snyder
Dog3 wrote in message ...
>>windshield still alive, she drives home and let him lay there dying in
>>her garage.
>>
>>You think that this wouldn't be a big news story under ANY
>>circumstances?!? This could have happened in Kazahkstan and it would
>>still make the news. The story is gruesome enough to be big news,
>>regardless of the race of the participants.
>>
>>If you don't see that, you've got your race blinders on a bit too
>>tight.
>
>into the garage and apologize to the victim? Would she not just leave
>him out there until he was dead and then dump the body? Gawd!
She talks to him, therefore race isn't an issue? What -- did Furman
ever talk to OJ?
BethF
"Michael Snyder" <msn...@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:R2uKa.5596$%3.27...@typhoon.sonic.net...
> >You know, I've hit people walking on an unlit street
> >(not with my car of course) and it's pretty scary. And she
> >had alcohol and drugs in her, a woman alone...
>
> Ah, there it is... don't blame her, she's a woman...
I personally found that statement pretty bizarre myself. Like the guy is
much less of a danger to her in her fucking garage than at a hospital, where
she should have driven immediately.
JLplsSS
>on that.
>
>Luk
"According to a police report filed against her Mallard giggled several months
later as she told friends, I hit this white man.'"
http://www.aarrgghh.com/no_way/hoodOrnament.htm
This is not the only account where Chante brought up the issue of race in
regards to her victim. That's the reason it's become somewhat of an issue -
whether you want to believe it or not.
BethF
"stargazer" <star...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:K0vKa.32289$uK1....@fe05.atl2.webusenet.com...
> I believe race was brought into the issue by the perp. It was testified
to
> that she 'laughed about hitting some white guy' at a party some four or
five
> months later. That's how she was caught. Someone at the party called the
> cops and told them the story she had told about hitting the 'white guy'
and
> keeping him in her garage until he died. I'm not saying the issue 'is'
race
> related, merely trying to explain where the idea of race involvement came
> from.
As a minority she is probably far more aware of her race than most whites
are. This would also make her more aware of his race and might explain her
using the words "white man".
Michael Snyder
BethF wrote in message ...
>
>
>As a minority she is probably far more aware of her race than most whites
>are. This would also make her more aware of his race and might explain her
>using the words "white man".
Oh blah blah blah, Beth. Does it also explain the black people in my
Oakland neighborhood calling me Honky when I lived there? Why is
it one thing when a black person does it, and something else entirely
when a white person does it? Racism is racism, no matter the color
of the perpetrator's skin. And letting people off the hook because of
their race is just more racism (just as letting them off the hook because
of their sex is sexism).
If we jumped on black people for saying certain things, and ignored
it when white people said them, you'd call it racism just like everyone
else. If we gave women longer prison sentences than men, you'd
call it sexism. Your resistance to using the same concept when the
race or the sex is reversed, is just more racism and sexism.
BethF
>
> BethF wrote in message ...
> >
> >
> >As a minority she is probably far more aware of her race than most whites
> >are. This would also make her more aware of his race and might explain
her
> >using the words "white man".
>
> Oh blah blah blah, Beth. Does it also explain the black people in my
> Oakland neighborhood calling me Honky when I lived there? Why is
> it one thing when a black person does it, and something else entirely
> when a white person does it? Racism is racism, no matter the color
> of the perpetrator's skin. And letting people off the hook because of
> their race is just more racism (just as letting them off the hook because
> of their sex is sexism).
saying she hit a "white man" isn't racist. its saying what color man she
hit. I wasn't there to hear how it was said, nor do I know she isnt'
racist. But I don't think there is enough information to accuse her crime
as being a racist one.
Calling you a honky is another story. Thats racist.
Are minorities more entitled to be racist? No. Nothing I hate worse than
my freaking bigoted jewish relatives. Of all people on this earth, we
should know better.
> If we jumped on black people for saying certain things, and ignored
> it when white people said them, you'd call it racism just like everyone
> else. If we gave women longer prison sentences than men, you'd
> call it sexism. Your resistance to using the same concept when the
> race or the sex is reversed, is just more racism and sexism.
I call my black friends black when its warranted. I calll my native friends
native when its appropriate. I call my one jewish friend jewish all the
time. Its not racist. Its identifying them for who they are.
ponyduck
wrote:
I'm familiar with this stretch of interstate, and there is no footpath
or sidewalk or anything of that nature running alongside. It's either
grass covered berms, or cemented drainage ditches on the other side of
the guardrails. Most likely he was walking along the rather wide
shoulder of the freeway. Dangerous? Yeah, but I doubt he was walking
in a traffic lane. Due to her intoxicated state, Mallard probably was
drifting all over the place. The guy just had the misfortune to be in
the spot she drifted to at one point.
--pony
Linda Griffith
> Ok, but what do we really know?
>
> First, the idea that he was still alive after he was hit,
> comes from two sources. One, the coroner who is
> testifying for the prosecution.
> Secondly, the say so of the people who helped cover
> up the accident, and who are testifying in exchange for
> a lighter sentence or immunity.
>
> So, if a pathologist for the defence testifies that
> he was killed instantly (probably backed up by
> the gruesome photos), all you have left is the
> testimony that Mallard told her friends that he
> was alive (and talked to her??).
But now we've had the testimony of the ME for the defense, and he, too, said
the man was alive when she drove him to her house. Unconscious, but alive.
> If he was already dead when her friends got to
> her, that might explain why they didn't call 911
> either. They may be overstating their testimony,
> in exchange for not being prosecuted for getting
> rid of the body. Just a thought.
The two men who disposed of the body are currently serving time for their
roles in this case. (The former boyfriend who testified is serving 10
years, having accepted a plea bargain to avoid the possibility of getting 20
years.) The girlfriend, "T", was given immunity in exchange for her
testimony.
>
> As for the her attorney, he hasn't exactly been helpful
> to her case by emphasizing that she was drunk and high.
> Or by letting a fireman testify about the medical state
> of the victim.
>
> Alex
But the fireman is an EMT, trained in life-saving skills. He was fully
capable of determining that the man was dead when he was discovered in the
park. That is the fireman to whom you are referring, isn't it?
Linda
Luk
>
> "According to a police report filed against her Mallard giggled several months
> later as she told friends, I hit this white man.'"
I see no racial component there. Her calling him
a "white man" was simply a vague description.
Luk
Luk
Michael Snyder wrote:
> She's not just some bad samaritan who
> happened upon the scene of an accident and failed to help.
> In the first place, she caused (or at least was a participant in)
> the accident. In the second place, she removed him from all
> possible help. She made it impossible for him to be found
> or helped. She actively prevented him from surviving, by
> taking him home with her and locking him in her garage.
You're exactly right. That's much worse than refusing
to help someone.
Luk
Wild Monkshood
Luk wrote:
I agree. It's not like she bragged she killed a white devil.
Wild Monkshood
>
>
> Luk
not_over_the_hill
We are told she called him a "white man" or "white guy".
What we do not know is what she really may have called
him. It's highly probable she referred to him as a
"honky".... since she was discussing this with other
blacks at the time.
Kris Baker
<ponyduck> wrote in message news:3efaa30a....@news.wf.net...
What I've not been able to figure is how she drove home,
with a guy sticking out of her windshield. Didn't *anyone*
notice? Yes, I know it was early in the morning, but
there's always cars on the roads.
Kris
Holier Than Thou
Is this true in all states?
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Holier Than Thou
news:ej3mfvcuvdnlso7sj...@4ax.com:
> We are told she called him a "white man" or "white guy".
>
> What we do not know is what she really may have called
> him. It's highly probable she referred to him as a
> "honky".... since she was discussing this with other
> blacks at the time.
Does anyone still use the term honky?
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Kris Baker
"Holier Than Thou" <be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote in message
news:Xns93A6552BB4218be...@216.168.3.44...
Sure. Folks over the age of 45.
Kris
Michael Snyder
Holier Than Thou wrote in message ...
In my personal experience, as the recipient of the epithet, yes.
ponyduck
That's a mystery to me too. That stretch of interstate is not heavily
travelled at that time of morning--but it's not deserted either. It's
one of those loops, that kind of circles around the outskirts of the
city.
Any cars coming the opposite way wouldn't notice anything
probably--they'd be travelling at clear freeway speeds, with the big
divider and guardrails (and sometimes fences) between opposing
traffic. So cars coming the opposite way would probably just zip by
without really noticing anything. But any cars going the same way as
Mallard--they'd have to have seen it. And then taking the off-ramp,
which usually leads to an intersection with at least a stop sign, more
commonly a light--and also usually, there are 24-hr. gas
stations/convenience stores at these intersections. And she'd be
driving slowly thru these areas. All I can think is that she just got
lucky, and either no one saw her, or if they did, just figured it was
some wild kids fooling around (I mean, who would think someone would
actually be driving around with a guy impaled in the windshield?).
Still, I kept waiting for someone to pop up later, saying "Hey! I saw
that--but I didn't realize what it was at the time" or something like
that. But if anyone saw her, they're not talking.
--pony
Sunny
<be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote:
>
>Does anyone still use the term honky?
Does anyone still use the term hippy dippy?
Michael Snyder
But she's not on trial for murder because of impaired driving skills.
She's on trial for murder because of impaired moral skills.
Michael Snyder
I get it -- a woman is afraid of a strange man, so she should
TAKE HIM HOME WITH HER, rather than to a public place like, oh,
I don't know... a hospital...
Michael Snyder
> "Michael Snyder" <msn...@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:smwKa.5663$%3.27...@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
>>BethF wrote in message ...
>>
>>>
>>>As a minority she is probably far more aware of her race than most whites
>>>are. This would also make her more aware of his race and might explain
>>
> her
>
>>>using the words "white man".
>>
>>Oh blah blah blah, Beth. Does it also explain the black people in my
>>Oakland neighborhood calling me Honky when I lived there? Why is
>>it one thing when a black person does it, and something else entirely
>>when a white person does it? Racism is racism, no matter the color
>>of the perpetrator's skin. And letting people off the hook because of
>>their race is just more racism (just as letting them off the hook because
>>of their sex is sexism).
>
>
>
> saying she hit a "white man" isn't racist.
Laughing about it is.
Michael Snyder
Possibly, but not probably. There's "look at that white man",
and there's "look at that white man".
Michael Snyder
Hey, check it out! I'm right about something! ;-)
Michael Snyder
In California, yes. In Texas?
Michael Snyder
I guarantee, the last person to call me a honky was not over 45.
not_over_the_hill
If all she gets is 15-25 years, I'm going to be pissed.
People get time now for abusing and killing dogs these days.
Hope Munro Smith
@redhat.com:
Depends on how late at night it was an how far her house is from
businesses that might be open at that time.
Holier Than Thou
news:hrdmfvgsn2tmb1btj...@4ax.com:
I do, on occasion. Do you have an actual purpose for discussing this or
are you just being Silly-Sunny, who feels persecuted?
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Holier Than Thou
Not just any strange man, a strange man who has an almost amputated leg and
is bleeding to death on her windshield. What a threat he must have been to
her.
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
JAK
>
> BethF wrote in message ...
> >
> >
> >As a minority she is probably far more aware of her race than most whites
> >are. This would also make her more aware of his race and might explain
her
> >using the words "white man".
>
> Oh blah blah blah, Beth. Does it also explain the black people in my
> Oakland neighborhood calling me Honky when I lived there? Why is
> it one thing when a black person does it, and something else entirely
> when a white person does it? Racism is racism, no matter the color
> of the perpetrator's skin. And letting people off the hook because of
> their race is just more racism (just as letting them off the hook because
> of their sex is sexism).
>
BTW, my experience is that many people of color assume that racism &
prejudice means against people of color...
I (foolishly) pointed out that the comments about "wetbacks" were racist to
a Black co-worker... when I defined "prejudice" as pre-judging... he didn't
get it...
To him, (and I've observed many others with similar blinders..) racism is
White people beating down Black people...but by definition Black people
cannot be racist or prejudiced... They know that Mexicans are all wetbacks.
They have proof that all Japanese are intellectual bigots..
J
JAK
>
> Dog3 wrote in message ...
> >On 24 Jun 2003 17:06:42 -0700, Cheneys...@deathsdoor.com (Bo Raxo)
> >wrote:
> >
> >
> >>
> >>
> >>Reality check: A woman hits a man with her car, he's embedded in the
> >>windshield still alive, she drives home and let him lay there dying in
> >>her garage.
> >>
> >>You think that this wouldn't be a big news story under ANY
> >>circumstances?!? This could have happened in Kazahkstan and it would
> >>still make the news. The story is gruesome enough to be big news,
> >>regardless of the race of the participants.
> >>
> >>If you don't see that, you've got your race blinders on a bit too
> >>tight.
> >
> >I agree Bo. Besides, if race was an issue, why would the perp go back
> >into the garage and apologize to the victim? Would she not just leave
> >him out there until he was dead and then dump the body? Gawd!
>
> She talks to him, therefore race isn't an issue? What -- did Furman
> ever talk to OJ?
>
>
Ummmmm OJ, you dropped your glove... here it is... how'd it get sticky?
J
JAK
"not_over_the_hill" <watch_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:ej3mfvcuvdnlso7sj...@4ax.com...
the current insult in my area is "cracker."
J.
Holier Than Thou
news:FoLKa.2457$Vx2.1...@newssvr28.news.prodigy.com:
I believe that cracker does not refer to whites in general, but rather
rednecks.
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Alex
<ponyduck> schreef in bericht news:3efb245c....@news.wf.net...
> Any cars coming the opposite way wouldn't notice anything
> probably--they'd be travelling at clear freeway speeds, with the big
> divider and guardrails (and sometimes fences) between opposing
> traffic. So cars coming the opposite way would probably just zip by
> without really noticing anything. But any cars going the same way as
> Mallard--they'd have to have seen it. And then taking the off-ramp,
> which usually leads to an intersection with at least a stop sign, more
> commonly a light--and also usually, there are 24-hr. gas
> stations/convenience stores at these intersections. And she'd be
> driving slowly thru these areas. All I can think is that she just got
> lucky, and either no one saw her, or if they did, just figured it was
> some wild kids fooling around (I mean, who would think someone would
> actually be driving around with a guy impaled in the windshield?).
>
> Still, I kept waiting for someone to pop up later, saying "Hey! I saw
> that--but I didn't realize what it was at the time" or something like
> that. But if anyone saw her, they're not talking.
According to her testimony, the man landed almost all the way inside
her car, with only one lower leg sticking out of the window (so much
for him being lodged halfway in the window glass - that most definitely
would have been remarkable.
Other than having a bad ecstacy experience, she was also cut by the
glass. She was probably trying to figure out whether she was
hallucinating or not.
It appeared from her testimony that there was a horseshoe shaped
exit from the highway, so she wouldn't have seen this guy walking
on it.
She also said she didn't have a cell phone. So, rather than blocking
the highway on a u-shaped turn, which would have been dangerous,
she continued to ride home, which was only 4-6 minutes away.
In conclusion, yes, she should have called 911 as soon as she
got home, but the accident wouldn't have happened if mr. homeless
wouldn't have gone walkabout on the highway.
Alex
Holier Than Thou
$1b62...@news.euronet.nl:
> In conclusion, yes, she should have called 911 as soon as she
> got home, but the accident wouldn't have happened if mr. homeless
> wouldn't have gone walkabout on the highway.
Asshole. (yes, sunny, thats an insult and intended to be one)
What if your car broke down and it was you walking on the highway? Should
she then have driven home and left you to die in her garage?
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Wild Monkshood
Alex wrote:
Except, she admitted, under oath, that she wasn't exactly sure that she
was all the way on the roadway when she hit the victim................
Wild Monkshood
>
>
> Alex
Michael Snyder
There ya go -- not a racist. ;-)
Michael Snyder
> "Michael Snyder" <msn...@nospam.net> wrote in message
> news:smwKa.5663$%3.27...@typhoon.sonic.net...
>
>>BethF wrote in message ...
>>
>>>
>>>As a minority she is probably far more aware of her race than most whites
>>>are. This would also make her more aware of his race and might explain
>>
> her
>
>>>using the words "white man".
>>
>>Oh blah blah blah, Beth. Does it also explain the black people in my
>>Oakland neighborhood calling me Honky when I lived there? Why is
>>it one thing when a black person does it, and something else entirely
>>when a white person does it? Racism is racism, no matter the color
>>of the perpetrator's skin. And letting people off the hook because of
>>their race is just more racism (just as letting them off the hook because
>>of their sex is sexism).
>>
>
> snip
>
> BTW, my experience is that many people of color assume that racism &
> prejudice means against people of color...
It's not just a "people of color" error -- it's a liberal error.
I still have a 1980's dictionary that defines "sexism" as
"prejudice against women".
Michael Snyder
Yeah, but depending on the context (and especially if spoken by
a southern black), it probably means a white redneck. And if you
are in an area where everyone's a redneck, it could be construed
to just mean white.
Colt
I actually have a friend who hit a homeless guy on the interstate. She
didn't stop (knowing there was nothing she could do for him--she ran
right over him), but instead pulled off at the nearest exit and called
the cops. She was not prosecuted, because it was an accident. However,
if he'd gotten stuck in her windshield, moaning for help, and she
ignored him and didn't call the police, she would have been guilty of
murder, because ignoring a person you hit and not calling the cops is
NOT an accident! Get it?
Alex
<ponyduck> schreef in bericht news:3efb245c....@news.wf.net...
> Any cars coming the opposite way wouldn't notice anything
> probably--they'd be travelling at clear freeway speeds, with the big
> divider and guardrails (and sometimes fences) between opposing
> traffic. So cars coming the opposite way would probably just zip by
> without really noticing anything. But any cars going the same way as
> Mallard--they'd have to have seen it. And then taking the off-ramp,
> which usually leads to an intersection with at least a stop sign, more
> commonly a light--and also usually, there are 24-hr. gas
> stations/convenience stores at these intersections. And she'd be
> driving slowly thru these areas. All I can think is that she just got
> lucky, and either no one saw her, or if they did, just figured it was
> some wild kids fooling around (I mean, who would think someone would
> actually be driving around with a guy impaled in the windshield?).
>
> Still, I kept waiting for someone to pop up later, saying "Hey! I saw
> that--but I didn't realize what it was at the time" or something like
> that. But if anyone saw her, they're not talking.
According to her testimony, the man landed almost all the way inside
Alex
"Colt" <PatSHo...@yahoo.commune> schreef in bericht news:3EFB96...@yahoo.commune...
> didn't stop (knowing there was nothing she could do for him--she ran
> right over him), but instead pulled off at the nearest exit and called
> the cops. She was not prosecuted, because it was an accident. However,
> if he'd gotten stuck in her windshield, moaning for help, and she
> ignored him and didn't call the police, she would have been guilty of
> murder, because ignoring a person you hit and not calling the cops is
> NOT an accident! Get it?
Look at it this way, at least she got him off the street.
Now if she had pushed him out of her car, then drove off
and _maybe_ called the police, he could have been driven over
by any number of other cars.
So you could argue she did him a favor not stopping.
But aren't we forgetting that she was high, alone and probably tired
as well? She panicked, but whatever she did or didn't do, was under
an impaired reasoning capacity. She didn't _intend_ to kill him, and
didn't actively go out of her way to kill him.
Now her friend "T", that's another story. However, lucky for her, she
made a deal for less time and squeeled on Mallard.
I just think there should be a difference between an accident
that wasn't her fold to begin with and got out of hand, and someone
who actively seeks to do someone in.
Alex
Alex
news:Xns93A6A68DB77BFbe...@216.168.3.44...
Mr. homeless _didn't have a car_.
And what's more, does anyone have any information on his state
of sobriety??
Alex
Alex
Think about that.
Alex
"Alex" <avdeele...@wanadoo.nl> schreef in bericht
news:3efb9e49$0$28897$1b62...@news.euronet.nl...
Michael Snyder
Alex wrote in message <3efb9e4a$0$28897$1b62...@news.euronet.nl>...
>"Holier Than Thou" <be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> schreef in bericht
>news:Xns93A6A68DB77BFbe...@216.168.3.44...
>> "Alex" <avdeele...@wanadoo.nl> wrote in news:3efb8ca8$0$28893
>> $1b62...@news.euronet.nl:
>>
>>
>> > In conclusion, yes, she should have called 911 as soon as she
>> > got home, but the accident wouldn't have happened if mr. homeless
>> > wouldn't have gone walkabout on the highway.
>>
>>
>> Asshole. (yes, sunny, thats an insult and intended to be one)
>>
>> What if your car broke down and it was you walking on the highway? Should
>> she then have driven home and left you to die in her garage?
>
>Mr. homeless _didn't have a car_.
That's s'posed to be relevant?
Linda Griffith
> > >the Court TV woman said that the victim was hit when
> > >walking _on an interstate_??
> > >
> > >He was _walking_ on the highway. And homeless.
> > >
> > >Alex
I don't think so, Alex. For one thing, I don't think he was walking in the
middle of the road; I don't think that was ever reported.
> What I've not been able to figure is how she drove home,
> with a guy sticking out of her windshield. Didn't *anyone*
> notice? Yes, I know it was early in the morning, but
> there's always cars on the roads.
>
> Kris
>
I don't go into Fort Worth any more often than necessary (but a helluva lot
more often than I go into Dallas!), so I should know this stretch of roadway
better than I do. I am familiar with at least one part of 287 (I think
Chanté mentioned 287 today); and as someone mentioned on TV, when something
is called a "highway" in this area, it's not what people expect in other
parts of the country. We have Hwy 10, which is "nothing much". Denton Hwy
(377) goes right through the middle of a town. These aren't the big
Interstate Highways that people in other parts of the country probably
expect, similar to the Autobahn, or something.
On some of these highways, few people would be out and about at 3:00 AM, or
whenever Chanté was driving along with a man's body stuck in her windshield,
especially if she took back roads/shortcuts that most people take on a
regular basis in getting to their homes. If we were discussing 121, 820, or
183, the traffic would be heavier, even at 3:00 AM.
Linda
Linda Griffith
> It appeared from her testimony that there was a horseshoe shaped
> exit from the highway, so she wouldn't have seen this guy walking
> on it.
I didn't hear this part of her testimony, but your description sounds like
what we call a "Texas turn-around"...an far-left lane that takes you back in
the opposite direction without having to wait through a light.
Traditionally, one goes through a Texas turn-around in a rather slow manner,
if for no other reason than the close quarters involved. I can't imagine
that a pedestrian would take a Texas turn-around, but perhaps he did.
Still, Chanté should have been going slowly enough to see a pedestrian.
(It's NOT really a pedestrian walkway, though.)
Linda
JLplsSS
>>
>> "According to a police report filed against her Mallard giggled several
>months
>> later as she told friends, I hit this white man.'"
>
>I see no racial component there. Her calling him
>a "white man" was simply a vague description.
>
>Luk
>
The problem, as I see it, is that she was giggling when she said it.
Donna
My opinions might have changed, but not the fact that I am right.
Linda Griffith
> >Does anyone still use the term honky?
>
> In my personal experience, as the recipient of the epithet, yes.
>
I've never been called a honky, and I live in the South. What did you do to
antagonize that person?
(Oops! Whatcha wanna bet it was a woman who called him a honky?)
Linda (never even been called a "Cracker")
Linda Griffith
news:hrdmfvgsn2tmb1btj...@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 16:21:33 -0000, Holier Than Thou
> <be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote:
>
> >
>
Ask George Carlin.
Linda
Michael Snyder
Linda Griffith wrote in message ...
>"Michael Snyder" <msn...@nospam.net> wrote in message news:jCFKa.5786$%
>
>> >Does anyone still use the term honky?
>>
>> In my personal experience, as the recipient of the epithet, yes.
>>
>I've never been called a honky, and I live in the South. What did you do to
>antagonize that person?
Beautiful. Someone called you a nigger? You must have deserved it!
>(Oops! Whatcha wanna bet it was a woman who called him a honky?)
You lose again. Although a woman did say to her friend,
"watch out, you almost hit that white man with your umbrella."
The person who shouted "honky" at me was male.
ponyduck
wrote:
>In conclusion, yes, she should have called 911 as soon as she
>got home, but the accident wouldn't have happened if mr. homeless
>wouldn't have gone walkabout on the highway.
>
>Alex
I can't believe you're trying to put the onus on Mr. Biggs in this
case. What he did might not have been wise, but it was Mallard
driving under the influence which had a greater hand in this accident.
Besides, it's not the initial accident that is at issue here--no one
is alleging it was anything other than an accident. It's what she did
afterwards that's the problem. And this can be blamed on no one but
Mallard herself.
--pony
Javanaut
> If all she gets is 15-25 years, I'm going to be pissed.
> People get time now for abusing and killing dogs these days.
I'd be surprised if she got more than that. People who rape and abuse
children usually get less than that. Animal abusers get much less than
that. Most people convicted of 2nd-degree murder serve less than 15 years.
My understanding is that the Texas jury can give her anything from
probation to life. Same as with the dentist's wife. They gave her 12 years
for "accidentally" running over her husband 3 times.
Luk
>> "According to a police report filed against her Mallard giggled several
>> months later as she told friends, I hit this white man.'
Donna wrote:
>The problem, as I see it, is that she was giggling when she said it.
That's the kind of comment I practice ignoring. Sounds
too much like someone doing their own interpreting.
It's also hearsay.
If she was giggling there's no way to know what part of
the story she found humorous. Given the woman's
proclivities, the things that amuse her don't amuse everyone.
The woman is obviously guilty. But there's no reason
to assume race had anything to do with it.
Luk
yaffaDina
Get an updated one, dude
yD :)
Sunny
<be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote:
>Asshole. (yes, sunny, thats an insult and intended to be one)
So, basically, your comments above are supposed to be a perfect
example of "debating like a grown up" and not "denigrating people"?
It disturbs me that your self-esteem problems cause you to run
around insulting people on usenet in your desperate attempt for
acceptance.
Beth, I haven't seen any indication that you are capable of any
independent thought whatsoever. You seem very good at "Me too" and
"You suck" but not much more.
You obviously have some self-esteem problems, do
not have well thought out opinions, and run around insulting anyone
who agrees with folks from soc.men in order to gain approval from a
bunch of folks who don't really respect you in the first place. Thats
not anything to envy.
Again, Beth, lets see some discourse instead of insults. The insult
thing really stopped floating my boat about 20 years ago.
Recognize your own words above, Beth? You wrote all that, hypocrite.
Holier Than Thou
news:95iofv038lio52hra...@4ax.com:
> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:21:34 -0000, Holier Than Thou
> <be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote:
>
>>Asshole. (yes, sunny, thats an insult and intended to be one)
>
> So, basically, your comments above are supposed to be a perfect
> example of "debating like a grown up" and not "denigrating people"?
>
> It disturbs me that your self-esteem problems cause you to run
> around insulting people on usenet in your desperate attempt for
> acceptance.
>
> Beth, I haven't seen any indication that you are capable of any
> independent thought whatsoever. You seem very good at "Me too" and
> "You suck" but not much more.
Oh Sunny, you are just so funny. You really dont' know the difference
between insulting an asshole and then explaining why in intelligent
terms they are an asshole, and insulting people without any opinion of
your own whatsoever.
> You obviously have some self-esteem problems, do
> not have well thought out opinions, and run around insulting anyone
> who agrees with folks from soc.men in order to gain approval from a
> bunch of folks who don't really respect you in the first place. Thats
> not anything to envy.
Silly girl, I had an opinion. I expressed it. Didnt' you read my
post? It was much, much more than just an insult. I also explained to
this guy why I insulted him, I explained my opinion.
> Again, Beth, lets see some discourse instead of insults. The insult
> thing really stopped floating my boat about 20 years ago.
>
> Recognize your own words above, Beth? You wrote all that, hypocrite.
There isn't anything hypocritical about what I have said to you and what
I posted here. I think its just that you are so overemotional about the
subject you aren't able to read critically.
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Holier Than Thou
>
>>> "According to a police report filed against her Mallard giggled several
>>> months later as she told friends, I hit this white man.'
>
> Donna wrote:
>
>>The problem, as I see it, is that she was giggling when she said it.
>
> That's the kind of comment I practice ignoring. Sounds
> too much like someone doing their own interpreting.
> It's also hearsay.
>
> If she was giggling there's no way to know what part of
> the story she found humorous. Given the woman's
> proclivities, the things that amuse her don't amuse everyone.
Its also possible it was nervous giggling, or that she was high on X again.
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Linda Griffith
news:3EFC4A70...@earthlink.net...
about the "white man" remark or the giggling. If the report were true, I
imagine the Prosecution would've used it, unless it didn't necessarily fit
in with the case they were presenting. I wonder why the woman who actually
heard Chanté talking about hitting the man never took the stand, and why her
*mother* seems to have testified instead. Think they'll ever tell us? That
intrigues me.
Linda
Michael Snyder
> Oh Sunny, you are just so funny. You really dont' know the difference
> between insulting an asshole and then explaining why in intelligent
> terms they are an asshole, and insulting people without any opinion of
> your own whatsoever.
Neither do you. In the first place, you wouldn't know an
"intelligent term" if it bit you in the ass, and in the second,
you obviously don't know what a person with an opiniion of their own
looks like.
Sunny
Beth wants to argue with me, she can come on over to soc.men to read
what is being said.
On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 16:36:38 -0000, Holier Than Thou
<be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote:
>Sunny <mas...@facstaff.wisc.edu> wrote in
>news:95iofv038lio52hra...@4ax.com:
>
>> On Fri, 27 Jun 2003 00:21:34 -0000, Holier Than Thou
>> <be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Asshole. (yes, sunny, thats an insult and intended to be one)
>
>> So, basically, your comments above are supposed to be a perfect
>> example of "debating like a grown up" and not "denigrating people"?
>>
>> It disturbs me that your self-esteem problems cause you to run
>> around insulting people on usenet in your desperate attempt for
>> acceptance.
>>
>> Beth, I haven't seen any indication that you are capable of any
>> independent thought whatsoever. You seem very good at "Me too" and
>> "You suck" but not much more.
>
>
>Oh Sunny, you are just so funny.
No, you're funny, because YOU WROTE *all* the above.
>You really dont' know the difference
>between insulting an asshole
Who says YOU get to denigrate people and not be considered insulting?
>and then explaining why in intelligent
>terms they are an asshole
There is nothing intelligent about you calling someone an asshole. You
just showing your hypocrisy and inability to ebate like an adult. Just
like when you icily insist that people look stupid when they
spell-flame, and then you go ahead and spell flame as if you are above
your own demands.
>, and insulting people without any opinion of
>your own whatsoever.
You're an asshole, Beth. No explanation necessary. You never offer
opinions, just insults and criticism. How does that feel?
>> You obviously have some self-esteem problems, do
>> not have well thought out opinions, and run around insulting anyone
>> who agrees with folks from soc.men in order to gain approval from a
>> bunch of folks who don't really respect you in the first place. Thats
>> not anything to envy.
>
>Silly girl, I had an opinion. I expressed it.
You wrote the above, not me. It is a DIRECT QUOTE of you scolding me
like you're in charge. That makes YOU the "silly girl." Your opinion
that someone is an asshole is off-topic, insulting and derogatory,
something YOU were screeching about other people doing.
You don't even recognize your own sanctimonious words, do you.
>Didnt' you read my
>post? It was much, much more than just an insult.
Not really.
>I also explained to
>this guy why I insulted him, I explained my opinion.
What gives you the right to call people assholes, and then whine about
how people shouldn't insult others or name-call? I just want you to
admit you are a hypocrite.
>> Again, Beth, lets see some discourse instead of insults. The insult
>> thing really stopped floating my boat about 20 years ago.
>>
>> Recognize your own words above, Beth? You wrote all that, hypocrite.
>
>There isn't anything hypocritical about what I have said to you and what
>I posted here.
There certainly is. Now you're just lying.
> I think its just that you are so overemotional about the
>subject you aren't able to read critically.
Now you are reading emotions into my posts, something you ordered me
not to do to you. I am going to take you to task every time you screw
up and go against your own holier than horseshit "advice." You are a
hypocrite of the worst kind. You're exactly the type of Usenet poster
that deserves their own medicine flung right back at them If you think
that's "overemotional", that's your problem. Maybe you should think
before you post.
You don't think I'm reading "critically"? You better believe I am.
More to come, I'm sure. I dish criticism right back at the source.
Sunny
Me too.
(LOL)
Holier Than Thou
@redhat.com:
Michael,
There are lots of folks in here with their own opinions that they express
quite well. Some express theirs poorly. Sunny expresses your opinion.
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Holier Than Thou
news:kq2pfv4281eogi37h...@4ax.com:
I know what the comment was, Sunny. You are just being silly now. Your
reposting things I said to you doesn't make them true about me. It just
means you know how to cut and paste. Very talented!
> You don't even recognize your own sanctimonious words, do you.
>
>>Didnt' you read my
>>post? It was much, much more than just an insult.
>
> Not really.
>
>>I also explained to
>>this guy why I insulted him, I explained my opinion.
>
> What gives you the right to call people assholes, and then whine about
> how people shouldn't insult others or name-call? I just want you to
> admit you are a hypocrite.
He is an asshole. He thinks the homeless guy should be killed for
walking on the highway. And I explained why he is an asshole.
You on the other hand drop into a conversation, offer no discourse on
the topic, but instead insult people.
>>> Again, Beth, lets see some discourse instead of insults. The insult
>>> thing really stopped floating my boat about 20 years ago.
>>>
>>> Recognize your own words above, Beth? You wrote all that, hypocrite.
>>
>>There isn't anything hypocritical about what I have said to you and
what
>>I posted here.
>
> There certainly is. Now you're just lying.
Of course I am not lying. I never claimed that I never insulted anyone,
now did i?
>> I think its just that you are so overemotional about the
>>subject you aren't able to read critically.
>
> Now you are reading emotions into my posts, something you ordered me
> not to do to you. I am going to take you to task every time you screw
> up and go against your own holier than horseshit "advice." You are a
> hypocrite of the worst kind. You're exactly the type of Usenet poster
> that deserves their own medicine flung right back at them If you think
> that's "overemotional", that's your problem. Maybe you should think
> before you post.
I am thinking and you are still making an ass of yourself. My post was
perfectly logical and held water. Have you shown that it hasn't?
> You don't think I'm reading "critically"? You better believe I am.
> More to come, I'm sure. I dish criticism right back at the source.
I believe you are capable of being critical, you have certainly shown
that. I still see no evidence you are capable of thinking critically.
There is quite a difference between the two.
--
BethF, Anchorage, AK
Philip Lewis
"Holier Than Thou" <be...@NOT-SO-bad-dawgs-in-ak.com> wrote in
message news:Xns93A76E14CAE8be...@216.168.3.44...
> Michael Snyder <msn...@redhat.com> wrote in
news:3EFC8F3C.9010500
> @redhat.com:
>
> > Holier Than Thou wrote:
> >
> >> Oh Sunny, you are just so funny. You really dont' know the
difference
> >> between insulting an asshole and then explaining why in
intelligent
> >> terms they are an asshole, and insulting people without any
opinion of
> >> your own whatsoever.
> >
> > Neither do you. In the first place, you wouldn't know an
> > "intelligent term" if it bit you in the ass, and in the
second,
> > you obviously don't know what a person with an opiniion of
their own
> > looks like.
>
>
> Michael,
> There are lots of folks in here with their own opinions that
they express
> quite well.
Then there are those like yourself that have fuck all to
contribute except personal
sniping.
> Some express theirs poorly.
You should know - a pity you don't.
Phil