Woman Shoots Motorcyclist: "Reasonable" or "Unreasonable?"

[HonorsDaddy]

Arguably HE would have been acting in self defense

That kind of aggressive driving in a car-v-bike scenario is most certainly going to raise the rider's pucker factor.

41 exits? She was riding his tail for a VERY long time. It would also seem she was making a point of riding his tail - and THAT is an extremely aggressive and life-threatening act. Especially knowing that it takes effort to stop a bike in as LONG a distance as an SUV will need.

If any of you doubt that, by all means, come sit in front of me while I hold a gun to your head for about 10 minutes - from behind. That's what being tailgated for that amount of time by an SUV would feel like.

I understand some of you don't like bikers. Too bad. Last i checked it was perfectly legal. We aren't thugs or criminals just because we're on 2 wheels.

 

[fletcher]

41 exits? She was riding his tail for a VERY long time. It would also seem she was making a point of riding his tail - and THAT is an extremely aggressive and life-threatening act. Especially knowing that it takes effort to stop a bike in as LONG a distance as an SUV will need.

Not to blame the victim, but part of keeping yourself safe and alive is to be smarter than the idiot giving you trouble, both on the road and off. Yes, drivers that do that are dangerous and in the wrong, but if you have a chance to get away from that driver, you should do so.

To work with your gun-to-the-head example, it would be like me sitting there with the gun pointed at my head, but although I'm free to move away from it, I continue to sit there.

 

[jlangton]

HonorsDaddy-I know several bikers,and if it comes down to a person tailgating them-they get off on an exit promptly or otherwise get away from them,not wait for somebody to tailgate them for 41 exits. That makes it sound as if he wasn't too bothered by it-41 exits around here is at least 20 miles.
JL

 

[ilbob]

black woman tailgating a white man

what difference does their races make?

 

[ilbob]

Arguably HE would have been acting in self defense

That kind of aggressive driving in a car-v-bike scenario is most certainly going to raise the rider's pucker factor.

41 exits? She was riding his tail for a VERY long time.

And he had 41 chances to get off the road without incident. Or he could have just dropped back behind her.

 

[MinnMooney]

I have had people pull so close to me at a light that I reached back and pounded on their hood- they just don't see you...

I drive a 3/4 ton P.U. with a tall topper. People pull up to within inches of me at stop lights. So What? Do I get out of my truck? No. Do I "pound on their hood"? Hell No. Motorcycle, car, P.U., semi, motorhome or bus. Idiots pull out in front of everyone. Idiots tailgate everyone. Idiots just won't 'let it go' if they get "dis'd" on the highway.

After reading all available accounts of the participants and eyewitnesses, and given Yolanda's violent, stalking past, I'm in the "fry her" camp. I believe that she provoked the incident and never tried to de-escalate. Was the motorcyclist partially at fault?...... Very possibly. By various accounts, Yolanda had many, many opportunities to exit the freeway and de-escalate the explosive situation. Well... so did the motorcyclist!! Instead, he choose to confront Yolanda by approaching her SUV. Was he about to harm her? Was he going to "ask her for a date"? I can only guess. My guess is that he was pissed and was going to dress her down for tailgating. Is that illegal? Not if he doesn't threaten her or APPEAR to going to threaten her. Ahhhh... but there's the rube. Did he APPEAR to be coming up to her SUV to harm her? Witnesses say he didn't appear threatening. Did she try to retreat? No! She acually advanced toward him and drew "1st blood" (actually, 1st act of contact) by hitting him with the vehicle door!
Unless there is more to this story that is yet to be printed, it's looking real bad for her. I hope justice is done and she gets what is justified.... no more and no less.

P.S. Her "child" should get prosecuted, also, for attacking a gunshot victim.

P.S.S. This isn't a race issue nor is it a motorcyclist issue. Let's simply keep this as a road-rage issue with 2 (possibly 3) idiots involved.

 

[conw]

IMO, people who tailgate, swerve all over the road with no warning, etc. should be the ones getting licenses revoked and jailtime. It makes no sense to me that you can negligently hit someone with a car and maybe get a little suspension and small penalty, but if you attack them and do the same damage if you ran into said individual on the street, you'll get locked up for sure. But, that's a rant and discussion for another time.

I agree. Until the judicial system starts taking aggressive driving seriously, it will continue to threaten and take lives.

 

[MinnMooney]

Until the judicial system starts taking aggressive driving seriously, it will continue to threaten and take lives.

The justice sys DOES take road-rage very seriously. There are more and more convictions every year. The road traveling cops hate aggresive drivers and write plenty of tickets to prove it.

Road-rage is illegal just as speeding, drunk driving and driving-with-your-head-up-your-a__ (legally refered to as 'careless driving') are illegal. Does that stopp anyone?.... Some, but certainly not all.

 

[Buzztail]

I drive a 3/4 ton P.U. with a tall topper. People pull up to within inches of me at stop lights. So What? Do I get out of my truck? No. Do I "pound on their hood"? Hell No. Motorcycle, car, P.U., semi, motorhome or bus. Idiots pull out in front of everyone. Idiots tailgate everyone. Idiots just won't 'let it go' if they get "dis'd" on the highway

If they ''Bump" my 3/4 ton truck I don't die. There is a big difference!

 

[harmonic]

I just jumped to the last page and I'm sure it's already been mentioned, but in case it hasn't, the lady's concealed carry license has been revoked following her indictment for two felonies.

http://www.news-tribune.net/local/local_story_206120102.html

(My home town, BTW.)

 

[XDKingslayer]

By the sounds of things, they both should have been charged. They both acted stupid and reaped their deserved rewards for it.

 

[The Tourist]

The Angels used to have business cards with the logo, "When we do right no one remembers, when we do wrong no one forgets."

I have seen lines of bikes in the thousands at MDA rallies and Toys For Tots affairs. Many citizens are surprised to see "1%er" patches.

However, if one biker drags a cager our of their car and gives them the beating they deserve with a canoe paddle, the "assault" will be plastered on youtube within minutes.

Of course, then citizens wonder why we're so edgy...

 

[Treo]

Weather it was the evil biker thug or the stupid savage woman driver that caused the incident is irrelevant at this point. What ever happened before, dude got off his bike and approached the other vehicle. Like it or not that was a demonstrably stupid thing to do.

Stupid drivers piss me off at least 10 times a day, when they do I literally repeat ,out loud, " I'm carrying a gun, if I escalate this at all I'm at fault." and go about my business.

The last thing I'd do is walk up on a car I don't know in traffic this is the 21st century folks, people don't care they will shoot you.

 

[antsi]

A Pox on Both Their Houses

That kind of aggressive driving in a car-v-bike scenario is most certainly going to raise the rider's pucker factor.

41 exits? She was riding his tail for a VERY long time. It would also seem she was making a point of riding his tail - and THAT is an extremely aggressive and life-threatening act.

Why is it hard to understand that a biker goin' down the highway, not hurting anyone, gets a tad ticked after being threatened and killed with a +two ton vehicle?

If they ''Bump" my 3/4 ton truck I don't die. There is a big difference!

A lot of people on this thread seem to be implying that the motorcyclist getting off his bike to confront the driver was justified because of the danger to cyclist if they collide with an SUV.

I'm not buying this.

If you are so threatened by an SUV driver trying to kill you with their vehicle, why are you getting off the bike to go confront her on foot? Stay on your bike, use your speed and maneuverability to get away. She can crush you just as dead on foot as she can on your bike. What do you think you are going to accomplish by confronting the driver anyway? The driver is probably an idiot and unlikely to change. Best strategy is to just get the H. away.

I agree with the prosecutor: I would like to see charges against both parties in this case. From all the facts I have seen here (and admitting there may be other facts we don't know), both of these clowns had ample opportunity to avoid the other. It looks like they both got tee'd off at each other, and neither was willing to disengage, but instead insisted on continuing/escalating the conflict. If you do that, don't come crying to me about the consequences of your behavior.

Those taking sides with the cyclist: OK, you already know the SUV driver is aggressive and raging, and she's demonstrated a willingness to endanger your life. What do you hope to gain by pursuing further confrontation with her?

Those taking sides with the driver: you are in a vehicle with doors and windows and locks. A man is approaching you on foot with his hands empty. Going from here to shooting is an unjustified escalation. Besides, it seems to have been your raging/tailgating/aggressive driving that generated this whole interchange to begin with. Sorry, no sympathy for you either.

 

[searcher451]

Who are we, any of us, to judge by way of a couple of newspaper stories? We weren't there, we don't know what happened, and it's possible that we'll never know what happened because the people who were directly involved in the incident have no motive or incentive whatsoever to tell the truth. It's ludicrous for any of us to pass judgment on events we know nothing about, beyond a few disjointed paragraphs scribbled by hurried and harried reporters.

 

[The Tourist]

I'm not buying this....If you are so threatened

This is a thread where the idea of "turn about" is a good idea.

For example, even courts recognize the idea of "fighting words," and there is the idea of "the doctrine of the reasonable man."

In that context, as I booted your butt around the pool table at the Wisconsin Inn for the third time would you still feel the presence of mind to read me Biblical/Qoran scipture? As a believer, you should.

Heck, to be a survivor you might not want to do anything further to enrage your attacker.

So that's "turn about."

But as a citizen at the hands of this attacker you feel helpless, a bit angered, upset your rights to safety and security are being ignored, not allowing for months of healing, loss of work and thousands of dollars in medical and rehab bills.

Well, guy, and so it goes for the biker. He has rights, he has expectations of safety on a public road his taxes have paid to build. An idiot who cannot control a moving vehicle shouldn't even have a license, period.

To most people, the biker is "tough" so he must always endure. Ever see a really bad wreck?

 

[ptmmatssc]

By the sounds of things, they both should have been charged. They both acted stupid and reaped their deserved rewards for it.

Just curious . Exactly what "charge' should the gentleman on the bike get? Was anything he did "illegal"? I didn't see in ANY article that he threatened anyone, caused any damage, or even any traffic infractions. So what exactly do you charge him with? Being stupid? Don't think there's a law for that , otherwise society would get quite a bit smaller.

Although Mosier was not charged, the grand jury report concluded that he was “clearly not without fault.” His attorney, Larry Wilder, conceded that point, but said Mosier’s actions were not criminal.

Now , without more actual facts , I personally would have to say this isn't a good shoot . It may not have been the "brightest" thing to do on the bikers part , but the SUV driver went to far for the circumstances . Just my opinion.

 

[csmkersh]

The motorcyclist had no gun in this case. No way to shoot the woman.

If she shoots, the law says it's got to be "reasonable."

It's called disparity of force. Out weighed and out muscled, a woman who is threatened should most likely shoot.

As to this particular instance, sounds like both the biker and the woman were idiots. Her for tail-gating and him passing 41 exits before apparently threatening her.

​

 

[ilbob]

Stupid drivers piss me off at least 10 times a day, when they do I literally repeat ,out loud, " I'm carrying a gun, if I escalate this at all I'm at fault." and go about my business.

Amen. Does not matter if you are carrying a gun or not. If you chose to do nothing to mitigate the situation, you are at fault.

 

[Buzztail]

Who said the he really needed to get off at that exit? Maybe he WAS trying to get away, and take a different route. Maybe she needed to get off at the next exit, and just wasn't ready to quit having fun..... Those things are specific to this one ordeal, and I will no longer comment on them.

 

[The Tourist]

I will no longer comment on them.

I'm beginning to feel the same way. The biker got off his bike. Many believe he shared in some form of culpability just for that act.

Of course, they would justify their own behavior if they simply got out of their cars. That's way "turn-about" is important here.

Had the woman jumped out of her SUV and the biker would have shot her as she moved towards him most of the entire forum would be screaming for his head.

But because she's a woman and he's a "biker" many of those same people are trying to hang him for the same conduct.

Either he committed a crime or he didn't. If he did prosecute him. If he didn't then get off of his case.

The legal slang for that opinion is "two bites of the apple."

An incompetent driver who is a nut job and might not even qualify for a firearm (and yes, that came from me) shot an innocent man. His transportation choices mean nothing, however, her conduct does.

 

[RNB65]

Ms. Parrish is going to prison. The only question is how long?

 

[rbernie]

If you chose to do nothing to mitigate the situation, you are at fault.

Agreed. What the biker did was tactically unsound (aka stupid). But that is not criminal, last I checked. And it does not deserve him getting shot until such time as he demonstrated that he was a threat.

The accounts would suggest that he did not demonstrate that he was a threat, and that she did not use verbal commands or other tools to determine his intent or stop his advance prior to shooting him center-mass. If these accounts prove true, then she shot prematurely and is legally culpable. If the accounts prove that the biker was a threat to any reasonable person in that situation, then she will be acquitted and we will no doubt praise her quick thinkin'.

 

[Drgong]

It is not a crime nor shootable offense to walk to someone window.

Secondly, if she feared for her life why did she exit the car?

If this was a case of where she was charged with brandishing a gun, where she pulls it out so that he does not get closer.


However this women took her gun, got out of the car, and shot down a man, then her and her son started to kick the heck out of him.

Sorry, I am a gun owner but in no way am I going to call that reasionable. I hate to see a THR memeber shoot down someone who gets out of the car to tell them that there gas tank lid is open

 

[Treo]

It is not a crime nor shootable offense to walk to someone's window.

You are absolutely 100% correct. I'm sure that fact was some comfort to our evil biker thug while the stupid savage woman driver and her demonic offspring were kicking him as he lay bleeding on the ground

You don't walk up to the vehicle of a person you don't know on the road