Dumb White Guy Slaps the Wrong Woman

[Mad_Cabbie]

Was the dumb white guy racist or did he simply hate cigarette smoke? Too bad there is no vidieo!

Well he called her Rosa Parks after spitting on her. Then he slapped her. Pretty sure he was racist. Why would he call her Rosa Parks if he was not a cowardly racist?

Prove he called her Rosa Parks or that he spat on her.

They will do that in court - not in the "Current Events" forum.

 

[S.J.]

I wouldnt know but I would guess this would be the first time you actually used your brain to do more than control your automated bodily functions. Be careful you dont get a head rush.

Yeah, you would. You've never posted anything on this forum that wasn't about race.

^^^^ That's funneh!

Shut up, ass kisser. You know I'm right.

 

[S.J.]

Well he called her Rosa Parks after spitting on her. Then he slapped her. Pretty sure he was racist. Why would he call her Rosa Parks if he was not a cowardly racist?

Prove he called her Rosa Parks or that he spat on her.

They will do that in court - not in the "Current Events" forum.

How convenient. In the meantime they can post anything they want and we're supposed to believe it. Got it.

 

[DigitalDrifter]

Does a criminal act go from a misdemeanor into a felony when a judge is the victim?

Only if the judge is black, and especially if she's a lesbo.

Horse crap. that's a bunch of hogwash.

Sarcasm man, sarcasm.

 

[Esmeralda]

Does a criminal act go from a misdemeanor into a felony when a judge is the victim?

Assault and battery is not a misdemeanor. This woman was 79 years old. What kind of man spits on anyone? And what kind of man hits a 79 year old person? As well, he made a racist comment while doing so. Hate crime and assault and battery on an elderly person? Far more than a misdemeanor.

 

[BobPlumb]

Calling her Rosa Parks makes it a hate crime? Would it have been better if he called her a ***** instead?

 

[Esmeralda]

Calling her Rosa Parks makes it a hate crime? Would it have been better if he called her a ***** instead?

Yes it does.

HATE CRIME: a crime motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence.

The reference to Rosa Parks means that he is hating this woman not just because she is smoking, but because she is black. If she were white, obviously he would not have said that. I believe he would not have spit on or hit an elderly 79 year old white woman. Spiting on someone is the ultimate show of distain and disrespect. He did that because of how he feels about blacks. Also, he felt free to hit her because she was black and probably assumed she had no power. It is clearly a racist incident, at least 50% of it. I hope they throw the book at him.

 

[BobPlumb]

Calling her Rosa Parks makes it a hate crime? Would it have been better if he called her a ***** instead?

Yes it does.

HATE CRIME: a crime motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence.

The reference to Rosa Parks means that he is hating this woman not just because she is smoking, but because she is black. If she were white, obviously he would not have said that. I believe he would not have spit on or hit an elderly 79 year old white woman. Spiting on someone is the ultimate show of distain and disrespect. He did that because of how he feels about blacks. Also, he felt free to hit her because she was black and probably assumed she had no power. It is clearly a racist incident, at least 50% of it. I hope they throw the book at him.

I don't think that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it because she is black. If it were a woman wearing glasses and he called her four eyes would if mean that he hates women that wear glasses? Some people simply find names to call people that they are mad at. He could of been mad at her for smoking, not because she was black. He may simply be a bully. It is a common technique of a bully to ridicule the person for whatever characteristics they have. Not that this is any defense for what the guy did.

I would like to know if there is a second side to this story. Was the woman being inconsiderate with her smoke? Did she blow smoke in his face either on purpose or inadvertently?

 

[Esmeralda]

Calling her Rosa Parks makes it a hate crime? Would it have been better if he called her a ***** instead?

Yes it does.

HATE CRIME: a crime motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence.

The reference to Rosa Parks means that he is hating this woman not just because she is smoking, but because she is black. If she were white, obviously he would not have said that. I believe he would not have spit on or hit an elderly 79 year old white woman. Spiting on someone is the ultimate show of distain and disrespect. He did that because of how he feels about blacks. Also, he felt free to hit her because she was black and probably assumed she had no power. It is clearly a racist incident, at least 50% of it. I hope they throw the book at him.

I don't think that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it because she is black. If it were a woman wearing glasses and he called her four eyes would if mean that he hates women that wear glasses? Some people simply find names to call people that they are mad at. He could of been mad at her for smoking, not because she was black. He may simply be a bully. It is a common technique of a bully to ridicule the person for whatever characteristics they have. Not that this is any defense for what the guy did.

I would like to know if there is a second side to this story. Was the woman being inconsiderate with her smoke? Did she blow smoke in his face either on purpose or inadvertly?

Reasonable doubt will be an issue when there is a trial. There is enough here to arrest him for assault. The hate crime issue, as well as the assault, will be dealt with during the trial. However, being angry at someone is one thing, making remarks about someone's race while you are attacking them is considered a hate crime.

I personally know of a case in the early 70s where 3 men went to a guy's house to beat him up. They were white and he was black. They tried to force their way into his home and were calling him the 'n' word over and over. He shot one of them and the other two retreated. There was nothing in the books then called a hate crime. There also wasn't anything like the Castle law either.

He was arrested and held for 30 days before being charged, which was the law then in that city. A local civil rights attorney (a white man) took his case pro-bono. The person he shot didn't die. He was released after 30 days and never charged. I imagine all factors were taken into account...self defense, people trying to force their way into your home, and the racist component. My point is, even then, without contemporary laws against hate crime, it was considered so heinous to call someone the 'n' word while attacking him, that a civil rights attorney volunterred to take the case for free.

 

[Asclepias]

Prove he called her Rosa Parks or that he spat on her.

They will do that in court - not in the "Current Events" forum.

How convenient. In the meantime they can post anything they want and we're supposed to believe it. Got it.

I dont care if you believe it. I posted it so others could see. if you notice I didnt say "please believe this story SJ" when I posted it.

 

[Asclepias]

Calling her Rosa Parks makes it a hate crime? Would it have been better if he called her a ***** instead?

Yes when you consider he assaulted her afterwards. Are you aware of what a hate crime is?

 

[Asclepias]

Calling her Rosa Parks makes it a hate crime? Would it have been better if he called her a ***** instead?

Yes it does.

HATE CRIME: a crime motivated by racial, sexual, or other prejudice, typically one involving violence.

The reference to Rosa Parks means that he is hating this woman not just because she is smoking, but because she is black. If she were white, obviously he would not have said that. I believe he would not have spit on or hit an elderly 79 year old white woman. Spiting on someone is the ultimate show of distain and disrespect. He did that because of how he feels about blacks. Also, he felt free to hit her because she was black and probably assumed she had no power. It is clearly a racist incident, at least 50% of it. I hope they throw the book at him.

I don't think that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it because she is black. If it were a woman wearing glasses and he called her four eyes would if mean that he hates women that wear glasses? Some people simply find names to call people that they are mad at. He could of been mad at her for smoking, not because she was black. He may simply be a bully. It is a common technique of a bully to ridicule the person for whatever characteristics they have. Not that this is any defense for what the guy did.

I would like to know if there is a second side to this story. Was the woman being inconsiderate with her smoke? Did she blow smoke in his face either on purpose or inadvertently?

You may not think but sane adults do. Your ad hominem has no bearing on the issue because people wearing glasses is not a covered category under the hate crime description.

His story is irrelevant. She is a judge. He simply messed with the wrong person. For his cowardice he will pay dearly.

 

[BobPlumb]

Yes it does.



The reference to Rosa Parks means that he is hating this woman not just because she is smoking, but because she is black. If she were white, obviously he would not have said that. I believe he would not have spit on or hit an elderly 79 year old white woman. Spiting on someone is the ultimate show of distain and disrespect. He did that because of how he feels about blacks. Also, he felt free to hit her because she was black and probably assumed she had no power. It is clearly a racist incident, at least 50% of it. I hope they throw the book at him.

I don't think that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it because she is black. If it were a woman wearing glasses and he called her four eyes would if mean that he hates women that wear glasses? Some people simply find names to call people that they are mad at. He could of been mad at her for smoking, not because she was black. He may simply be a bully. It is a common technique of a bully to ridicule the person for whatever characteristics they have. Not that this is any defense for what the guy did.

I would like to know if there is a second side to this story. Was the woman being inconsiderate with her smoke? Did she blow smoke in his face either on purpose or inadvertly?

Reasonable doubt will be an issue when there is a trial. There is enough here to arrest him for assault. The hate crime issue, as well as the assault, will be dealt with during the trial. However, being angry at someone is one thing, making remarks about someone's race while you are attacking them is considered a hate crime.

I personally know of a case in the early 70s where 3 men went to a guy's house to beat him up. They were white and he was black. They tried to force their way into his home and were calling him the 'n' word over and over. He shot one of them and the other two retreated. There was nothing in the books then called a hate crime. There also wasn't anything like the Castle law either.

He was arrested and held for 30 days before being charged, which was the law then in that city. A local civil rights attorney (a white man) took his case pro-bono. The person he shot didn't die. He was released after 30 days and never charged. I imagine all factors were taken into account...self defense, people trying to force their way into your home, and the racist component. My point is, even then, without contemporary laws against hate crime, it was considered so heinous to call someone the 'n' word while attacking him, that a civil rights attorney volunterred to take the case for free.

"Rosa Parks" is light years from using the N-word. Based on this anything that is said that acknowledges a person's race during a crime makes it a hate crime.

I am bias when it comes to these so called hate crimes. To me, it's no better or worse for a person to commit a crime like described in the OP because the man is an asshole bully than if it is because he is a racist.

 

[Asclepias]

I don't think that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it because she is black. If it were a woman wearing glasses and he called her four eyes would if mean that he hates women that wear glasses? Some people simply find names to call people that they are mad at. He could of been mad at her for smoking, not because she was black. He may simply be a bully. It is a common technique of a bully to ridicule the person for whatever characteristics they have. Not that this is any defense for what the guy did.

I would like to know if there is a second side to this story. Was the woman being inconsiderate with her smoke? Did she blow smoke in his face either on purpose or inadvertly?

Reasonable doubt will be an issue when there is a trial. There is enough here to arrest him for assault. The hate crime issue, as well as the assault, will be dealt with during the trial. However, being angry at someone is one thing, making remarks about someone's race while you are attacking them is considered a hate crime.

I personally know of a case in the early 70s where 3 men went to a guy's house to beat him up. They were white and he was black. They tried to force their way into his home and were calling him the 'n' word over and over. He shot one of them and the other two retreated. There was nothing in the books then called a hate crime. There also wasn't anything like the Castle law either.

He was arrested and held for 30 days before being charged, which was the law then in that city. A local civil rights attorney (a white man) took his case pro-bono. The person he shot didn't die. He was released after 30 days and never charged. I imagine all factors were taken into account...self defense, people trying to force their way into your home, and the racist component. My point is, even then, without contemporary laws against hate crime, it was considered so heinous to call someone the 'n' word while attacking him, that a civil rights attorney volunterred to take the case for free.

"Rosa Parks" is light years from using the N-word. Based on this anything that is said that acknowledges a person's race during a crime makes it a hate crime.

I am bias when it comes to these so called hate crimes. To me, it's no better or worse for a person to commit a crime like described in the OP because the man is an asshole bully than if it is because he is a racist.

No one really cares what you think about the hate crime law. Its not up for discussion as its already a law. The point is he committed a hate crime against an elderly Black woman. She just happens to have enough clout to make sure he gets whats coming to him in full measure.

 

[BobPlumb]

Yes it does.



The reference to Rosa Parks means that he is hating this woman not just because she is smoking, but because she is black. If she were white, obviously he would not have said that. I believe he would not have spit on or hit an elderly 79 year old white woman. Spiting on someone is the ultimate show of distain and disrespect. He did that because of how he feels about blacks. Also, he felt free to hit her because she was black and probably assumed she had no power. It is clearly a racist incident, at least 50% of it. I hope they throw the book at him.

I don't think that proves beyond a reasonable doubt that he did it because she is black. If it were a woman wearing glasses and he called her four eyes would if mean that he hates women that wear glasses? Some people simply find names to call people that they are mad at. He could of been mad at her for smoking, not because she was black. He may simply be a bully. It is a common technique of a bully to ridicule the person for whatever characteristics they have. Not that this is any defense for what the guy did.

I would like to know if there is a second side to this story. Was the woman being inconsiderate with her smoke? Did she blow smoke in his face either on purpose or inadvertently?

You may not think but sane adults do. Your ad hominem has no bearing on the issue because people wearing glasses is not a covered category under the hate crime description.

His story is irrelevant. She is a judge. He simply messed with the wrong person. For his cowardice he will pay dearly.

His story is irrelevant because she is a judge? Really? The truth is what is relevant.

 

[S.J.]

Calling her Rosa Parks makes it a hate crime? Would it have been better if he called her a ***** instead?

Don't be so quick to believe the story. It doesn't pass the smell test. I'm not saying he didn't slap her, but a red flag goes up when I read what they CLAIM he said.
Let's go over it.
They're claiming she walked past him, smoking, and he got in her face and said "Rosa Parks, move" and spit in her face. Then, as he walked away, the Law Division Judge (I assume that's her) followed him and called out for assistance. Nicosia then turned and allegedly slapped the judge on the left side of her face with an open hand, prosecutors said. He was then arrested by sheriff’s deputies and charged with four counts of aggravated battery and a hate crime.

Were the deputies already there, did they see it, or is this just hearsay? If they were already there, why did she have to call on them for assistance (before he slapped her)? Spitting on someone is assault, why didn't they already have him in cuffs before he "walked away"?

Then the judge, named "James Brown" set his bail at $90,000.
If this doesn't sound like a grossly padded and inflated accounting of events, I don't know what would qualify. This is what it sounds like actually happened.

She stood next to him, smoking. He asked her not to. She told him to **** off (or some other smart ass remark). He said "**** you, *****", and walked away. She followed him, giving him shit and he turned around and slapped her upside the head. Sounds a lot more like reality.

I don't condone him slapping her, and he should be charged for that but I doubt seriously if the rest of the story is remotely true. Sounds more like they're trying to make a case for racism where there was none, and it sure as shit wouldn't be the first time it's been done.

 

[BobPlumb]

Reasonable doubt will be an issue when there is a trial. There is enough here to arrest him for assault. The hate crime issue, as well as the assault, will be dealt with during the trial. However, being angry at someone is one thing, making remarks about someone's race while you are attacking them is considered a hate crime.

I personally know of a case in the early 70s where 3 men went to a guy's house to beat him up. They were white and he was black. They tried to force their way into his home and were calling him the 'n' word over and over. He shot one of them and the other two retreated. There was nothing in the books then called a hate crime. There also wasn't anything like the Castle law either.

He was arrested and held for 30 days before being charged, which was the law then in that city. A local civil rights attorney (a white man) took his case pro-bono. The person he shot didn't die. He was released after 30 days and never charged. I imagine all factors were taken into account...self defense, people trying to force their way into your home, and the racist component. My point is, even then, without contemporary laws against hate crime, it was considered so heinous to call someone the 'n' word while attacking him, that a civil rights attorney volunterred to take the case for free.

"Rosa Parks" is light years from using the N-word. Based on this anything that is said that acknowledges a person's race during a crime makes it a hate crime.

I am bias when it comes to these so called hate crimes. To me, it's no better or worse for a person to commit a crime like described in the OP because the man is an asshole bully than if it is because he is a racist.

No one really cares what you think about the hate crime law. Its not up for discussion as its already a law. The point is he committed a hate crime against an elderly Black woman. She just happens to have enough clout to make sure he gets whats coming to him in full measure.

This is a discussion board. And since I've been discussing hate crime law, it is certainly up for discussion. If you don't want to be part of the discussion then don't let the door hit your black racist ass on the way out.

 

[Asclepias]

"Rosa Parks" is light years from using the N-word. Based on this anything that is said that acknowledges a person's race during a crime makes it a hate crime.

I am bias when it comes to these so called hate crimes. To me, it's no better or worse for a person to commit a crime like described in the OP because the man is an asshole bully than if it is because he is a racist.

No one really cares what you think about the hate crime law. Its not up for discussion as its already a law. The point is he committed a hate crime against an elderly Black woman. She just happens to have enough clout to make sure he gets whats coming to him in full measure.

This is a discussion board. And since I've been discussing hate crime law, it is certainly up for discussion. If you don't want to be part of the discussion then don't let the door hit your black racist ass on the way out.

Maybe i should clarify my remark. You discussing the hate crime law wont change it. You have not even a scintilla of power in the matter. If that causes consternation for you then deal with it.

 

[BobPlumb]

Calling her Rosa Parks makes it a hate crime? Would it have been better if he called her a ***** instead?

Don't be so quick to believe the story. It doesn't pass the smell test. I'm not saying he didn't slap her, but a red flag goes up when I read what they CLAIM he said.
Let's go over it.
They're claiming she walked past him, smoking, and he got in her face and said "Rosa Parks, move" and spit in her face. Then, as he walked away, the Law Division Judge (I assume that's her) followed him and called out for assistance. Nicosia then turned and allegedly slapped the judge on the left side of her face with an open hand, prosecutors said. He was then arrested by sheriff’s deputies and charged with four counts of aggravated battery and a hate crime.

Were the deputies already there, did they see it, or is this just hearsay? If they were already there, why did she have to call on them for assistance (before he slapped her)? Spitting on someone is assault, why didn't they already have him in cuffs before he "walked away"?

Then the judge, named "James Brown" set his bail at $90,000.
If this doesn't sound like a grossly padded and inflated accounting of events, I don't know what would qualify. This is what it sounds like actually happened.

She stood next to him, smoking. He asked her not to. She told him to **** off (or some other smart ass remark). He said "**** you, *****", and walked away. She followed him, giving him shit and he turned around and slapped her upside the head. Sounds a lot more like reality.

I don't condone him slapping her, and he should be charged for that but I doubt seriously if the rest of the story is remotely true. Sounds more like they're trying to make a case for racism where there was none, and it sure as shit wouldn't be the first time it's been done.

I think there is more to the story myself. The guy might be a racist; however, it's unlikely that even a racist white asshole will assault an old black lady unprovoked. One thing is for sure, we only have one side of the story.

 

[BobPlumb]

No one really cares what you think about the hate crime law. Its not up for discussion as its already a law. The point is he committed a hate crime against an elderly Black woman. She just happens to have enough clout to make sure he gets whats coming to him in full measure.

This is a discussion board. And since I've been discussing hate crime law, it is certainly up for discussion. If you don't want to be part of the discussion then don't let the door hit your black racist ass on the way out.

Maybe i should clarify my remark. You discussing the hate crime law wont change it. You have not even a scintilla of power in the matter. If that causes consternation for you then deal with it.

You are discussing hate crime with me. Just can't help yourself can you? Apparently you do care what I think, otherwise you would just move along.