Our surveillance society

TheGreenHornet

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
473
Points
130
I clicked on a peacock movie called 'The Capture" as it seemed to hold some indication of a good story.

However, after watching the first segment I found out you are required to pay to watch the whole story...and it did not seem worth it so I opted out.

Yet it was interesting at one level as in regards to the modern phenomenon of the public being on camera so much of the time...more so in some places than in others of course....London being the most surveilled city in the world and the city wherein this story takes place.

Atlanta, Ga. is the most surveilled city in America.

The point of the whole thing being can cameras be trusted to present the real truth in every case?

Which reminded me of a rather famous case in Florida not that long ago....it was discussed on here and unfortunately most got it wrong(I contend) as well as did the jury.

Not even to mention how the media(no surprise there)totally mangled the case.

For those that remember it was a case of simple self defense.

I should also mention the defense lawyers were inept as well.

The prosecutors were very competent but heavy-handed I think in their devotion to convicting a innocent man in order to please the city fathers and protect tourism aka....to avoid letting the city be painted as racist and to protect the liberal myth of black victimhood.

The case was about a white guy who got into a argument with a black woman regarding parking in a handicap spot at a conveinance store. Though she was not the driver she was merely waiting in the car with her kids whilst her b/f went into the store to get some stuff.

The black woman was the one responsible for the whole tragedy...instead of reacting in a common sense manner she became enraged that some white dude would dare point out to her that the vehicle should not have been parked in a handicap spot.

Her angry tirade towards the white dude caught the attention of a customer going into the store who unfortunately got the wrong impression...thinking the white guy was messing with the woman (he had no idea what was going on) but went into the store and told the black guy that some white dude was messing with his woman.

Whereupon, the black dude in a blind rage rushes out of the store and in a very violent manner knocks the white guy to the ground who in fear of his life and grievious bodily injury pulls his pistol out of his pocket and shoots the black guy one time....killing him.

A simple case of self defense.....but as we know all too well now .....there is a double standard that comes into play now whenever a white guy kills a black guy. Blacks have become sort of a super protected species in our society due to political correctness and be you a private citizen or even a police officer....if you kill a black guy....under any circumstances....the media will put you in the spotlight and try and convict you in the public eye no matter if they have to mis-state the facts of the case in order to do so....aka George Zimmerman.

The police investigated the case and did not arrest the white guy until later after political pressure stirred up by the media was brought to bear.

The prosecutions case was based strictly on the parking lot video. The event was captured on camera....and it clearly showed the black guy(who had a history of assault as well as drug use) clearly committing a violent assault on the white guy.

However, the prosecution contended that the white guy over-reacted.....as in he did not have to shoot the black guy....and they presented the video in slow motion video to convince the jury that was the case.

The outrageous thing about the slow motion video was that it altered the real time reality....in slow motion it deceptively appears that the white guy had a lot of time to make his decision of to shoot or not to shoot.....in truth he had to make a very, very fast decision. He only had a couple of seconds to make his decision. And we should not forget that under the law of self defense if you reasonably believe your life or limb is in serious jeopardy you have the legal right to use lethal force..

Not even to mention he was in a state of shock due to being attacked and in a blind sided manner.....he did not even see the black guy coming....though the g/f had told him when her man came back he would get fucked up....a blatant threat.

The prosecutors attempted to show that the black guy was actually retreating when he was shot.....this is also deceptive....as in he merely took a step back to assess the situation and was still very,very close to his victim.....within striking distance.

Unfortunately, the jury was intimidated by a very strong prosecutor.....who banged his fist on the table and screamed in a very loud manner.....watch the video, watch the video that is all you have to do.....outrageous summation and a mis-direction of the jury.....by law they were charged with much more than to merely watch a video.

Their very first action should have been to determine if the white dude was in reasonable fear of his life or in fear of great bodily harm......according to the jury foreman( interviewed after the case was over) they did not even consider that.

They voted to convict and thus perpetrated a miscarriage of justice...their unfortunate victim is now serving 30 years for murder.

This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.

 
Last edited:

Angelo

Platinum Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2019
Messages
24,781
Reaction score
10,607
Points
950
Location
_Arkansas~_The Natural State_

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
 
OP
TheGreenHornet

TheGreenHornet

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
473
Points
130
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
First of all this was not a stand your ground case, also....neither was the Zimmerman case though the media misled people very much in regards to that in both cases.

What does the number of children he had have to do with the case?....nothing. Just brought out over and over to generate sympathy for the black dude.

Also...it was hardly mentioned the black dude was driving his kids around whilst under the influence of drugs....yes he had drugs in his system which may have contributed to his aggressiveness....not to forget he had a history of assault.

The white gentleman had never been arrested for anything....there was some 'he said she said' type history....but nothing he was ever arrested for...none of which has any bearing on this case as we know previous history is not allowed in court rooms ....remember trayvon and his history and how that was not allowed to be presented in court?
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
First of all this was not a stand your ground case, also....neither was the Zimmerman case though the media misled people very much in regards to that in both cases.

What does the number of children he had have to do with the case?....nothing. Just brought out over and over to generate sympathy for the black dude.

Also...it was hardly mentioned the black dude was driving his kids around whilst under the influence of drugs....yes he had drugs in his system which may have contributed to his aggressiveness....not to forget he had a history of assault.

The white gentleman had never been arrested for anything....there was some 'he said she said' type history....but nothing he was ever arrested for...none of which has any bearing on this case as we know previous history is not allowed in court rooms ....remember trayvon and his history and how that was not allowed to be presented in court?
Black dude versus white "gentleman" huh?

Drejka just like Zimmerman believed that having a concealed carry permit allows one to attempt to police the behavior of others. Zimmerman got away with it, but now the tide has begun to turn and people are finally being held accountable for their erroneous beliefs and [unlawful] behaviors. You can't be the initiator of a confrontation and then claim self-defense:

"The police reports describe a man quick to anger, but who always denied he threatened anyone with a gun. Former prosecutors said the earlier cases could possibly be used if Drejka is brought to trial, as evidence that he pulled out his weapon because he was frustrated, not afraid.​

Twice investigators admonished Drejka, telling him he was fortunate the alleged victims of his road rage did not want to press charges.​
If they had, an officer once said, authorities could have revoked his concealed carry permit."​
 
OP
TheGreenHornet

TheGreenHornet

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
473
Points
130
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
First of all this was not a stand your ground case, also....neither was the Zimmerman case though the media misled people very much in regards to that in both cases.

What does the number of children he had have to do with the case?....nothing. Just brought out over and over to generate sympathy for the black dude.

Also...it was hardly mentioned the black dude was driving his kids around whilst under the influence of drugs....yes he had drugs in his system which may have contributed to his aggressiveness....not to forget he had a history of assault.

The white gentleman had never been arrested for anything....there was some 'he said she said' type history....but nothing he was ever arrested for...none of which has any bearing on this case as we know previous history is not allowed in court rooms ....remember trayvon and his history and how that was not allowed to be presented in court?
Black dude versus white "gentleman" huh?

Drejka just like Zimmerman believed that having a concealed carry permit allows one to attempt to police the behavior of others. Zimmerman got away with it, but now the tide has begun to turn and people are finally being held accountable for their erroneous beliefs and [unlawful] behaviors. You can't be the initiator of a confrontation and then claim self-defense:

"The police reports describe a man quick to anger, but who always denied he threatened anyone with a gun. Former prosecutors said the earlier cases could possibly be used if Drejka is brought to trial, as evidence that he pulled out his weapon because he was frustrated, not afraid.​

Twice investigators admonished Drejka, telling him he was fortunate the alleged victims of his road rage did not want to press charges.​
If they had, an officer once said, authorities could have revoked his concealed carry permit."​
Zimmerman was perfectly within the law as well as Drejka....neither did anything at all illegal.

None of his alleged involvement in a couple of road rage cases had anything to do with the killing of the black guy. That had nothing at all to do with road rage. All those alleged road rage incidents were just hersay....and were not allowed in court.

Drejka had exhibited no anger at all....it was the black lady and her boy friend who were angry....hence his rushing out of the store not knowing what was going on angry because a white dude claimed some white guy was messing with his woman......

The real difference between the two cases was that Z had good attorneys....how Drejka wound up with such poor lawyers I do not know.

I remember your previous statements of long ago regarding Z ....you never did get the facts of the case right....btw Z had forgotten he even had his weapon with him until his arm brushed against it...just in the nick of time.

Drejka was perfectly within his rights to tell the black woman they should not have parked in a handicap spot.

The g/f over-reacted ....yelling and hollering at Drejka...that was the real igniter of the tragedy....and it was a tragedy and a miscarriage of justice.

If it had been a black guy telling her that she no doubt would not have gone into hysterics....she obviously had a problem with a white man telling her they should not be parking in a handicap spot.....that was illegal and it carries a heavy fine.

To claim Drejka initiated the tragedy is nonsense. He had told others about illegally parking in a handicap spot and nothing came of it.

The reason the black girls boyfriend got shot was the result of two things....the commotion created by the g/f and her boyfriend committing illegal assault.

If Drejka had not shot him he would be in jail for assault as he was already on probation for assault.
 
Last edited:
OP
TheGreenHornet

TheGreenHornet

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
473
Points
130
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
First of all this was not a stand your ground case, also....neither was the Zimmerman case though the media misled people very much in regards to that in both cases.

What does the number of children he had have to do with the case?....nothing. Just brought out over and over to generate sympathy for the black dude.

Also...it was hardly mentioned the black dude was driving his kids around whilst under the influence of drugs....yes he had drugs in his system which may have contributed to his aggressiveness....not to forget he had a history of assault.

The white gentleman had never been arrested for anything....there was some 'he said she said' type history....but nothing he was ever arrested for...none of which has any bearing on this case as we know previous history is not allowed in court rooms ....remember trayvon and his history and how that was not allowed to be presented in court?
Black dude versus white "gentleman" huh?

Drejka just like Zimmerman believed that having a concealed carry permit allows one to attempt to police the behavior of others. Zimmerman got away with it, but now the tide has begun to turn and people are finally being held accountable for their erroneous beliefs and [unlawful] behaviors. You can't be the initiator of a confrontation and then claim self-defense:

"The police reports describe a man quick to anger, but who always denied he threatened anyone with a gun. Former prosecutors said the earlier cases could possibly be used if Drejka is brought to trial, as evidence that he pulled out his weapon because he was frustrated, not afraid.​

Twice investigators admonished Drejka, telling him he was fortunate the alleged victims of his road rage did not want to press charges.​
If they had, an officer once said, authorities could have revoked his concealed carry permit."​
Zimmerman was perfectly within the law as well as Drejka....neither did anything at all illegal.

None of his alleged involvement in a couple of road rage cases had anything to do with the killing of the black guy. That had nothing at all to do with road rage. All those alleged road rage incidents were just hersay....and were not allowed in court.

Drejka had exhibited no anger at all....it was the black lady and her boy friend who were angry....hence his rushing out of the store not knowing what was going on angry because a white dude claimed some white guy was messing with his woman......

The real difference between the two cases was that Z had good attorneys....how Drejka wound up with such poor lawyers I do not know.

I remember your previous statements of long ago regarding Z ....you never did get the facts of the case right....btw Z had forgotten he even had his weapon with him until his arm brushed against it...just in the nick of time.

Drejka was perfectly within his rights to tell the black woman they should not have parked in a handicap spot.

The g/f over-reacted ....yelling and hollering at Drejka...that was the real igniter of the tragedy....and it was a tragedy and a miscarriage of justice.

If it had been a black guy telling her that she no doubt would not have gone into hysterics....she obviously had a problem with a white man telling her they should not be parking in a handicap spot.....that was illegal and it carries a heavy fine.

To claim Drejka initiated the tragedy is nonsense. He had told others about illegally parking in a handicap spot and nothing came of it.

The reason the black girls boyfriend got shot was the result of two things....the commotion created by the g/f and her boyfriend committing illegal assault.

If Drejka had not shot him he would be in jail for assault as he was already on probation for assault.

A little logic will go a long ways here.....break it down step by step.

The black guy transporting his kids whilst under the influence....stops at a store and illegally parks in a handicap spot.

He goes into the store leaving his g/f and kids in the car.

Drejka pulls up and sees the car illegally parked after checking for a handicap permit.

He tells the woman in a polite manner that they should not be parking in a handicap spot...the black woman goes into a rage and got so loud a white customer on his way into the store heard her.

The white customer misinforms the black guy that a white dude is messing with his woman.

The black guy goes into a rage and rushes out of the store to attack the white guy.

The black guy comitting assault on the white guy was the real cause of him getting shot.

Though the black g/f and the white customer telling the black guy someone was messing with his woman....both bear some responsibility for the tragedy....the black woman much more than the ignorant white guy who not really knowing what was going on and thus misinforming the black guy or perhaps he just wanted to stir up some trouble. He was hot on the heels of the black guy as he rushed out of the store to confront Drejka...perhaps wanting to see a fight...but he fled quickly as soon as drejka whipped out his pistol...which is what the black dude should have done instead of just stupidly standing there waiting to get shot.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
First of all this was not a stand your ground case, also....neither was the Zimmerman case though the media misled people very much in regards to that in both cases.

What does the number of children he had have to do with the case?....nothing. Just brought out over and over to generate sympathy for the black dude.

Also...it was hardly mentioned the black dude was driving his kids around whilst under the influence of drugs....yes he had drugs in his system which may have contributed to his aggressiveness....not to forget he had a history of assault.

The white gentleman had never been arrested for anything....there was some 'he said she said' type history....but nothing he was ever arrested for...none of which has any bearing on this case as we know previous history is not allowed in court rooms ....remember trayvon and his history and how that was not allowed to be presented in court?
Black dude versus white "gentleman" huh?

Drejka just like Zimmerman believed that having a concealed carry permit allows one to attempt to police the behavior of others. Zimmerman got away with it, but now the tide has begun to turn and people are finally being held accountable for their erroneous beliefs and [unlawful] behaviors. You can't be the initiator of a confrontation and then claim self-defense:

"The police reports describe a man quick to anger, but who always denied he threatened anyone with a gun. Former prosecutors said the earlier cases could possibly be used if Drejka is brought to trial, as evidence that he pulled out his weapon because he was frustrated, not afraid.​

Twice investigators admonished Drejka, telling him he was fortunate the alleged victims of his road rage did not want to press charges.​
If they had, an officer once said, authorities could have revoked his concealed carry permit."​
Zimmerman was perfectly within the law as well as Drejka....neither did anything at all illegal.

None of his alleged involvement in a couple of road rage cases had anything to do with the killing of the black guy. That had nothing at all to do with road rage. All those alleged road rage incidents were just hersay....and were not allowed in court.

Drejka had exhibited no anger at all....it was the black lady and her boy friend who were angry....hence his rushing out of the store not knowing what was going on angry because a white dude claimed some white guy was messing with his woman......

The real difference between the two cases was that Z had good attorneys....how Drejka wound up with such poor lawyers I do not know.

I remember your previous statements of long ago regarding Z ....you never did get the facts of the case right....btw Z had forgotten he even had his weapon with him until his arm brushed against it...just in the nick of time.

Drejka was perfectly within his rights to tell the black woman they should not have parked in a handicap spot.

The g/f over-reacted ....yelling and hollering at Drejka...that was the real igniter of the tragedy....and it was a tragedy and a miscarriage of justice.

If it had been a black guy telling her that she no doubt would not have gone into hysterics....she obviously had a problem with a white man telling her they should not be parking in a handicap spot.....that was illegal and it carries a heavy fine.

To claim Drejka initiated the tragedy is nonsense. He had told others about illegally parking in a handicap spot and nothing came of it.

The reason the black girls boyfriend got shot was the result of two things....the commotion created by the g/f and her boyfriend committing illegal assault.

If Drejka had not shot him he would be in jail for assault as he was already on probation for assault.

A little logic will go a long ways here.....break it down step by step.

The black guy transporting his kids whilst under the influence....stops at a store and illegally parks in a handicap spot.

He goes into the store leaving his g/f and kids in the car.

Drejka pulls up and sees the car illegally parked after checking for a handicap permit.

He tells the woman in a polite manner that they should not be parking in a handicap spot...the black woman goes into a rage and got so loud a white customer on his way into the store heard her.

The white customer misinforms the black guy that a white dude is messing with his woman.

The black guy goes into a rage and rushes out of the store to attack the white guy.

The black guy comitting assault on the white guy was the real cause of him getting shot.

Though the black g/f and the white customer telling the black guy someone was messing with his woman....both bear some responsibility for the tragedy....the black woman much more than the ignorant white guy who not really knowing what was going on and thus misinforming the black guy or perhaps he just wanted to stir up some trouble. He was hot on the heels of the black guy as he rushed out of the store to confront Drejka...perhaps wanting to see a fight...but he fled quickly as soon as drejka whipped out his pistol...which is what the black dude should have done instead of just stupidly standing there waiting to get shot.
Do you have a Florida concealed carry permit? Or one issued by any state?
 
OP
TheGreenHornet

TheGreenHornet

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
473
Points
130
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
First of all this was not a stand your ground case, also....neither was the Zimmerman case though the media misled people very much in regards to that in both cases.

What does the number of children he had have to do with the case?....nothing. Just brought out over and over to generate sympathy for the black dude.

Also...it was hardly mentioned the black dude was driving his kids around whilst under the influence of drugs....yes he had drugs in his system which may have contributed to his aggressiveness....not to forget he had a history of assault.

The white gentleman had never been arrested for anything....there was some 'he said she said' type history....but nothing he was ever arrested for...none of which has any bearing on this case as we know previous history is not allowed in court rooms ....remember trayvon and his history and how that was not allowed to be presented in court?
Black dude versus white "gentleman" huh?

Drejka just like Zimmerman believed that having a concealed carry permit allows one to attempt to police the behavior of others. Zimmerman got away with it, but now the tide has begun to turn and people are finally being held accountable for their erroneous beliefs and [unlawful] behaviors. You can't be the initiator of a confrontation and then claim self-defense:

"The police reports describe a man quick to anger, but who always denied he threatened anyone with a gun. Former prosecutors said the earlier cases could possibly be used if Drejka is brought to trial, as evidence that he pulled out his weapon because he was frustrated, not afraid.​

Twice investigators admonished Drejka, telling him he was fortunate the alleged victims of his road rage did not want to press charges.​
If they had, an officer once said, authorities could have revoked his concealed carry permit."​
Zimmerman was perfectly within the law as well as Drejka....neither did anything at all illegal.

None of his alleged involvement in a couple of road rage cases had anything to do with the killing of the black guy. That had nothing at all to do with road rage. All those alleged road rage incidents were just hersay....and were not allowed in court.

Drejka had exhibited no anger at all....it was the black lady and her boy friend who were angry....hence his rushing out of the store not knowing what was going on angry because a white dude claimed some white guy was messing with his woman......

The real difference between the two cases was that Z had good attorneys....how Drejka wound up with such poor lawyers I do not know.

I remember your previous statements of long ago regarding Z ....you never did get the facts of the case right....btw Z had forgotten he even had his weapon with him until his arm brushed against it...just in the nick of time.

Drejka was perfectly within his rights to tell the black woman they should not have parked in a handicap spot.

The g/f over-reacted ....yelling and hollering at Drejka...that was the real igniter of the tragedy....and it was a tragedy and a miscarriage of justice.

If it had been a black guy telling her that she no doubt would not have gone into hysterics....she obviously had a problem with a white man telling her they should not be parking in a handicap spot.....that was illegal and it carries a heavy fine.

To claim Drejka initiated the tragedy is nonsense. He had told others about illegally parking in a handicap spot and nothing came of it.

The reason the black girls boyfriend got shot was the result of two things....the commotion created by the g/f and her boyfriend committing illegal assault.

If Drejka had not shot him he would be in jail for assault as he was already on probation for assault.

A little logic will go a long ways here.....break it down step by step.

The black guy transporting his kids whilst under the influence....stops at a store and illegally parks in a handicap spot.

He goes into the store leaving his g/f and kids in the car.

Drejka pulls up and sees the car illegally parked after checking for a handicap permit.

He tells the woman in a polite manner that they should not be parking in a handicap spot...the black woman goes into a rage and got so loud a white customer on his way into the store heard her.

The white customer misinforms the black guy that a white dude is messing with his woman.

The black guy goes into a rage and rushes out of the store to attack the white guy.

The black guy comitting assault on the white guy was the real cause of him getting shot.

Though the black g/f and the white customer telling the black guy someone was messing with his woman....both bear some responsibility for the tragedy....the black woman much more than the ignorant white guy who not really knowing what was going on and thus misinforming the black guy or perhaps he just wanted to stir up some trouble. He was hot on the heels of the black guy as he rushed out of the store to confront Drejka...perhaps wanting to see a fight...but he fled quickly as soon as drejka whipped out his pistol...which is what the black dude should have done instead of just stupidly standing there waiting to get shot.
Do you have a Florida concealed carry permit? Or one issued by any state?
I have a permit from Nevada but not a concealed permit. In Nevada you can openly carry.

I have not bothered to get a concealed carry permit here in Florida...as in I never carry my pistol with me when I am out and about...they are just for home protection.

I advise white males not to carry guns.....an easy way to wind up in jail even if you legally shoot someone.....especially someone black...the law on self defense is rapidly eroding.

I do carry a knife and that is what I advise everyone to do....just by the fact of having a gun puts you in a bad light with a lot of juries these days....plus a knife is very effective at close range and most of these encounters happen at close range.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
First of all this was not a stand your ground case, also....neither was the Zimmerman case though the media misled people very much in regards to that in both cases.

What does the number of children he had have to do with the case?....nothing. Just brought out over and over to generate sympathy for the black dude.

Also...it was hardly mentioned the black dude was driving his kids around whilst under the influence of drugs....yes he had drugs in his system which may have contributed to his aggressiveness....not to forget he had a history of assault.

The white gentleman had never been arrested for anything....there was some 'he said she said' type history....but nothing he was ever arrested for...none of which has any bearing on this case as we know previous history is not allowed in court rooms ....remember trayvon and his history and how that was not allowed to be presented in court?
Black dude versus white "gentleman" huh?

Drejka just like Zimmerman believed that having a concealed carry permit allows one to attempt to police the behavior of others. Zimmerman got away with it, but now the tide has begun to turn and people are finally being held accountable for their erroneous beliefs and [unlawful] behaviors. You can't be the initiator of a confrontation and then claim self-defense:

"The police reports describe a man quick to anger, but who always denied he threatened anyone with a gun. Former prosecutors said the earlier cases could possibly be used if Drejka is brought to trial, as evidence that he pulled out his weapon because he was frustrated, not afraid.​

Twice investigators admonished Drejka, telling him he was fortunate the alleged victims of his road rage did not want to press charges.​
If they had, an officer once said, authorities could have revoked his concealed carry permit."​
Zimmerman was perfectly within the law as well as Drejka....neither did anything at all illegal.

None of his alleged involvement in a couple of road rage cases had anything to do with the killing of the black guy. That had nothing at all to do with road rage. All those alleged road rage incidents were just hersay....and were not allowed in court.

Drejka had exhibited no anger at all....it was the black lady and her boy friend who were angry....hence his rushing out of the store not knowing what was going on angry because a white dude claimed some white guy was messing with his woman......

The real difference between the two cases was that Z had good attorneys....how Drejka wound up with such poor lawyers I do not know.

I remember your previous statements of long ago regarding Z ....you never did get the facts of the case right....btw Z had forgotten he even had his weapon with him until his arm brushed against it...just in the nick of time.

Drejka was perfectly within his rights to tell the black woman they should not have parked in a handicap spot.

The g/f over-reacted ....yelling and hollering at Drejka...that was the real igniter of the tragedy....and it was a tragedy and a miscarriage of justice.

If it had been a black guy telling her that she no doubt would not have gone into hysterics....she obviously had a problem with a white man telling her they should not be parking in a handicap spot.....that was illegal and it carries a heavy fine.

To claim Drejka initiated the tragedy is nonsense. He had told others about illegally parking in a handicap spot and nothing came of it.

The reason the black girls boyfriend got shot was the result of two things....the commotion created by the g/f and her boyfriend committing illegal assault.

If Drejka had not shot him he would be in jail for assault as he was already on probation for assault.

A little logic will go a long ways here.....break it down step by step.

The black guy transporting his kids whilst under the influence....stops at a store and illegally parks in a handicap spot.

He goes into the store leaving his g/f and kids in the car.

Drejka pulls up and sees the car illegally parked after checking for a handicap permit.

He tells the woman in a polite manner that they should not be parking in a handicap spot...the black woman goes into a rage and got so loud a white customer on his way into the store heard her.

The white customer misinforms the black guy that a white dude is messing with his woman.

The black guy goes into a rage and rushes out of the store to attack the white guy.

The black guy comitting assault on the white guy was the real cause of him getting shot.

Though the black g/f and the white customer telling the black guy someone was messing with his woman....both bear some responsibility for the tragedy....the black woman much more than the ignorant white guy who not really knowing what was going on and thus misinforming the black guy or perhaps he just wanted to stir up some trouble. He was hot on the heels of the black guy as he rushed out of the store to confront Drejka...perhaps wanting to see a fight...but he fled quickly as soon as drejka whipped out his pistol...which is what the black dude should have done instead of just stupidly standing there waiting to get shot.
Do you have a Florida concealed carry permit? Or one issued by any state?
I have a permit from Nevada but not a concealed permit. In Nevada you can openly carry.

I have not bothered to get a concealed carry permit here in Florida...as in I never carry my pistol with me when I am out and about...they are just for home protection.

I advise white males not to carry guns.....an easy way to wind up in jail even if you legally shoot someone.....especially someone black...the law on self defense is rapidly eroding.

I do carry a knife and that is what I advise everyone to do....just by the fact of having a gun puts you in a bad light with a lot of juries these days....plus a knife is very effective at close range and most of these encounters happen at close range.
Most of the people I know who carry are white, males mostly but they're generally not the type of people who go around with a chip on their shoulder or act as if they have something to prove by being confrontational.

I was taught that when you make the decision to carry a firearm you have to learn to leave your ego at home as well as mitigate as much of the damage that occurs as possible if you suddenly find yourself in a confrontational or volatile situation. The best way to do so of course is to avoid those situations as much as possible however if you can't avoid it, forget about pride, saving face, whatever, and just walk away.

I am surprised to hear that juries in Florida view carrying a weapon negatively. Carrying the weapon is never the issue from my perspective, it's using it in a method that is inconsistent with self-defense laws. I guess a jury of ones peers might be difficult to find for some.
 

TheParser

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
3,817
Reaction score
1,970
Points
940
I clicked on a peacock movie called 'The Capture" as it seemed to hold some indication of a good story.

However, after watching the first segment I found out you are required to pay to watch the whole story...and it did not seem worth it so I opted out.

Yet it was interesting at one level as in regards to the modern phenomenon of the public being on camera so much of the time...more so in some places than in others of course....London being the most surveilled city in the world and the city wherein this story takes place.

Atlanta, Ga. is the most surveilled city in America.

The point of the whole thing being can cameras be trusted to present the real truth in every case?

Which reminded me of a rather famous case in Florida not that long ago....it was discussed on here and unfortunately most got it wrong(I contend) as well as did the jury.

Not even to mention how the media(no surprise there)totally mangled the case.

For those that remember it was a case of simple self defense.

I should also mention the defense lawyers were inept as well.

The prosecutors were very competent but heavy-handed I think in their devotion to convicting a innocent man in order to please the city fathers and protect tourism aka....to avoid letting the city be painted as racist and to protect the liberal myth of black victimhood.

The case was about a white guy who got into a argument with a black woman regarding parking in a handicap spot at a conveinance store. Though she was not the driver she was merely waiting in the car with her kids whilst her b/f went into the store to get some stuff.

The black woman was the one responsible for the whole tragedy...instead of reacting in a common sense manner she became enraged that some white dude would dare point out to her that the vehicle should not have been parked in a handicap spot.

Her angry tirade towards the white dude caught the attention of a customer going into the store who unfortunately got the wrong impression...thinking the white guy was messing with the woman (he had no idea what was going on) but went into the store and told the black guy that some white dude was messing with his woman.

Whereupon, the black dude in a blind rage rushes out of the store and in a very violent manner knocks the white guy to the ground who in fear of his life and grievious bodily injury pulls his pistol out of his pocket and shoots the black guy one time....killing him.

A simple case of self defense.....but as we know all too well now .....there is a double standard that comes into play now whenever a white guy kills a black guy. Blacks have become sort of a super protected species in our society due to political correctness and be you a private citizen or even a police officer....if you kill a black guy....under any circumstances....the media will put you in the spotlight and try and convict you in the public eye no matter if they have to mis-state the facts of the case in order to do so....aka George Zimmerman.

The police investigated the case and did not arrest the white guy until later after political pressure stirred up by the media was brought to bear.

The prosecutions case was based strictly on the parking lot video. The event was captured on camera....and it clearly showed the black guy(who had a history of assault as well as drug use) clearly committing a violent assault on the white guy.

However, the prosecution contended that the white guy over-reacted.....as in he did not have to shoot the black guy....and they presented the video in slow motion video to convince the jury that was the case.

The outrageous thing about the slow motion video was that it altered the real time reality....in slow motion it deceptively appears that the white guy had a lot of time to make his decision of to shoot or not to shoot.....in truth he had to make a very, very fast decision. He only had a couple of seconds to make his decision. And we should not forget that under the law of self defense if you reasonably believe your life or limb is in serious jeopardy you have the legal right to use lethal force..

Not even to mention he was in a state of shock due to being attacked and in a blind sided manner.....he did not even see the black guy coming....though the g/f had told him when her man came back he would get fucked up....a blatant threat.

The prosecutors attempted to show that the black guy was actually retreating when he was shot.....this is also deceptive....as in he merely took a step back to assess the situation and was still very,very close to his victim.....within striking distance.

Unfortunately, the jury was intimidated by a very strong prosecutor.....who banged his fist on the table and screamed in a very loud manner.....watch the video, watch the video that is all you have to do.....outrageous summation and a mis-direction of the jury.....by law they were charged with much more than to merely watch a video.

Their very first action should have been to determine if the white dude was in reasonable fear of his life or in fear of great bodily harm......according to the jury foreman( interviewed after the case was over) they did not even consider that.

They voted to convict and thus perpetrated a miscarriage of justice...their unfortunate victim is now serving 30 years for murder.

This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.

I can well understand what you said about Atlanta, Georgia!
 

TheParser

Platinum Member
Joined
Nov 16, 2017
Messages
3,817
Reaction score
1,970
Points
940
Sadly, because of the growing numbers of people with a very low caliber of decency, we need more and more cameras and drones everywhere.

If I had my druthers, everyone would have a chip implanted in him-, her. This would catch the guilty and protect the innocent.
 
OP
TheGreenHornet

TheGreenHornet

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
473
Points
130
Sadly, because of the growing numbers of people with a very low caliber of decency, we need more and more cameras and drones everywhere.

If I had my druthers, everyone would have a chip implanted in him-, her. This would catch the guilty and protect the innocent.
Just depends on who is in charge....technology can be used for good or bad....look at China....good example of how a totalitarian government uses technology for evil purposes.

If the democrats are successful this time around and it looks like they will be then we are definitely advancing down the road towards totalitarianism.

Surveillance is increasing by leaps and bounds....the time when everyone will be followed and essentially controlled by advanced technology is not that far off....crime will be eliminated or greatly reduced by the increasing technology.....but at what costs?
 
Last edited:
OP
TheGreenHornet

TheGreenHornet

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
473
Points
130
This occurred because the jury was misled by the prosecutor and a 'slow motion' video.
You don't think his previous aggressive behavior involving his firearm had anything at all to do with the conviction?

"The Clearwater man who shot and killed a father of three outside a convenience store in a parking dispute last month — setting off a stand your ground debate that has swept Florida and the nation — has a history of road rage.​
Since 2012, according to records and interviews, 47-year-old Michael Drejka has been the accused aggressor in four incidents. Investigators documented three cases in police reports.​
The other was not shared with authorities at the time but involved the same handicap-reserved parking spot outside the Circle A Food Store near Clearwater and another shooting threat"​
Records show road rage, gun threats in stand your ground shooter's past
First of all this was not a stand your ground case, also....neither was the Zimmerman case though the media misled people very much in regards to that in both cases.

What does the number of children he had have to do with the case?....nothing. Just brought out over and over to generate sympathy for the black dude.

Also...it was hardly mentioned the black dude was driving his kids around whilst under the influence of drugs....yes he had drugs in his system which may have contributed to his aggressiveness....not to forget he had a history of assault.

The white gentleman had never been arrested for anything....there was some 'he said she said' type history....but nothing he was ever arrested for...none of which has any bearing on this case as we know previous history is not allowed in court rooms ....remember trayvon and his history and how that was not allowed to be presented in court?
Black dude versus white "gentleman" huh?

Drejka just like Zimmerman believed that having a concealed carry permit allows one to attempt to police the behavior of others. Zimmerman got away with it, but now the tide has begun to turn and people are finally being held accountable for their erroneous beliefs and [unlawful] behaviors. You can't be the initiator of a confrontation and then claim self-defense:

"The police reports describe a man quick to anger, but who always denied he threatened anyone with a gun. Former prosecutors said the earlier cases could possibly be used if Drejka is brought to trial, as evidence that he pulled out his weapon because he was frustrated, not afraid.​

Twice investigators admonished Drejka, telling him he was fortunate the alleged victims of his road rage did not want to press charges.​
If they had, an officer once said, authorities could have revoked his concealed carry permit."​
Zimmerman was perfectly within the law as well as Drejka....neither did anything at all illegal.

None of his alleged involvement in a couple of road rage cases had anything to do with the killing of the black guy. That had nothing at all to do with road rage. All those alleged road rage incidents were just hersay....and were not allowed in court.

Drejka had exhibited no anger at all....it was the black lady and her boy friend who were angry....hence his rushing out of the store not knowing what was going on angry because a white dude claimed some white guy was messing with his woman......

The real difference between the two cases was that Z had good attorneys....how Drejka wound up with such poor lawyers I do not know.

I remember your previous statements of long ago regarding Z ....you never did get the facts of the case right....btw Z had forgotten he even had his weapon with him until his arm brushed against it...just in the nick of time.

Drejka was perfectly within his rights to tell the black woman they should not have parked in a handicap spot.

The g/f over-reacted ....yelling and hollering at Drejka...that was the real igniter of the tragedy....and it was a tragedy and a miscarriage of justice.

If it had been a black guy telling her that she no doubt would not have gone into hysterics....she obviously had a problem with a white man telling her they should not be parking in a handicap spot.....that was illegal and it carries a heavy fine.

To claim Drejka initiated the tragedy is nonsense. He had told others about illegally parking in a handicap spot and nothing came of it.

The reason the black girls boyfriend got shot was the result of two things....the commotion created by the g/f and her boyfriend committing illegal assault.

If Drejka had not shot him he would be in jail for assault as he was already on probation for assault.

A little logic will go a long ways here.....break it down step by step.

The black guy transporting his kids whilst under the influence....stops at a store and illegally parks in a handicap spot.

He goes into the store leaving his g/f and kids in the car.

Drejka pulls up and sees the car illegally parked after checking for a handicap permit.

He tells the woman in a polite manner that they should not be parking in a handicap spot...the black woman goes into a rage and got so loud a white customer on his way into the store heard her.

The white customer misinforms the black guy that a white dude is messing with his woman.

The black guy goes into a rage and rushes out of the store to attack the white guy.

The black guy comitting assault on the white guy was the real cause of him getting shot.

Though the black g/f and the white customer telling the black guy someone was messing with his woman....both bear some responsibility for the tragedy....the black woman much more than the ignorant white guy who not really knowing what was going on and thus misinforming the black guy or perhaps he just wanted to stir up some trouble. He was hot on the heels of the black guy as he rushed out of the store to confront Drejka...perhaps wanting to see a fight...but he fled quickly as soon as drejka whipped out his pistol...which is what the black dude should have done instead of just stupidly standing there waiting to get shot.
Do you have a Florida concealed carry permit? Or one issued by any state?
I have a permit from Nevada but not a concealed permit. In Nevada you can openly carry.

I have not bothered to get a concealed carry permit here in Florida...as in I never carry my pistol with me when I am out and about...they are just for home protection.

I advise white males not to carry guns.....an easy way to wind up in jail even if you legally shoot someone.....especially someone black...the law on self defense is rapidly eroding.

I do carry a knife and that is what I advise everyone to do....just by the fact of having a gun puts you in a bad light with a lot of juries these days....plus a knife is very effective at close range and most of these encounters happen at close range.
Most of the people I know who carry are white, males mostly but they're generally not the type of people who go around with a chip on their shoulder or act as if they have something to prove by being confrontational.

I was taught that when you make the decision to carry a firearm you have to learn to leave your ego at home as well as mitigate as much of the damage that occurs as possible if you suddenly find yourself in a confrontational or volatile situation. The best way to do so of course is to avoid those situations as much as possible however if you can't avoid it, forget about pride, saving face, whatever, and just walk away.

I am surprised to hear that juries in Florida view carrying a weapon negatively. Carrying the weapon is never the issue from my perspective, it's using it in a method that is inconsistent with self-defense laws. I guess a jury of ones peers might be difficult to find for some.
I agree and that is something everyone who carries a gun should understand, unfortunately....many do not.

In the drejka cas we see two individuals that were train wrecks ready to happen....the black guy well down the road of self destruction with his drug usage and history of violence and the white dude not too bright and with some sort of fixation on people parking illegally in handicap spots most likely because he had a handicapped relative and though understandable................. in todays society he did not grasp the fact that it is unwise to argue with strangers.

Though he did noting illegal his bravado placed him in extreme jeopardy...a situation everyone should try to avoid...just common sense.

And on top of that he never learned that one should never talk to the police without the presence of their lawyer.

Too many innocent people make that mistake...failing to grasp the fact the police are not your friend...their job is to get evidence that shows you are guilty.

Also it should be noted that drejka was still in a state of shock whilst being questioned by the police....something that should not have been allowed to happen...and whilst his lawyer did bring that up in court...he did not do so in strong enough of a manner and the jury really paid no attention to it.

The last I heard the case was on appeal but I do not think it will result in justice...too much politics involved.
 
OP
TheGreenHornet

TheGreenHornet

Gold Member
Joined
Nov 21, 2017
Messages
2,439
Reaction score
473
Points
130
Channel 10's popular news anchor Reginal Roundtree's interview with Michael Drejka not long after the shooting.


Incidentally the news anchor was fired not long after doing the interview. No reason was given for his firing.

Even though he had been there for a couple of decades and did an outstanding job with high ratings.

Many believe it was because the higher ups at channel 10 thought he was too sympathetic with Michael Drejka.
 

NewsVine_Mariyam

Gold Member
Joined
Mar 3, 2018
Messages
4,358
Reaction score
1,661
Points
325
Location
The Beautiful Pacific Northwest
Channel 10's popular news anchor Reginal Roundtree's interview with Michael Drejka not long after the shooting.


Incidentally the news anchor was fired not long after doing the interview. No reason was given for his firing.

Even though he had been there for a couple of decades and did an outstanding job with high ratings.

Many believe it was because the higher ups at channel 10 thought he was too sympathetic with Michael Drejka.
I'm not sure what the purpose of that interview was other than to garner sympathy for Drejka and his wife and their current financial difficulties which preceded his legal troubles. And perhaps to make it known that there had been threats made against them with the police basically stating "watch your back" but not providing anything by way of safety or security (no "we'll have a car drive by your house from time to time to check on you", etc.)

Because Drejka brought up the fact that the interview was not the proper place to answer some of the interviewer's questions I'm not sure it was a wise move on Drejka's part to allow it in the first place or that his attorney allowed it.

Lastly, I have seen more than a few reports of video or audio recordings of police officers using the n-word while denying that they are racists. Use of the n-word is not the only manifestation of racism but as long as that's the measuring stick that's being used and everyone knows it, very few people will ever be proven to be racist by that standard. A better indicator in Drejka's case is whether he confronts everyone who parks in a disabled parking space without the disability sticker. Does he confront other white men about their errant behavior when they park in the disabled spot or does he tend to go for the perceived "soft targets" like women or minorities?

It is indeed unfortunate if the reason behind the journalist's firing is because of this interview. They could have simply told him to be less biased in any future interviews if that is how they perceived this one and if he continued then perhaps fired him. Or maybe he made a statement to them in response to their criticism of his interview that they didn't like. All I could find was this:

Earlier this year, the parent company for WTSP, TEGNA, claimed they fired Roundtree in response to poor professional ethics used during the high-profile Michael Drejka case. Roundtree obtained an exclusive interview with Drejka through a close friendship with a local criminal defense attorney.​
 

Missourian

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
22,267
Reaction score
9,154
Points
940
Location
Missouri
Sadly, because of the growing numbers of people with a very low caliber of decency, we need more and more cameras and drones everywhere.

If I had my druthers, everyone would have a chip implanted in him-, her. This would catch the guilty and protect the innocent.
Just depends on who is in charge....technology can be used for good or bad....look at China....good example of how a totalitarian government uses technology for evil purposes.

If the democrats are successful this time around and it looks like they will be then we are definitely advancing down the road towards totalitarianism.

Surveillance is increasing by leaps and bounds....the time when everyone will be followed and essentially controlled by advanced technology is not that far off....crime will be eliminated or greatly reduced by the increasing technology.....but at what costs?
Sounds like a really good time to...


...wait for it...



...wear a mask!
 

Likkmee

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 24, 2015
Messages
10,542
Reaction score
2,724
Points
215
Sadly, because of the growing numbers of people with a very low caliber of decency, we need more and more cameras and drones everywhere.

If I had my druthers, everyone would have a chip implanted in him-, her. This would catch the guilty and protect the innocent.
Hail Satan !
 

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top