• Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?

    Go here:

    Edit Account Details and Profile

West Point Cadet jumped twice: Once by thugs, once by the Army

J

jtmedli

Well-Known Member
pilot
I think you're missing the point. There were 3 BIG guys that beat him senseless in some stupid attempt to 'protect' some half assed has-been singer. Maybe it's just me, but he could have been belligerent and TRYING to pick a fight and those guys could have handled it better than that and without beating him senseless.
 
Sapper!

Sapper!

Excuse the BS...
Well, I talked with someone yesterday from my district representative's office about the email I wrote. They called and asked about the incident. Couldn't actually tell him anything except that I was concerned and would like the congressman to look into it if he wouldn't mind. Hopefully that helps out!

The ends don't justify the means here, that is my only gripe. Hopefully the kid was straight arrow and I'm not putting my foot in my mouth.
 
BigIron

BigIron

Remotely piloted
pilot
Super Moderator
Contributor
wink said:
I kept waiting for the bystanders to react. Even after beat down and trying to get up on his own, no one came to him. I am not sure if anyone saw much of the beating and it might be too much to ask most folks to get physically involved when two pros are at work beating a guy. You can't know what was being said, or yelled, since there is no audio. But even after the fact, you have a young man obviously in distress, bleeding, unable to get up and everyone keeps their distance, except for the mature gentleman in the cowboy hat. Am I putting too fine a point on the stereotype?
Click to expand...

I think that's commonplace these days. Look at all the beatings recorded and placed on youtube. No bystander will do shit.
 
statesman

statesman

Shut up woman... get on my horse.
pilot
MPH said:
How's that? Because I pointed out he's stumbling around (I believe drunk) and I stated I thought that's why WP nailed him?
Click to expand...

On what basis do you have to make that assertion?

The fact that he admitted to having one or two drinks, and you saw what APPEARS to be him stumbling on a video tape that runs at 1 fps.

Thats all circumstantial. I'm just glad this happened in Texas, where you cant be pulled for jury duty.
 
MPH

MPH

Well-Known Member
statesman said:
On what basis do you have to make that assertion?

The fact that he admitted to having one or two drinks, and you saw what APPEARS to be him stumbling on a video tape that runs at 1 fps.

Thats all circumstantial. I'm just glad this happened in Texas, where you cant be pulled for jury duty.
Click to expand...

One of the nice things about circumstantial evidence is that it serves to complement direct evidence. In this case, the circumstances of him "appearing" to stumble zigzag and walk into traffic is complemented by the direct evidence of the driver's testimony that the cadet was drunk. I'd be the last person to believe the driver, he has a HUGE conflict of interest. But, when viewed through the lens of the video, I think it holds more water.

If you don't think I'm on the side of the cadet here, you're dead wrong. The difference is I'm willing to admit he likely had more to drink than he should have, and that placed him in a bad situation. Once again: From what I've seen, I don't think he deserves any form of punishment. But drunk cadet + altercation with civilians... I'm not surprised at the action of West Point. THAT'S what I said. You should really re-read my posts.

On another note: over the past two weeks I've agreed with Flash and disagreed with Statesman... Did I stumble into bizzaro AirWarriors?
 
KCOTT

KCOTT

remember to pillage before you burn
pilot
MPH said:
On another note: over the past two weeks I've agreed with Flash and disagreed with Statesman... Did I stumble into bizzaro AirWarriors?
Click to expand...

Eh, I wouldn't worry about it. I disagree with him everyday.
 
phrogdriver

phrogdriver

More humble than you would understand
pilot
Super Moderator
MPH said:
One of the nice things about circumstantial evidence is that it serves to complement direct evidence. In this case, the circumstances of him "appearing" to stumble zigzag and walk into traffic is complemented by the direct evidence of the driver's testimony that the cadet was drunk. I'd be the last person to believe the driver, he has a HUGE conflict of interest. But, when viewed through the lens of the video, I think it holds more water.

If you don't think I'm on the side of the cadet here, you're dead wrong. The difference is I'm willing to admit he likely had more to drink than he should have, and that placed him in a bad situation. Once again: From what I've seen, I don't think he deserves any form of punishment. But drunk cadet + altercation with civilians... I'm not surprised at the action of West Point. THAT'S what I said. You should really re-read my posts.

On another note: over the past two weeks I've agreed with Flash and disagreed with Statesman... Did I stumble into bizzaro AirWarriors?
Click to expand...

Drunk or not, that was a hellacious, blood-on-the-pavement beat down. People are allowed to use reasonable force to protect themselves, and in Texas, their property. Reasonable force is that required to stop the threat, not that required to maim the threat. I don't think the threat to Patti LaBelle's luggage justifies beating the piss out of someone. I'm not saying you think that, but the cadet was really only guilty of public intox, at most. That doesn't justify expulsion, unless he had a prior history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top