Anyone Know This Moron???

[68Charger]

I'm with everyone who's stated we're not hearing the whole story...

In my experience, there's at least 3 sides to every story- in this case:
1) the one this lady is spouting to the news, maybe even matches what she told police.
2) the one the CHP owner told the police when he turned himself in
3) exactly what happened, with no partiality and nothing left out

in the end, nobody was hurt- and the local news got a field day... hoping to bump their ratings with sensationalism...

[Byte Stryke]

Guys, Put the hammer and nails down and step away from the cross...

Lets play what if.
What if this statement is true

Lindsay told investigators the woman started driving towards him and because he was now out of his car he "feared for himself and did remove his handgun from his pocket."

road rage is ugly, it knows no gender.
I had a woman try to run me down in the best buy parking lot near 92d and Sheridan. Psycho bitch took out 4 cars.
Yes, over a parking spot.
I have that effect on women


I am not saying anyone was right or wrong here. I'm Simply stating we are wrong for perpetuating the trial by media.

Sometimes, proper use of force simply means letting the person threatening you know you are armed and will defend yourself if needed.



On a side note: Should someone direct their motor vehicle at me while I have my son, they would find the corpse behind the wheel, with the vehicle still in drive.

[Byte Stryke]

Ya, what if she was? Why is the guy outside of his car regarding a parking issue?

Self defense is not a valid claim if you provoked the action in ANY way. Even if she drove towards him, he has no valid self defense claim because he got out of her car and approached her over a parking issue.

Furthermore, he admitted he pulled his firearm and pointed it at her. Preponderance of the evidence? Unless the LEO they interviewed is completely fabricating bullshit, then this is pretty cut and dry *regardless of the circumstances*.

Assuming the LEO isn't magically fabricating the interview and admission of guilt, we know for a fact:

1) It was over a parking spot, and both parties wanted it. The woman pulled in first. (not disputed by either party)
2) At some point, the guy STEPPED OUT OF HIS CAR AND APPROACHED HER (he admitted this, and this is not disputed by either party)
3) At some point, the guy PULLED HIS FIREARM AND POINTED IT AT HER (he admitted this)

What happened between 2 and 3 bears absolutely no relevance. I don't care if she was a serial killer brandishing a severed horse head and twisting around like the exorcist. Read Colorado law regarding physical use of force. He had absolutely no justification to pull his firearm. If you walk into a bar and randomly point and shout to someone "I'm going to kick your ass" and they start to approach you, you don't have ANY legal basis for physical use of force.

Instances like this give good permit holders a very bad name.

I'm Sorry sir, Media spin gives permit holders a bad name.
You have already convicted him without a trial.

again, we weren't there, we dont know what happened, he says he was already out of his car when she drove her car at him, she says he pulled the gun for no reason.
I believe it's up to 2 lawyers to prove and 12 jurors to decide.

"On the initial scene the officer presented what was known at the time to his sergeant and then lieutenant. After a discussion based on the accounts of the people involved, no independent witnesses and no other compelling evidence it was determined that no party would be charged.

The THREE Cops seemed to think it was a bunch of BS until she went crying to the city council about it... Yet another case of politicians trying to do everyone's job except their own.

and to be honest, if the three cops are called to the stand for the defense and asked "Why didn't you initially charge him?" That case is getting pitched out like yesterdays trash.

And as Usual, her mouth is hurting her case.

"He stepped out of his vehicle... pulled a revolver, a black revolver and it was a pretty little gun, it was newer type, small and he just mouthed at me, 'Move your car,'" she said.

Defense attorney: So Ma'am, you are trying to convince this court that you were terrified and in fear for your life by something you described as a "pretty little gun"

and the fact that they prop up something as small as unlawful display of a weapon as opposed to felony Menacing. I See nothing coming of this except an excuse for the Brady campaign to take your guns.
I am shipping mine to the Philippines.

[Byte Stryke]

damned non-conformists
Rules dont apply to them.


Seems she was going the wrong way as well?

while I know it isn't illegal, for me it says a bit about her character.

[BigMat]

Ya, what if she was? Why is the guy outside of his car regarding a parking issue?

Self defense is not a valid claim if you provoked the action in ANY way. Even if she drove towards him, he has no valid self defense claim because he got out of her car and approached her over a parking issue.

Furthermore, he admitted he pulled his firearm and pointed it at her. Preponderance of the evidence? Unless the LEO they interviewed is completely fabricating bullshit, then this is pretty cut and dry *regardless of the circumstances*.

Assuming the LEO isn't magically fabricating the interview and admission of guilt, we know for a fact:

1) It was over a parking spot, and both parties wanted it. The woman pulled in first. (not disputed by either party)
2) At some point, the guy STEPPED OUT OF HIS CAR AND APPROACHED HER (he admitted this, and this is not disputed by either party)
3) At some point, the guy PULLED HIS FIREARM AND POINTED IT AT HER (he admitted this)

What happened between 2 and 3 bears absolutely no relevance. I don't care if she was a serial killer brandishing a severed horse head and twisting around like the exorcist. Read Colorado law regarding physical use of force. He had absolutely no justification to pull his firearm. If you walk into a bar and randomly point and shout to someone "I'm going to kick your ass" and they start to approach you, you don't have ANY legal basis for physical use of force.

Instances like this give good permit holders a very bad name.

100% agree, more facts are needed to fine him, but I have no legal implications based on what I say, so I quarterback away! Simply put, based one what they both said, he is a dumb ass. Even if she tried to run him over, he could have avoided this one before it started, easily. Back up two feet, give up the spot. Take your head-rat for a walk. Move on with your life.


Just for fun. Did OJ do it? You weren't there, or in the jury...

[Monky]

So her traveling the wrong direction..they both go to pull into the spot.. she nearly hits him.. He backs up slightly and steps out of his car with his arms up in the WTF gesture.. she pulls forward at him.. Don't tell me none of you have ever done it..

[OneGuy67]

So her traveling the wrong direction..they both go to pull into the spot.. she nearly hits him.. He backs up slightly and steps out of his car with his arms up in the WTF gesture.. she pulls forward at him.. Don't tell me none of you have ever done it..

I'll tell you I haven't done it. A parking spot isn't something that I would get upset to the point of doing what he did. I would go pick another spot and grumble under my breath about what a bitch she was. That's it. I wouldn't get out of my vehicle, and I wouldn't make a big deal out of it.

As an aside, her driving towards him isn't reason enough to pull a gun out. Too easy to move to the side and out of the way, thus threat elimination.

[Colorado Luckydog]

I'll tell you I haven't done it. A parking spot isn't something that I would get upset to the point of doing what he did. I would go pick another spot and grumble under my breath about what a bitch she was. That's it. I wouldn't get out of my vehicle, and I wouldn't make a big deal out of it.

As an aside, her driving towards him isn't reason enough to pull a gun out. Too easy to move to the side and out of the way, thus threat elimination.

X2 and there is no way I would have pulled my weapon. There is not a beeeeatch on this earth that could hit me with their car in a busy King Soopers parking lot. I could evade easily.

I'm not arguing the fact that she was not a bitch. I'd bet a dollar to doughnut hole, that she was, is and always will be a bitch. However big of a bitch she was or still is, he was wrong to pull his weapon. In the time it took to pull his weapon, he could have stepped out of the way of her car.

[Hkguy45]

In a King Soopers parking lot, I would have had a ton of options. Pulling my gun on a woman would not have been one of them.

excellent comment....all that really matters.AS a responsible gun owner/permit holder drawing your weapon should be the last option...this was obviously not his LAST option. What was the lady going to do? run into his car? That sounds like a stupid thing to do, although...bitches be crazy. Like luckydog said, pulling a gun on a defenseless woman in the parking lot of a king soopers doesn't seem like one of the options he should've made. ALSO if he mouthed something to her why would he try to do it discretely? If your life is really in danger and you need to pull your weapon you want the witnesses to be on YOUR side so you'd want them to know what was going on exactly. the guy looks like a dipshit, who was looking for an excuse to pull his gun. just my two cents.

[Byte Stryke]

What was the lady going to do? run into his car? That sounds like a stupid thing to do, although...bitches be crazy. Like luckydog said, pulling a gun on a defenseless woman in the parking lot of a king soopers doesn't seem like one of the options he should've made. ALSO if he mouthed something to her why would he try to do it discretely?

you obviously have never had a crazy bitch try to run you over and destroy (total) 4 other cars in the attempt.

Im not saying right or wrong or who's lying or telling the truth.
One thing I am noticing is this allot of people are overlooking the fact that this 'Poor defenseless woman" was at the controls of a 2-5 thousand pound battering ram (depending on make/Model and options).

Personally, I cannot wait until someone makes some sort of accusation against one of you so I can sit here and armchair a verdict based on the partial facts spun up by the liberal media.


I am honestly surprised since it was black revolver that they didn't label it an "assault weapon."

Based on the fact that an officer, his supervisor and his supervisors supervisor saw no need for charges that there is more to the story than 9News is letting on.
Lets let the courts do their jobs.