FBI hits man with car and then cites him for "Walking to create a hazzard".

[rahvin]

http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/19/hatfill/index.html

Hatfill told officers he walked up to the automobile with the camera to take the picture when the driver drove off and ran over Hatfill's right foot. The report states that Hatfill refused medical treatment at the scene and that after investigation, Hatfill was issued a citation for "walking to create a hazard" and fined $5.

It will be interesting to see how those who would defend the FBI regardless of what they did will spin this.

 

[Pliablemoose]

I don't think the folks dead & injured by Anthrax would mind...

The FBI may be way off in labeling him a "Person of Interest", but then again, they may be onto something.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
I don't think the folks dead & injured by Anthrax would mind...

The FBI may be way off in labeling him a "Person of Interest", but then again, they may be onto something.

So if they think he's a suspect it's ok to run over his foot with a car then cite him for it?

 

[Pliablemoose]

Strictly speaking, he was breaking the law, the FBI agent was not...

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
Strictly speaking, he was breaking the law, the FBI agent was not...

And what law would that be? Taking a picture of an FBI agent? I always thought hitting a pedestrian with a vehicle regardless of what the pedestrian was doing was against the law. In fact I was under the silly impression that intentionaly hitting someone with a vehicle could be charged as attempted murder.

Do you Honestly believe that it was ok for them to hit him with a car and then cite him for it?

 

[Alistar7]

I think it's hysterical.

But you have to question the ability of a govt agent to carry such authority, we cant have crazy gun toting federalists running around handing out $5 tickets, thats how it started with the indians and look what happened to them, this is all a buildup to the zionist occupation and realization of the global dominance apsirations of the elitist academic homosexual militant agenda prevelant in prime time liberal television and the media in whole.

 

[Pliablemoose]

If a pedestrian purposely hampers your movement in a car on a public street, they're guilty of "Walking to create a hazard" That's why we have crosswalks, traffic lights & jaywalking laws...

Mulder & Scully win...

 

[Alistar7]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
If a pedestrian purposely hampers your movement in a car on a public street, they're guilty of "Walking to create a hazard" That's why we have crosswalks, traffic lights & jaywalking laws...

Mulder & Scully win...

he right of course, what spin....

$5 ticket, it's not like they tortured the man, jesus, I will gladly paypal the fine right now if that would make you feel better....

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
If a pedestrian purposely hampers your movement in a car on a public street, they're guilty of "Walking to create a hazard" That's why we have crosswalks, traffic lights & jaywalking laws...

Mulder & Scully win...

In any jurisdiction I'm aware of, regardless of whether the person was jay walking or blocking the car it is quite illegal to intentionaly run them over with the vehicle. It has something to do with those rules that someone in a car is weilding a deadly weapon against a pedestrian and must yeild to the pedestrian EVEN if the pedestrian is breaking the law. I don't care that he was cited, I care that the FBI agent ran him over and he WASN'T cited. But I get the impression you all believe the FBI is above the law and is not required to follow simple rules like: Don't run someone over with a car.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
If a pedestrian purposely hampers your movement in a car on a public street, they're guilty of "Walking to create a hazard" That's why we have crosswalks, traffic lights & jaywalking laws...

Mulder & Scully win...

In any jurisdiction I'm aware of, regardless of whether the person was jay walking or blocking the car it is quite illegal to intentionaly run them over with the vehicle. It has something to do with those rules that someone in a car is weilding a deadly weapon against a pedestrian and must yeild to the pedestrian EVEN if the pedestrian is breaking the law. I don't care that he was cited, I care that the FBI agent ran him over and he WASN'T cited. But I get the impression you all believe the FBI is above the law and is not required to follow simple rules like: Don't run someone over with a car.

And you know the driver intended on running his foot over - how? Maybe twinkle toes should keep his @ss off the street while taking pictures next time


CkG

 

[Alistar7]

the car was parked, he walked up, the agent tried to leave.

Did he try to mantain a position close to the car or obstruct his departure? Did he intentionally place his foot in harms way? Why did he not step back when the car began to move?

 

[Bulk Beef]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
If a pedestrian purposely hampers your movement in a car on a public street, they're guilty of "Walking to create a hazard" That's why we have crosswalks, traffic lights & jaywalking laws...

Mulder & Scully win...

In any jurisdiction I'm aware of, regardless of whether the person was jay walking or blocking the car it is quite illegal to intentionaly run them over with the vehicle. It has something to do with those rules that someone in a car is weilding a deadly weapon against a pedestrian and must yeild to the pedestrian EVEN if the pedestrian is breaking the law. I don't care that he was cited, I care that the FBI agent ran him over and he WASN'T cited. But I get the impression you all believe the FBI is above the law and is not required to follow simple rules like: Don't run someone over with a car.

Who's spinning now?

 

[drewshin]

it seems like they're just trying to drive that guy crazy, until he finally slips up --- if he is guilty.

 

[Dari]

Rahvin: streets are for cars. sidewalks are for pedestrians. Let's repeat.

 

[dabuddha]

Originally posted by: sward666

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
If a pedestrian purposely hampers your movement in a car on a public street, they're guilty of "Walking to create a hazard" That's why we have crosswalks, traffic lights & jaywalking laws...

Mulder & Scully win...

In any jurisdiction I'm aware of, regardless of whether the person was jay walking or blocking the car it is quite illegal to intentionaly run them over with the vehicle. It has something to do with those rules that someone in a car is weilding a deadly weapon against a pedestrian and must yeild to the pedestrian EVEN if the pedestrian is breaking the law. I don't care that he was cited, I care that the FBI agent ran him over and he WASN'T cited. But I get the impression you all believe the FBI is above the law and is not required to follow simple rules like: Don't run someone over with a car.

Who's spinning now?

Agreed.

 

[Pliablemoose]

Reminds me of the hookers that get their feet run over & come to my ER

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: dabuddha

Originally posted by: sward666

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: Pliablemoose
If a pedestrian purposely hampers your movement in a car on a public street, they're guilty of "Walking to create a hazard" That's why we have crosswalks, traffic lights & jaywalking laws...

Mulder & Scully win...

In any jurisdiction I'm aware of, regardless of whether the person was jay walking or blocking the car it is quite illegal to intentionaly run them over with the vehicle. It has something to do with those rules that someone in a car is weilding a deadly weapon against a pedestrian and must yeild to the pedestrian EVEN if the pedestrian is breaking the law. I don't care that he was cited, I care that the FBI agent ran him over and he WASN'T cited. But I get the impression you all believe the FBI is above the law and is not required to follow simple rules like: Don't run someone over with a car.

Who's spinning now?

Agreed.

The sad thing is he doesn't even know he is spinning.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: rahvin
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/05/19/hatfill/index.html

Hatfill told officers he walked up to the automobile with the camera to take the picture when the driver drove off and ran over Hatfill's right foot. The report states that Hatfill refused medical treatment at the scene and that after investigation, Hatfill was issued a citation for "walking to create a hazard" and fined $5.

It will be interesting to see how those who would defend the FBI regardless of what they did will spin this.

There is no defense for this. None. Their tactics were harrassment, and their actions once confronted were assualt.

 

[Insane3D]

You guys are interesting to say the least. He walked up to a parked car to take a picture of the occupant...perfectly legal. He was not impeding traffic..the car was parked. The individual in the car decides to drive off, and hits him...but it's his fault? Who logic is faulty here? Are you guys really that blind? Oh wait...this is AT..silly me.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
You guys are interesting to say the least. He walked up to a parked car to take a picture of the occupant...perfectly legal. He was not impeding traffic..the car was parked. The individual in the car decides to drive off, and hits him...but it's his fault? Who logic is faulty here? Are you guys really that blind? Oh wait...this is AT..silly me.

One of the rare times I agree with you, Insane3d.

Must be a sign of the apocalypse, or something...

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: Insane3D
You guys are interesting to say the least. He walked up to a parked car to take a picture of the occupant...perfectly legal. He was not impeding traffic..the car was parked. The individual in the car decides to drive off, and hits him...but it's his fault? Who logic is faulty here? Are you guys really that blind? Oh wait...this is AT..silly me.

IF you believe the agent driving the car ran over Hatfill's foot on purpose.

Any 3rd party confirmation of injuries? The police say Hatfill refused treatment.
Hatfill's spokesman say's he was treated for a bruised foot and abrasion on the head(?).

Anyone ever pull the old "ouch you ran over my foot!" gag?
I actually had my foot run over trying to do that to my uncle... lol... I didn't pull it back fast enough. hehe. ouch.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: Insane3D
You guys are interesting to say the least. He walked up to a parked car to take a picture of the occupant...perfectly legal. He was not impeding traffic..the car was parked. The individual in the car decides to drive off, and hits him...but it's his fault? Who logic is faulty here? Are you guys really that blind? Oh wait...this is AT..silly me.

IF you believe the agent driving the car ran over Hatfill's foot on purpose.

Any 3rd party confirmation of injuries? The police say Hatfill refused treatment.
Hatfill's spokesman say's he was treated for a bruised foot and abrasion on the head(?).

Anyone ever pull the old "ouch you ran over my foot!" gag?
I actually had my foot run over trying to do that to my uncle... lol... I didn't pull it back fast enough. hehe. ouch.

Reckless endangerment at a minimum. This FBI is trusted by the public to act responsibly with his guns and other powers he has and driving a car at close proximity to a pedestrian, even if his intent was to miss him, is very irresponsible. But ya I played that game too....When I was 16.

 

[FrancesBeansRevenge]

Originally posted by: Carbonyl

Originally posted by: FrancesBeansRevenge

Originally posted by: Insane3D
You guys are interesting to say the least. He walked up to a parked car to take a picture of the occupant...perfectly legal. He was not impeding traffic..the car was parked. The individual in the car decides to drive off, and hits him...but it's his fault? Who logic is faulty here? Are you guys really that blind? Oh wait...this is AT..silly me.

IF you believe the agent driving the car ran over Hatfill's foot on purpose.

Any 3rd party confirmation of injuries? The police say Hatfill refused treatment.
Hatfill's spokesman say's he was treated for a bruised foot and abrasion on the head(?).

Anyone ever pull the old "ouch you ran over my foot!" gag?
I actually had my foot run over trying to do that to my uncle... lol... I didn't pull it back fast enough. hehe. ouch.

Reckless endangerment at a minimum. This FBI is trusted by the public to act responsibly with his guns and other powers he has and driving a car at close proximity to a pedestrian, even if his intent was to miss him, is very irresponsible. But ya I played that game too....When I was 16.

Perhaps irresponsible.... certainly not reckless endangerment IMHO. Hatfill was jaywalking. Hatfill deserves just as much, if not more, blame for the incident IMHO.
Again, I wonder if he was injured at all. There seems to be no independent verification of this yet.

PS: My uncle was operating a vehicle in close proximity of a pedestrian (me). He had no intent against me. He wasn't driving fast or wrecklessly.
He was simply pulling out of a parking lot.
I stepped closer to the vehicle and extended my foot into the path of the drivers side wheel. Whose fault was it my foot was run over?
BTW, this happened when I was 14 or so and was the last time I played that damn game. My foot hurt like a bitch for more than a week.

 

[Insane3D]

IF you believe the agent driving the car ran over Hatfill's foot on purpose.

So, let me get this straight. I run over someone with my car. If I didn't mean to, it's ok, but if I did it is not? Cool. Sounds like it's time for a drive...there are too many old people walking the streets anyways.

One of the rare times I agree with you, Insane3d.

Must be a sign of the apocalypse, or something...

I thought I smelled brimstone...

 

[Vic]

Had that been a private citizen driving that car rather than an FBI agent, the citizen would have been carted off to jail. There is only one law people. Not one for law enforcement and one for the rest of us. :disgust: