Black Airbnb guest shot while walking to grocery store, officials say

Where does it say he was on his porch?
Where does it say that the victim was near the shooter's vehicle?

 

People get shot in the back all the time, and it oftentimes doesn't mean what your average, ignorant person thinks it does. For example, the pedophile that attacked Kyle Rittenhouse managed to get himself shot "in the back" because he jumped / lunged forward and downwards while trying to steal Kyle's gun in his final act on this earth. Likewise, criminals routinely get shot "from behind" as they're running away and pointing a gun (or something that looks like a gun) back towards the cops. It happens, if not "often" then at least frequently enough that it's a commonplace occurrence, and it's not the ultimate "gotcha - bad shoot" that the ignorant public seems to believe it is.

In the story in the OP, we simply don't know enough about the shooting to take an informed position one way or the other. From the initial subset of facts released, it doesn't look good for the shooter, but there's a lot we still don't know. We don't know what words were exchanged, if any, the body language / directions of travel / actions of the involved parties, etc. There's apparently some video of the shooting in the cops hands, and I hope it's released publicly because I'd be interested to see how this particular series of events played out.

I've seen plenty of shitbag criminals paint themselves as the victim before (again, going back to Rittenhouse's glorious night, that dirtbag Grosskreutz tried to claim he was just a Good Samaritan, rather than a lethal threat), and I've seen plenty of times where someone got shot in circumstances not justified by the law.

 

The shooter stated that he knew that the victim was running away. But still shot him. Does not matter what words were said. It doesn't even matter if the victim was one of the thieves. The shooter should be charged with attempted murder

 

You've supplied no quote by the shooter saying that, and AFAIK, no such quote exists. You are, once again, spreading misinformation.

It matters a great deal when you claim "the shooter stated" and he did not state any such thing. You're fabricating statements whole-cloth, just making things up out of thin air.

 

The quote:

“[Waters] comprehended and knew that the victim was running away, and he shot him anyway,” Welsh said. “There was nothing that would cause him to fear the victim, the victim had not stepped foot at his front door, on his driveway, in his front yard.”

Waters’ attorney, Jose Badillo, however, argued that while the sexagenarian knew the victim was running away....

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...wQFnoECAkQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0WrHpuyZN-Y8I-4P4VVM9B

I'll accept your apology regarding your accusations which I presume you will make.

 

Check again buddy. "Welsh" is the Deputy District Attorney, Aidan Welsh, not the shooter. You wrote "The shooter stated". I called you on that lie and your response is to tell me what the DDA said rather than what the shooter said? That's just more evidence that you were lying. Thanks for proving my point. You'll get no apology from me for your lies.

 

Wow you really struggle with reading!
Let's try again:
Waters’ attorney, Jose Badillo, however, argued that while the sexagenarian knew the victim was running away

“[Waters] comprehended and knew that the victim was running away, and he shot him anyway,” Welsh said.

Where do you think that Waters attorney got that information if not from the shooter?

 

Your claim was about what "The shooter stated" and now your defense of that false claim is to cite what the deputy district attorney or his attorney said? Neither of those two people were the shooter. If you're going to claim that the shooter stated something, you'd better be prepared to prove it, and so far you've failed to do that.

 

Not only that. A neighbor got it all on vid.
And you're just being childish to think his attorney says things about his client, without talking to his client.

 

LMAO!
You left out THIS Part:
Waters’ attorney, Jose Badillo, however, argued that while the sexagenarian knew the victim was running away.
So? Water's OWN Attorney is "making things up"?
Good luck with that...
At this point the hole being dug is about to reach the core of the earth...
Time to quit digging it deeper, and move on..
You have been Proven WRONG!

 

Jose Badillo and Mark Waters are two separate people. You understand that much at least, right?

 

I've already mentioned the video and said that I'd like to see it. It's not "childish" to insist on accuracy in claims. If someone says "the shooter stated" but the shooter did not, in fact, state that, the claim is false. If he meant to say "The shooter's attorney stated", he's free to issue a retraction and a correction. Thus far, he has chosen not to do that.

 

The vid is not made public as far as I know. Nobody also denies it's around. So get over it that you're not in the front seat on this one.

It's just childishly nitpicking as if it matters if the attorney said it on his behalve or if he said it personally.

 

It matters a great deal, especially since we don't know what basis the attorney had for making the statement. Again, the claim was that Mark Waters stated something, but we don't have any evidence that Mark Waters ever stated that thing. That makes @truth and justice's claim false, or at least unsupported by evidence.

But then again, I'm having this exchange with you, and you've demonstrated repeatedly in this thread that you're unacquainted with the most basic details of this case, so I'm not surprised you don't think accuracy is important.

 

I want to give credit where credit is due though: you at least understand that this was not first degree murder. @notme still has apparently not managed to grasp even that simple fact.

 

It doesn't matter greatly, since it's safe to assume the attorney and it's client talked things through. You just basically demand they break their attorney client privilege. It's just childish that you demand and instead go gaslight on whatever.

 

The only definition that matters is what it says in the law.
The law that I found stated that 1st degree also could be great bodily harm. And you choose to ignore it said or great bodily harm again and again.

 

yes, Rittenhouse did paint himself as a victim, agree with you there

so did OJ

sometimes it works for the jury, other times not

 

Lawyers speak for their clients in court so since Waters claimed he mistook the young man's headphones for a gun did Waters also mistake that the man was running away from him with his back turned to him when he shot him in the leg? LOL
You must be real dizzy from jumping through all those hoops.

 

the video of the events showed Kyle was a victim, several times.

 

Hear! Hear!

Yahoo comment:
10 December, 2022

"Well, let us have some compassion for the poor shooter. He had amassed an arsenal and had waited years and years for someone to give him a reason to shoot. The victim failed to do anything to him - thus denying the old man his dream of righteous victimhood - and, indeed, turned his back and ran away, stubbornly denying the shooter a motive."

 

They speak on behalf of their client, but that does not mean what they say is not some verbatim repetition of what their client said. You can't, for example, use a lawyer's statements to impeach a defendant as if he himself had made the statement.

 

"Lindenberg testified that Bullock told police he had checked into the Airbnb across the street from Waters’s house earlier that day. He said he had not met Waters, did not have any prior interactions with him, and did not see him before the shooting. While being taken into custody, Waters appeared to express some regret, according to the detective’s testimony, telling the officer who was detaining him, “I can’t take it back, what I’ve done. I ****ed up.”

https://www.yahoo.com/news/man-allegedly-shot-unarmed-black-011845277.html

Oh my, he has no idea how much........

 

So are you defending the shooter or white supremacy?

 

Defend the shooter even harder.