What's new
By:
Filters
  • Check out our new Group Buy Program! We're kicking it off with Baja Designs! $10 Flat rate shipping no matter how much you order!

Self defense? Or not? - Apple River Stabbing

IBB Jury - On the charges of intentional first degree homicide

  • Total voters
    52
  • Poll closed .
KenV said:
Kids made bold by alcohol and weed, plus an off-center older guy with a pig sticker. What could go wrong? I wonder if the dude who received a free c-section learned anything.

I don't know what to think. Seems like a lot of detail is missing regarding why the guy approached the kids. Grabbing their tubes doesn't make sense either. But I wasn't there 🤷‍♂️
Click to expand...
I watched some of the trial and these kids are lying changing their stories doing what they can to make them look innocent and the old guy guilty.

He’s ganged up on by drunk underage kids starting shit with him. Things got bad when the old man was freaking out and attacked out of fear imo. He’s probably never been in a situation like that in his life.

I’m not sure why he didn’t just walk away from the kids but he had every right to be where he was as anyone else did.
 
trampas said:
One of the clearest portions of the video where he gets pushed down into the water on his ass, then almost immediately someone sucker punched (kicked?) him in the face, is telling.

Didn't someone mention on page 1 that he was looking for his phone, or something he thought he lost in the river, and that's why he came toward their tube gathering in the first place?

With his multi-lingual non-American background and the look on his face that seems to display "i don't know wtf all these kids are screaming about" - and if my speclations are mostly correct... i think if i were in that situation i'd be pissed AF if those river rats shoved me down and smacked me in the face while i wasn't being aggressive in any sense, assaulting, or whatever.

I don't blame him for standing his ground on the shifty riverbed that day, but it does suck that he brought a knife to a kiddie bar (sandbar, in this case) and a child was deleted. Isn't it odd that on a hot day in a shallow tubing river, in soaked dad-shorts, he carried a buck with him.
Click to expand...
One of his friends lost a phone and he wanted to try and find it
 
trampas said:
One of the clearest portions of the video where he gets pushed down into the water on his ass, then almost immediately someone sucker punched (kicked?) him in the face, is telling.

Didn't someone mention on page 1 that he was looking for his phone, or something he thought he lost in the river, and that's why he came toward their tube gathering in the first place?

With his multi-lingual non-American background and the look on his face that seems to display "i don't know wtf all these kids are screaming about" - and if my speclations are mostly correct... i think if i were in that situation i'd be pissed AF if those river rats shoved me down and smacked me in the face while i wasn't being aggressive in any sense, assaulting, or whatever.

I don't blame him for standing his ground on the shifty riverbed that day, but it does suck that he brought a knife to a kiddie bar (sandbar, in this case) and a child was deleted. Isn't it odd that on a hot day in a shallow tubing river, in soaked dad-shorts, he carried a buck with him.
Click to expand...
He’s carrying a knife because he used it for tying the tubes together with a line.
 
From what I've seen of Miu's testimony, the frame by frame breakdown of events makes his odd behavior make sense. From the poor footwear and stumbling into the tubes, and his weird looks where he was actually motioning for his group to come over and help him. Story seems to line up with the video accurately. Cross will be interesting.

Defense seems to be doing a good job.
 
He's clear and concise. I bet chunky, keep you warm in the winter, blonde regrets not keeping her hands to herself.

edit: And of course there's tatted up chicks, it's always trashy ass, dumb, broke ass girls with shitty flower tats starting shit. Change my mind...
 
Last edited:
Think he's answering the questions about his "fear level" wrong. From the beginning, he should have started with. "I was looking for my goggles. These people started surrounding me, yelling, I didn't know what was going on. I didn't know what they were going to or trying to do to me."
 
Yota Up said:
DA: You did not need the knife for this current task, correct?
DA: So why did you bring it with you?

What a prick. When I carry my knife(100%), I never think to myself "Oh, I don't need my knife to pump gas right now, better take it off"
Click to expand...
Yep. Most of us have carried knives since childhood. It'd be weird NOT having one.

If I were out on the river and my line caught on something that could puncture my ride or drown me, I'd want a blade so I could cut free. Being able to keep a group of drunk/stoned Gen Z people off of me would be a bonus feature.
 
I can't carry a gun in Canada during my daily routines. I do carry one of my knives. Never know when I will need to open a box, a package or maybe cut a piece of rope.
 
Last edited:
Yota Up said:
No, automatically it should not.
If the dead guy had a prison record, the jury should not hear about it if the guy that shot him claims self defense.
Unless the guy that shot him knew that as a fact at the time of the shooting.
If the shooter could not appreciate that as a fact, then neither should the jury, and as such, that evidence is inadmissible.

However, later on after the conviction, during sentencing phase, those records can be brought up with a 404(I think), and the sentence would be considered with the priors appreciated.
Click to expand...
I was referring to what happened at the time of the crime, meaning the whole video should be submitted.
 
Animalmother said:
On the flipside, why shove an old man and then sucker punch him when he is down in water? Its one thing to get knocked out its a whole other ballgame to get knocked out in the water and outnumbered. People act more bold when they are in a group opposed to by themselves and this group was drunk, feeding off each other and seemed content on going the chimp out route.
Click to expand...
yes I agree, and that should be shown too
 
DMG said:
Except he didn’t claim to own the water. He was tubing too. Why make up a scenario that didn’t exist?

And he didn’t start cutting until they had pushed him underwater a couple of times. Do you assclowns know what happens when you are held underwater? You can’t breathe.
Click to expand...
the scenario is just a mind set that I have observed quite often from the older Karen crowd, I didn't imply it to this d bag
you how you don't get pushed underwater a couple of times?? Move along when you are out numbered :grinpimp:
and he was let up right? He can breath then? Did he start stabbing while underwater? I didn't see the girl down there with him :stirthepot:
 
KacksterK5 said:
Dude, that's exactly what I thought. Nobody more entitled than a Bass fisherman winging lures under a dock and saying how they're allowed to be there. Well, technically yes, but if two people are standing on a football field and one person can't move, the other guy decides to stand chest to chest and be annoying, the one who can't move will likely get pissed.

Kinda like Harley Davidson guys. Yes, you can be there, but don't be all annoying "FAG!!"

Found him:grinpimp:
Click to expand...

Public is public dude
you would be a great cop
 
Animalmother said:
Its such bullshit how they nitpick each frame and only show bits and pieces. “Look your smiling”

Does the defense get to play the video in its entirety?
Click to expand...
Selective editing can be used to help, also. Whole thing should be played, but break downs can help or hurt.

After initial contact with [guy with phone], you walked away to look for____, correct?
1712691800225.png
1712691832486.png


When you could not find ______, you continued to walk away and search, correct?
1712691906118.png


You were heading upstream, correct? Against the current?

To jury or whoever: This group went against the current to pursue Mr. Miu. This shows they no longer are there to float the river and are now focused on him, for unknown reasons.

However, the group pursued you. With your back turned, you would not yet know this, but as seen here [insert name] is walking towards Mr. Miu. This action by [frizzy hair] can be seen in full between marks 00:XX and 00:XX of the video.

The video further shows the whole group of men walking towards you, as shown between marks of 00:XX and 00:XX. This is when you turn and notice the group pursuing you, correct?
1712692246578.png


And others, not involved in any interaction between you and the group of men, come to the center of the river and are also shouting at you. When did you notice the group increasing?
1712692368746.png


You are still facing away from the crowd, looking for _______ as they get closer. They are also between you and your group of friends, are they not?
1712692477893.png


More people join and further separate you from your friends. When did you notice them? Were they also shouting at you?
1712692537862.png


At what point did you notice you were almost completely surrounded? At that point did you feel there was a threat of harm to you? (this was right before he reached for his knife).
1712692673389.png


Further review of the video, between marks 01:XX and 01:XX will show there are Y number of people with in close proximity of Mr. Miu. All shouting, getting closer, surrounding, and flailing their hands in his face.

Then go into the next scenes where he is pushed down, hit, and pushed down again when attempts to get up.
 
WaterH said:
Thankyou for that.

Question, what about coaching a witness? I know it’s kind of illegal, but is done all the time. Would it be illegal for you to ask the witness (before trial) all the questions that will be asked. If they make a provable false statement, can you tell them to correct it or explain how it does not match with the evidence?
Click to expand...
We ask questions to witnesses before trial all the time. Sometimes in Court, sometimes in our offices. If it's in our offices, we have to have an investigator present so we don't make ourselves witnesses to the case. Whether the witness is consistent or not, the investigator writes a report summarizing the statements, and we give that to defense. This is almost always recorded. We try to do this nearly immediately in domestic violence cases, as 95% of the time, the victims will recant their statements.

Before any questions are asked, I'll provide a police report with their statements in it. After they read it, I'll ask if anything is wrong or needs correcting. Then I'll start asking my own questions. If it's clearly wrong, I'll confront them with whatever I have and have them explain which is the right version and why. If they've lied before, I'll ask them why.

There's a saying that "crimes committed in hell aren't witnesses by angels". Most of my witnesses are... criminal adjacent. Meaning they aren't exactly upstanding members of society. So it's expected that the witnesses aren't going to be polished, sophisticated, or even believable. But I can't pick and choose, I get what I get. The hardest part of my job isn't asking the questions, it's getting the people into Court. Most of my time is spent trying to track down witnesses, serving them, and then bringing them into court. It's a huge PITA. You might imagine that gang member witnesses aren't exactly cooperative. It isn't uncommon to have the following:

"Good morning sir, can you state your name for the record?"
Fuck you.
"Do you know why you're here?"
Fuck you.
"At this time requesting the Court direct the witness to answer" (Judge: Lil Joker, can you please respond to the questions? If not I'll have to hold you in contempt"
Fuck you.
"Witness ordered remanded, setting an OSC re sanctions"
"People call Officer So and So to the stand"

If a witness refuses to cooperate, it opens a door to allowing hearsay. That's how most statements come in, in cases like that. Live testimony is always a gamble. I'd prefer to have prior recorded statements be the evidence. Plus, it prevents the defense from impeaching the witness with his past.
 
Bonanza said:
The hardest part of my job isn't asking the questions, it's getting the people into Court. Most of my time is spent trying to track down witnesses, serving them, and then bringing them into court. It's a huge PITA. You might imagine that gang member witnesses aren't exactly cooperative. It isn't uncommon to have the following:

"Good morning sir, can you state your name for the record?"
Fuck you.
"Do you know why you're here?"
Fuck you.
"At this time requesting the Court direct the witness to answer" (Judge: Lil Joker, can you please respond to the questions? If not I'll have to hold you in contempt"
Fuck you.
"Witness ordered remanded, setting an OSC re sanctions"
Click to expand...

I should have been a gang member, i could nail that role on the witness stand tout de suite, with some pleasure :lmao:

Again, an excellent view into a prosecutor's world, ty bonanza. I get the criminal adjacent bullshit, i have tenants that are not exactly pinnacles of society at times, and their friends can be generally douchey and/or cannot be trusted to tell me the truth, ever.
 
For whatever reason they allowed Madison Coen, the drunk twat from the 3rd group that escalated the situation, to not testify on camera or audio.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Back Refresh