Physicians Assistant yelling “HELP ME” while stealing a CitiBike ?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it strange that there is nothing on the internet about the 5 men (or boys) harassing her. Nothing.

Like Google is protecting them.

As it should be. There is absolutely no need to ruin more lives over a misunderstanding. One person being treated this way is too many.

And if this wasn't a misunderstanding, but a deliberate effort to find a white woman to harass (and cause the internet to also harass) as an exercise in "punching up" (a.k.a. channeling rage upon the head of a convenient scapegoat)? Still ok for these guys to face zero consequences, and for others to know they can continue to target women without censure?

Personally, as a woman, I'm ok with the boys not facing consequences. They are kids. It appears that they were looking to stir up trouble with this woman and film it, as evidenced by the friend in the hoodie who seemed disinterested and willing to walk away. This was, at most, a misunderstanding between regular people that should have ended when the parties went their separate ways. It doesn't matter what happens to the boys because they don't have the power to correct the wrong that has been done (assuming that one has been done). It's far more important to address this through the channels that caused this story to blow up. I agree with others that there need to be major changes to the restrictions for online platforms to prevent regular people's lives from being unfairly ruined by an internet mob. It's one thing if you are a public figure, but regular people should not have their careers ruined and their families' safety threatened as a result of an out-of-context two-minute video clip.

They are not kids and knew exactly what they were doing. What next, the do something worse as people like you want to give them a free pass? They should be held accountable.

Let's talk about the atmosphere of consequence-free lawlessness we are experiencing in our cities. I have always lived in central city neighborhoods and I am not ok with this.

The lawyer is doing what he needs to do for his client, even if that means limiting his focus to the things he can practically affect. But the rest of us need to stop excusing antisocial behavior.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it strange that there is nothing on the internet about the 5 men (or boys) harassing her. Nothing.

Like Google is protecting them.

As it should be. There is absolutely no need to ruin more lives over a misunderstanding. One person being treated this way is too many.

And if this wasn't a misunderstanding, but a deliberate effort to find a white woman to harass (and cause the internet to also harass) as an exercise in "punching up" (a.k.a. channeling rage upon the head of a convenient scapegoat)? Still ok for these guys to face zero consequences, and for others to know they can continue to target women without censure?

The woman who was actually present and involved has said it was a misunderstanding. While you may not respect her enough to believe her or to think she is capable of assessing the situation, her lawyer does. Dismissing what she says to make up a false narrative that is based on solely on personal assumptions and biases and not on fact to say this was a deliberate act to find a white woman to harrass is no better than making up a false narrative that she was a racist stealing a bike.

The woman has spoken through her lawyer and stated her interpretation and what she wants from this. Lets give her basic respect that she is a competent and capable woman who is able to understand and interpret the situation she was in and to state her wants and needs.

I'm pretty sure she and her attorney are describing this as a "misunderstanding" with their eyes on the more productive goal for her rehabilitation. It is the fiction everyone needs to accept in order to move forward.

But come on. We still know this was a set-up to cause trouble for a white woman.

No we don't. She was there, before, during and after. We weren't there. We see a clip of part of an interaction between people. I have no reason to think she isn't capable of understnading the situation that she was in. I don't think I know better than she does what her experience was or what the situation was. Sure, like you, I can fabricate a story about a clip of part of a sitation that I wasn't involved in but why? When teh woman who was there from beginning to end has stated what happened from her perspective (via her lawyer), I am not in any way going to think my made up view of a piece of the situation is a better interpration than hers. People doing what you are doing is the whole reason she is in the current distress and situation that she is.

You don't have any experience of PR to draw from in evaluating this situation? Yes, I believe she fully understands the situation she was in. Those men harassed her intentionally.

But her attorney's statement holds back from describing the full extent as a practical means to the best realistic end. Too many people are unwilling to hear that she was intentionally harassed on the street, or perhaps they think that's fine. It is better to limit public focus to the gleeful rumor-spreaders.

I agree with this decision but let's have our eyes open. Especially if we're white women of a certain age who live in central-city neighborhoods. We should acknowledge the target on our backs.

You are picking and choosing that some of what she has said is factual and some is PR. You believe the parts of what she says that fit your own biases and you refuse to accept the possibility that black young men could be involved in a misunderstanding as that doesn't fit your biases. Your view is that the only option is that they had to be a mob harrassing her and intentionally there to channel rage on the head of a convenient scapegoat because she was a white women and they were young black men. You don't believe parts of her version because you don't believe that there could be a mild confrontation between a white woman and young black men that was just a misunderstanding as that goes against your own biases. So you have decided that you know better than her what happened, despite having a very limited view compared to her.

Let me introduce you to the concept of "spin."

Let me introduce you to the concepts of 'internalized racism" and "cognitive bias" and "ego".

You have succinctly described Monique Judge.

And you are doing the same as she is...just to different people in the scenario.

I agree you are both sure that your biased interpretation is the only one, regardless of the facts in front of you, and think you kow better than the people involved. You are just biased and discriiminatory towards different people than she is.

[Anonymous]

She is not going after the black guy for one reason and one reason only - she will be accused once again of being a racist. The only option is for her to say she wished them well and move on to the media that slandered her. It’s a smart move. But it still lets the guy get away with the ridiculous sh¡t he pulled, sadly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:She is not going after the black guy for one reason and one reason only - she will be accused once again of being a racist. The only option is for her to say she wished them well and move on to the media that slandered her. It’s a smart move. But it still lets the guy get away with the ridiculous sh¡t he pulled, sadly.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it strange that there is nothing on the internet about the 5 men (or boys) harassing her. Nothing.

Like Google is protecting them.

As it should be. There is absolutely no need to ruin more lives over a misunderstanding. One person being treated this way is too many.

And if this wasn't a misunderstanding, but a deliberate effort to find a white woman to harass (and cause the internet to also harass) as an exercise in "punching up" (a.k.a. channeling rage upon the head of a convenient scapegoat)? Still ok for these guys to face zero consequences, and for others to know they can continue to target women without censure?

The woman who was actually present and involved has said it was a misunderstanding. While you may not respect her enough to believe her or to think she is capable of assessing the situation, her lawyer does. Dismissing what she says to make up a false narrative that is based on solely on personal assumptions and biases and not on fact to say this was a deliberate act to find a white woman to harrass is no better than making up a false narrative that she was a racist stealing a bike.

The woman has spoken through her lawyer and stated her interpretation and what she wants from this. Lets give her basic respect that she is a competent and capable woman who is able to understand and interpret the situation she was in and to state her wants and needs.

I'm pretty sure she and her attorney are describing this as a "misunderstanding" with their eyes on the more productive goal for her rehabilitation. It is the fiction everyone needs to accept in order to move forward.

But come on. We still know this was a set-up to cause trouble for a white woman.

No we don't. She was there, before, during and after. We weren't there. We see a clip of part of an interaction between people. I have no reason to think she isn't capable of understnading the situation that she was in. I don't think I know better than she does what her experience was or what the situation was. Sure, like you, I can fabricate a story about a clip of part of a sitation that I wasn't involved in but why? When teh woman who was there from beginning to end has stated what happened from her perspective (via her lawyer), I am not in any way going to think my made up view of a piece of the situation is a better interpration than hers. People doing what you are doing is the whole reason she is in the current distress and situation that she is.

You don't have any experience of PR to draw from in evaluating this situation? Yes, I believe she fully understands the situation she was in. Those men harassed her intentionally.

But her attorney's statement holds back from describing the full extent as a practical means to the best realistic end. Too many people are unwilling to hear that she was intentionally harassed on the street, or perhaps they think that's fine. It is better to limit public focus to the gleeful rumor-spreaders.

I agree with this decision but let's have our eyes open. Especially if we're white women of a certain age who live in central-city neighborhoods. We should acknowledge the target on our backs.

You are picking and choosing that some of what she has said is factual and some is PR. You believe the parts of what she says that fit your own biases and you refuse to accept the possibility that black young men could be involved in a misunderstanding as that doesn't fit your biases. Your view is that the only option is that they had to be a mob harrassing her and intentionally there to channel rage on the head of a convenient scapegoat because she was a white women and they were young black men. You don't believe parts of her version because you don't believe that there could be a mild confrontation between a white woman and young black men that was just a misunderstanding as that goes against your own biases. So you have decided that you know better than her what happened, despite having a very limited view compared to her.

Let me introduce you to the concept of "spin."

Let me introduce you to the concepts of 'internalized racism" and "cognitive bias" and "ego".

You have succinctly described Monique Judge.

And you are doing the same as she is...just to different people in the scenario.

I agree you are both sure that your biased interpretation is the only one, regardless of the facts in front of you, and think you kow better than the people involved. You are just biased and discriiminatory towards different people than she is.

It’s not even worth explaining the complete differences in both situations. You won’t understand it anyway.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So, what exactly was the “misunderstanding”?
The perps “thought” it was their bike?

[Anonymous]

The lawyer doesn’t need to go after the young men. He just needs to show the receipts which he has, and which explain the situation clearly. The young men are too young to have any assets worth pursuing, unlike the media companies and figures. So why go after the young men? It’s not worth it to the case, and by not going after them, his client looks like the far better person.

We all know what happened here. He doesn’t need to say anything further.

If there was a world in which the young men were remotely close to being victims themselves, attorneys would be falling all over themselves to take their cases. Hence the obvious truth of the matter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it strange that there is nothing on the internet about the 5 men (or boys) harassing her. Nothing.

Like Google is protecting them.

As it should be. There is absolutely no need to ruin more lives over a misunderstanding. One person being treated this way is too many.

And if this wasn't a misunderstanding, but a deliberate effort to find a white woman to harass (and cause the internet to also harass) as an exercise in "punching up" (a.k.a. channeling rage upon the head of a convenient scapegoat)? Still ok for these guys to face zero consequences, and for others to know they can continue to target women without censure?

The woman who was actually present and involved has said it was a misunderstanding. While you may not respect her enough to believe her or to think she is capable of assessing the situation, her lawyer does. Dismissing what she says to make up a false narrative that is based on solely on personal assumptions and biases and not on fact to say this was a deliberate act to find a white woman to harrass is no better than making up a false narrative that she was a racist stealing a bike.

The woman has spoken through her lawyer and stated her interpretation and what she wants from this. Lets give her basic respect that she is a competent and capable woman who is able to understand and interpret the situation she was in and to state her wants and needs.

I'm pretty sure she and her attorney are describing this as a "misunderstanding" with their eyes on the more productive goal for her rehabilitation. It is the fiction everyone needs to accept in order to move forward.

But come on. We still know this was a set-up to cause trouble for a white woman.

No we don't. She was there, before, during and after. We weren't there. We see a clip of part of an interaction between people. I have no reason to think she isn't capable of understnading the situation that she was in. I don't think I know better than she does what her experience was or what the situation was. Sure, like you, I can fabricate a story about a clip of part of a sitation that I wasn't involved in but why? When teh woman who was there from beginning to end has stated what happened from her perspective (via her lawyer), I am not in any way going to think my made up view of a piece of the situation is a better interpration than hers. People doing what you are doing is the whole reason she is in the current distress and situation that she is.

You don't have any experience of PR to draw from in evaluating this situation? Yes, I believe she fully understands the situation she was in. Those men harassed her intentionally.

But her attorney's statement holds back from describing the full extent as a practical means to the best realistic end. Too many people are unwilling to hear that she was intentionally harassed on the street, or perhaps they think that's fine. It is better to limit public focus to the gleeful rumor-spreaders.

I agree with this decision but let's have our eyes open. Especially if we're white women of a certain age who live in central-city neighborhoods. We should acknowledge the target on our backs.

You are picking and choosing that some of what she has said is factual and some is PR. You believe the parts of what she says that fit your own biases and you refuse to accept the possibility that black young men could be involved in a misunderstanding as that doesn't fit your biases. Your view is that the only option is that they had to be a mob harrassing her and intentionally there to channel rage on the head of a convenient scapegoat because she was a white women and they were young black men. You don't believe parts of her version because you don't believe that there could be a mild confrontation between a white woman and young black men that was just a misunderstanding as that goes against your own biases. So you have decided that you know better than her what happened, despite having a very limited view compared to her.

Let me introduce you to the concept of "spin."

Let me introduce you to the concepts of 'internalized racism" and "cognitive bias" and "ego".

You have succinctly described Monique Judge.

And you are doing the same as she is...just to different people in the scenario.

I agree you are both sure that your biased interpretation is the only one, regardless of the facts in front of you, and think you kow better than the people involved. You are just biased and discriiminatory towards different people than she is.

It’s not even worth explaining the complete differences in both situations. You won’t understand it anyway.

Her view is that there is only one way to interpret the white woman's behaviour and that is through the lens of intentional malice and your view is that there is only one way to interpret the black men's behaviour and that is through the lens of intentional malice. There really is no differnence. Both of you have the close minded view of how certain people act and believe that one party involved is only capable of intentional malice and therefore you feel you can interpret with certainty what people were thinking and doing before an after a video clip. Both of you are prepared to dismiss facts and statements by the woman involved as it doesn't fit your view that specific people involved are only capable of intentional malice. Neither of you can accept that there could have been a misunderstanding about renting bikes as that goes against your beliefs that one party is only capable of intentional malice and perpetrating harm against others.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If this man is in the right, why not come forward with your receipt as everything is online and he clearly has a phone and speak the truth.

Don’t worry. They’ll be subpeonaed for discovery in the PA’s lawsuits.

Only if the PA pays to find them. So far the police haven't acknowledged anything needing their involvement, and the perpetrators are in hiding.

Citibike has the records and can easily be subpeonaed. And she’s raised all she needs for legal expenses. Not that subpeonaing these records is an expensive task.

I understand you don’t know how litigation and discovery works but feel free to ask questions instead of showing off your ignorance.

Since you're such a talented, high powered attorney, why don't you do it pro bono?
It's a BIG case!!!!!

A lawyer very similar to me has taken it. And I’m sure he’ll make more than enough for it to have been worth his time.

That just goes to show how both of you are idiots, wasting your time suing some kids who don't have a pot to piss in.

Let me guess, the ambulance chaser is also going to sue anonymous people on the internet for calling people names?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure why people think the teenagers somehow were trying to ruin her life-they were being terrible for sure, but I think they were trying to be malicious idiots in the moment, not ruin her life. just because they videoed and posted it they had no way of knowing so many people with big audiences would run with the misleading clip. Newsflash-many teens video literally everything and post all manner of stuff without thinking it will go viral.

1st time poster because I’m always a fact gatherer. You are naive pp. These young men are part of the native digital GenZ. Of course, it was maliciously filmed. Now with more info, I’ll state my opinion because I’m a reliable narrator having lived these types of scenarios. These guys were hanging around looking for an opportunity to start trouble. I won’t go as far as saying it was premeditated, but I know the type well. She was an easy target. Her attorney is clever by stating no animosity towards the men, and we wish them well. Lmao! His purpose for now is to protect his client and toss some water on the embers. Watch what happens. A canary in the bunch will surface. The victim should enjoy the remainder of her pregnancy at home. Bellevue will pay for extended pre/post maternity leave.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it strange that there is nothing on the internet about the 5 men (or boys) harassing her. Nothing.

Like Google is protecting them.

As it should be. There is absolutely no need to ruin more lives over a misunderstanding. One person being treated this way is too many.

And if this wasn't a misunderstanding, but a deliberate effort to find a white woman to harass (and cause the internet to also harass) as an exercise in "punching up" (a.k.a. channeling rage upon the head of a convenient scapegoat)? Still ok for these guys to face zero consequences, and for others to know they can continue to target women without censure?

The woman who was actually present and involved has said it was a misunderstanding. While you may not respect her enough to believe her or to think she is capable of assessing the situation, her lawyer does. Dismissing what she says to make up a false narrative that is based on solely on personal assumptions and biases and not on fact to say this was a deliberate act to find a white woman to harrass is no better than making up a false narrative that she was a racist stealing a bike.

The woman has spoken through her lawyer and stated her interpretation and what she wants from this. Lets give her basic respect that she is a competent and capable woman who is able to understand and interpret the situation she was in and to state her wants and needs.

I'm pretty sure she and her attorney are describing this as a "misunderstanding" with their eyes on the more productive goal for her rehabilitation. It is the fiction everyone needs to accept in order to move forward.

But come on. We still know this was a set-up to cause trouble for a white woman.

No we don't. She was there, before, during and after. We weren't there. We see a clip of part of an interaction between people. I have no reason to think she isn't capable of understnading the situation that she was in. I don't think I know better than she does what her experience was or what the situation was. Sure, like you, I can fabricate a story about a clip of part of a sitation that I wasn't involved in but why? When teh woman who was there from beginning to end has stated what happened from her perspective (via her lawyer), I am not in any way going to think my made up view of a piece of the situation is a better interpration than hers. People doing what you are doing is the whole reason she is in the current distress and situation that she is.

You don't have any experience of PR to draw from in evaluating this situation? Yes, I believe she fully understands the situation she was in. Those men harassed her intentionally.

But her attorney's statement holds back from describing the full extent as a practical means to the best realistic end. Too many people are unwilling to hear that she was intentionally harassed on the street, or perhaps they think that's fine. It is better to limit public focus to the gleeful rumor-spreaders.

I agree with this decision but let's have our eyes open. Especially if we're white women of a certain age who live in central-city neighborhoods. We should acknowledge the target on our backs.

You are picking and choosing that some of what she has said is factual and some is PR. You believe the parts of what she says that fit your own biases and you refuse to accept the possibility that black young men could be involved in a misunderstanding as that doesn't fit your biases. Your view is that the only option is that they had to be a mob harrassing her and intentionally there to channel rage on the head of a convenient scapegoat because she was a white women and they were young black men. You don't believe parts of her version because you don't believe that there could be a mild confrontation between a white woman and young black men that was just a misunderstanding as that goes against your own biases. So you have decided that you know better than her what happened, despite having a very limited view compared to her.

Let me introduce you to the concept of "spin."

Let me introduce you to the concepts of 'internalized racism" and "cognitive bias" and "ego".

You have succinctly described Monique Judge.

And you are doing the same as she is...just to different people in the scenario.

I agree you are both sure that your biased interpretation is the only one, regardless of the facts in front of you, and think you kow better than the people involved. You are just biased and discriiminatory towards different people than she is.

It’s not even worth explaining the complete differences in both situations. You won’t understand it anyway.

Her view is that there is only one way to interpret the white woman's behaviour and that is through the lens of intentional malice and your view is that there is only one way to interpret the black men's behaviour and that is through the lens of intentional malice. There really is no differnence. Both of you have the close minded view of how certain people act and believe that one party involved is only capable of intentional malice and therefore you feel you can interpret with certainty what people were thinking and doing before an after a video clip. Both of you are prepared to dismiss facts and statements by the woman involved as it doesn't fit your view that specific people involved are only capable of intentional malice. Neither of you can accept that there could have been a misunderstanding about renting bikes as that goes against your beliefs that one party is only capable of intentional malice and perpetrating harm against others.

Nope. No one is harassing the black guy - just asking him to come forward with his side of the story. If we were doxxing him and calling for mobs and pitchforks you’d have a point. Asking for him to simply come forward with his explanation is completely different.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m not sure why people think the teenagers somehow were trying to ruin her life-they were being terrible for sure, but I think they were trying to be malicious idiots in the moment, not ruin her life. just because they videoed and posted it they had no way of knowing so many people with big audiences would run with the misleading clip. Newsflash-many teens video literally everything and post all manner of stuff without thinking it will go viral.

1st time poster because I’m always a fact gatherer. You are naive pp. These young men are part of the native digital GenZ. Of course, it was maliciously filmed. Now with more info, I’ll state my opinion because I’m a reliable narrator having lived these types of scenarios. These guys were hanging around looking for an opportunity to start trouble. I won’t go as far as saying it was premeditated, but I know the type well. She was an easy target. Her attorney is clever by stating no animosity towards the men, and we wish them well. Lmao! His purpose for now is to protect his client and toss some water on the embers. Watch what happens. A canary in the bunch will surface. The victim should enjoy the remainder of her pregnancy at home. Bellevue will pay for extended pre/post maternity leave.

It’s precisely bc they’re gen z that I think (while they were being awful and rude if not worse) they had no idea they would ruin her life. Kids (even relatively nice ones) film all the time-they do it to show their friends and perhaps think one in 100 of their absurd videos will go mildly viral among there peers. This is not an excuse for them but more I think others are more responsible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it strange that there is nothing on the internet about the 5 men (or boys) harassing her. Nothing.

Like Google is protecting them.

As it should be. There is absolutely no need to ruin more lives over a misunderstanding. One person being treated this way is too many.

And if this wasn't a misunderstanding, but a deliberate effort to find a white woman to harass (and cause the internet to also harass) as an exercise in "punching up" (a.k.a. channeling rage upon the head of a convenient scapegoat)? Still ok for these guys to face zero consequences, and for others to know they can continue to target women without censure?

The woman who was actually present and involved has said it was a misunderstanding. While you may not respect her enough to believe her or to think she is capable of assessing the situation, her lawyer does. Dismissing what she says to make up a false narrative that is based on solely on personal assumptions and biases and not on fact to say this was a deliberate act to find a white woman to harrass is no better than making up a false narrative that she was a racist stealing a bike.

The woman has spoken through her lawyer and stated her interpretation and what she wants from this. Lets give her basic respect that she is a competent and capable woman who is able to understand and interpret the situation she was in and to state her wants and needs.

I'm pretty sure she and her attorney are describing this as a "misunderstanding" with their eyes on the more productive goal for her rehabilitation. It is the fiction everyone needs to accept in order to move forward.

But come on. We still know this was a set-up to cause trouble for a white woman.

No we don't. She was there, before, during and after. We weren't there. We see a clip of part of an interaction between people. I have no reason to think she isn't capable of understnading the situation that she was in. I don't think I know better than she does what her experience was or what the situation was. Sure, like you, I can fabricate a story about a clip of part of a sitation that I wasn't involved in but why? When teh woman who was there from beginning to end has stated what happened from her perspective (via her lawyer), I am not in any way going to think my made up view of a piece of the situation is a better interpration than hers. People doing what you are doing is the whole reason she is in the current distress and situation that she is.

You don't have any experience of PR to draw from in evaluating this situation? Yes, I believe she fully understands the situation she was in. Those men harassed her intentionally.

But her attorney's statement holds back from describing the full extent as a practical means to the best realistic end. Too many people are unwilling to hear that she was intentionally harassed on the street, or perhaps they think that's fine. It is better to limit public focus to the gleeful rumor-spreaders.

I agree with this decision but let's have our eyes open. Especially if we're white women of a certain age who live in central-city neighborhoods. We should acknowledge the target on our backs.

You are picking and choosing that some of what she has said is factual and some is PR. You believe the parts of what she says that fit your own biases and you refuse to accept the possibility that black young men could be involved in a misunderstanding as that doesn't fit your biases. Your view is that the only option is that they had to be a mob harrassing her and intentionally there to channel rage on the head of a convenient scapegoat because she was a white women and they were young black men. You don't believe parts of her version because you don't believe that there could be a mild confrontation between a white woman and young black men that was just a misunderstanding as that goes against your own biases. So you have decided that you know better than her what happened, despite having a very limited view compared to her.

Let me introduce you to the concept of "spin."

Let me introduce you to the concepts of 'internalized racism" and "cognitive bias" and "ego".

You have succinctly described Monique Judge.

And you are doing the same as she is...just to different people in the scenario.

I agree you are both sure that your biased interpretation is the only one, regardless of the facts in front of you, and think you kow better than the people involved. You are just biased and discriiminatory towards different people than she is.

Nobody believes your BS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I find it strange that there is nothing on the internet about the 5 men (or boys) harassing her. Nothing.

Like Google is protecting them.

As it should be. There is absolutely no need to ruin more lives over a misunderstanding. One person being treated this way is too many.

And if this wasn't a misunderstanding, but a deliberate effort to find a white woman to harass (and cause the internet to also harass) as an exercise in "punching up" (a.k.a. channeling rage upon the head of a convenient scapegoat)? Still ok for these guys to face zero consequences, and for others to know they can continue to target women without censure?

The woman who was actually present and involved has said it was a misunderstanding. While you may not respect her enough to believe her or to think she is capable of assessing the situation, her lawyer does. Dismissing what she says to make up a false narrative that is based on solely on personal assumptions and biases and not on fact to say this was a deliberate act to find a white woman to harrass is no better than making up a false narrative that she was a racist stealing a bike.

The woman has spoken through her lawyer and stated her interpretation and what she wants from this. Lets give her basic respect that she is a competent and capable woman who is able to understand and interpret the situation she was in and to state her wants and needs.

It was not a misunderstanding. It looked very calculated. She is just trying to play nice per her lawyer as she is now being targeted because of her race and because of her skin color there was no way she could be in the right. This is clearly racism at its finest. These men need to step up. The hospital and local businesses and police need to release any security footage and the bike company needs to produce records from both parties. Get an answer to who was right. That man had no right to grab the bike with her on it and shove it back into the holder because he wanted it. And his friend making the horrible comments should also be held accountable. and, if she stole the bike that’s between her and the police and company, not her employer as she was off duty not on hospital property.

[Anonymous]

For those who believe this was a gang of violent black men who set out to channel their rage against a white woman and they set out a trap and waited for their prey so they could terrorize, harrass, assault and threaten someone and make her fear for her life. Why would she not go after them legally? Why would she want the next white woman to walk out of the hospital to have to experience this angry mob of black men setting upon her with malicious intentions and wanting to harm her.

Why would she want to have a mob of angry black men who want only to harm white women and have only malicious intent to be on the street near her work where they can be violent towards others? She didn't shy away from immediately hiring a lawyer to deal with the employent issue, why wouldn't she press charges against this violent mob of men who set out to terrorize, assault, violate, harrass and harm her? while she managed to escape, the next woman might not be so fortunate. If that is what the video so clearly shows according to you and that no other possible interpretation is even believeable, then there should be no issue in having them arrested and making the area safer for her and other women she works with.

She clearly wants to go back to work given her immediate decision to hire an employment lawyer - why would she do that when she will need to fear for her life coming to and from work everyday due to the mob of angry black men who want to channel their rage against her and threaten her and her fetuses life?