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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the Citi Bike rules I read you have to wait 2 minutes. The bike is up for grabs in the down time. Otherwise don't be a cheap skate and just pay for the bike if you want it so bad.

And, it had been I forget but 5-7 minutes or so. I don't think it was so much about being cheap, but they were probably taking a break as they had a long ride and you only get a limited time.

You get more time, for a fee. So yes, it was about saving money.

More than two minutes had past so that is the issue. He hadn't rented it at that point she did. They could have traded bikes around too. It looks like you have to dock the bike.

[Anonymous]

I think the attorney released the unredacted receipts. Idk why this matters but it is an update.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In the Citi Bike rules I read you have to wait 2 minutes. The bike is up for grabs in the down time. Otherwise don't be a cheap skate and just pay for the bike if you want it so bad.

In fact I'm sure that's why there's an upcharge for time over 45 min in the first place. To discourage multi-hour monopolization of bikes.

I wish cafes had such a rule and people had to get up every 45 minutes so other people could sit down at a table.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So. Why were there multiple guys arguing over 1 bike with the PA? Had the other guys already rented bikes, or did they bring their own bikes?

This is an important question. Why did multiple men surround a lone, pregnant woman and proceed to terrorize her over the bike? Someone is filming the exchange and it ends up on social media.

Uh, huh.

They were bored, cruising around town and probably not very close to hone. But, it did seem a bit set up even if they didn't plan it as such.

It looked like some were sitting on their bikes and he wasn't on the bike, so he was either next to it or nearby.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The larger issue here is that she yelled and screamed bloody murder over a bike, which could have ended up causing a much more dangerous situation for the young men. This is why people are upset!!! Even if the teens had the bike, and then redocked it in order to reset the system. While she might have assumed it was free, the way she carried on over a bike is absurd.

In the video we see her attempting to snatch his phone, yell her head off and then carry on about him touching her stomach, even though he narrates to her to stop touching him, she continues to touch him and then make it about her unborn baby.

This is why people are outraged.

Omg she was not screaming bloody murder. Not even close. She yelled for help. A pretty lame yell at that. She was probably exhausted from her shift and just wanted out of the situation.

And yet for all the yelling she did, the dry tears and such, she immediately went along her merry way when a passerby merely suggested that she try for a different bike. She blanked for a minute, because you could tell that it never occurred to her to just check out the bike right next to the one she was carrying on about. This could have ended much earlier, if they had conveyed that they were waiting for the system to reset and if she had checked out the bike right next to their bike.

What on earth was she supposed to do? No one would care if she reported it to the police as it's been reported and the police have done nothing. So, her only option was to get off the bike, get a new one and go home. She was pregnant off a 12 hours shift. One can assume she was pretty tired.

Why didn't the men just change around bikes or take a free bike? None of that makes sense.

I mean she could have just pulled out her phone and called the citibike people off to the side and they would have locked the bike. She could have explained there was a dispute between the bikes and she was not sure who was the rightful owner. Instead she had a complete meltdown. I don't believe she was in fear because people in fear don't attempt to snatch a man's phone from his hand and touch him.

You won't answer the question: Why is this all on her? Why couldn't the guy have gotten a different bike?

Well she is the adult here, these are a group of young teens. Given their lack of maturity and that brains don't fully form into adulthood until you are at least 25. I think more responsibility lies on her from the perspective of a former teacher.

Does trolling pay better than teaching

+1. It staggers belief the lame excuses that poster keeps finding to exonerate the guys and put all the blame on the PA. Do you have to be 35 to realize there's another bike two docks away and you could use that instead?

What is unclear is if other bikes were available or did someone get off their bike and dock it for her to rent it. Either way, she didn't call the police or security. She rented another bike per others advice, went home and thought that was the end of it. Instead one of the boys (or maybe even this sister) posted the video online which started the drama.

Which means they’re doubly in the wrong. They were jerks about trying to hoard a bike. And then what should have been a stupid incident everyone involved forgot about within a few days turned into online defamation and doxxing. There’s been so much focus on the bike and their actions during the incident. But it’s their online behavior that is even more atrocious.

They wanted to ruin this woman. They wanted to portray her as an evil “Karen” so they could get their 15 minutes of fame in the spotlight of the SJW social media frenzy. They’re pretty horrible human beings and the sister is nuts to be out there trying to defend this nonsense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the attorney released the unredacted receipts. Idk why this matters but it is an update.

It matters because the sister released either her or the bother's receipt showing the times he rented it. He rented it for a period of time (30-45 minutes or so), docked it and it wasn't rented at the time. She rented it after he docked it. After she rented it, he got mad, and shoved it back in the dock so he could rent it. That's what all the receipts show us. He's claiming it was his bike when in reality it was no one's bike as no one was paying for it at the time she paid for it. His intention was to rent it again to get home/go somewhere else but he was not renting it when she took the bike.

However, it's pretty clear he wasn't trying to steal the bike or he wouldn't have pushed it back into the dock. He was taking a break then planning to rent it later on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The larger issue here is that she yelled and screamed bloody murder over a bike, which could have ended up causing a much more dangerous situation for the young men. This is why people are upset!!! Even if the teens had the bike, and then redocked it in order to reset the system. While she might have assumed it was free, the way she carried on over a bike is absurd.

In the video we see her attempting to snatch his phone, yell her head off and then carry on about him touching her stomach, even though he narrates to her to stop touching him, she continues to touch him and then make it about her unborn baby.

This is why people are outraged.

Omg she was not screaming bloody murder. Not even close. She yelled for help. A pretty lame yell at that. She was probably exhausted from her shift and just wanted out of the situation.

And yet for all the yelling she did, the dry tears and such, she immediately went along her merry way when a passerby merely suggested that she try for a different bike. She blanked for a minute, because you could tell that it never occurred to her to just check out the bike right next to the one she was carrying on about. This could have ended much earlier, if they had conveyed that they were waiting for the system to reset and if she had checked out the bike right next to their bike.

What on earth was she supposed to do? No one would care if she reported it to the police as it's been reported and the police have done nothing. So, her only option was to get off the bike, get a new one and go home. She was pregnant off a 12 hours shift. One can assume she was pretty tired.

Why didn't the men just change around bikes or take a free bike? None of that makes sense.

I mean she could have just pulled out her phone and called the citibike people off to the side and they would have locked the bike. She could have explained there was a dispute between the bikes and she was not sure who was the rightful owner. Instead she had a complete meltdown. I don't believe she was in fear because people in fear don't attempt to snatch a man's phone from his hand and touch him.

You won't answer the question: Why is this all on her? Why couldn't the guy have gotten a different bike?

Well she is the adult here, these are a group of young teens. Given their lack of maturity and that brains don't fully form into adulthood until you are at least 25. I think more responsibility lies on her from the perspective of a former teacher.

Does trolling pay better than teaching

+1. It staggers belief the lame excuses that poster keeps finding to exonerate the guys and put all the blame on the PA. Do you have to be 35 to realize there's another bike two docks away and you could use that instead?

What is unclear is if other bikes were available or did someone get off their bike and dock it for her to rent it. Either way, she didn't call the police or security. She rented another bike per others advice, went home and thought that was the end of it. Instead one of the boys (or maybe even this sister) posted the video online which started the drama.

Which means they’re doubly in the wrong. They were jerks about trying to hoard a bike. And then what should have been a stupid incident everyone involved forgot about within a few days turned into online defamation and doxxing. There’s been so much focus on the bike and their actions during the incident. But it’s their online behavior that is even more atrocious.

They wanted to ruin this woman. They wanted to portray her as an evil “Karen” so they could get their 15 minutes of fame in the spotlight of the SJW social media frenzy. They’re pretty horrible human beings and the sister is nuts to be out there trying to defend this nonsense.

I don't think we can speculate what they were trying to do. They may have just been entertained and posted the video without thinking of the consequences. Who knows. They were horrible to her regardless. The question is who posted that video. I wonder if the sister did.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The larger issue here is that she yelled and screamed bloody murder over a bike, which could have ended up causing a much more dangerous situation for the young men. This is why people are upset!!! Even if the teens had the bike, and then redocked it in order to reset the system. While she might have assumed it was free, the way she carried on over a bike is absurd.

In the video we see her attempting to snatch his phone, yell her head off and then carry on about him touching her stomach, even though he narrates to her to stop touching him, she continues to touch him and then make it about her unborn baby.

This is why people are outraged.

She didn't yell and scream and stop making it about those men as the victim when they aren't. She grabbed his phone to see the receipt. If they are such fine men, why not stand up and say your side. The sisters side makes sense.

There is a double standard in your analysis. No woman should assault a man by grabbing at his phone to get her way. If this had been reversed, a man doing this to a group of women, there would be outcry. She should keep her hands to herself.

She was wrong to grab the phone but she was also probably trying to get her to let her go and he's basically restraining her. If he wanted that bike, his rear end should have been on it holding it. She was probably trying to look at the receipt.

How was he restraining her? He restrained the bike but not her person.

He reached across her pregnant belly to scan his QR code. He touched her then.

That doesn't really meet anyone's definition of restraining. Are you the same crazy person who said that she was kidnapped?

The things you are saying don't really exist in reality.

You're arguing in bad faith. Several pp's have explained to you that the guy held onto the bike with her on it, after pushing it back into the dock with her on it. That's bodily restraint.

Then, pp with the kidnapping was making an analogy. Presumably you know what an analogy is, but here you are pretending that was an actual claim.

Also, all your ad hominems are just childish.

If you want to persuade anybody about your position, you need to start arguing in good faith.

PP again. The point about kidnapping is a simile not an analogy, if it matters. Same point--if you're pretending that was an actual argument, you need to grow up.

+1
Let's just ignore the troll so this thread doesn't get locked. This is her little pet project so she takes everything personally.

[Anonymous]

If he was trying to take the bike from her, eg shove the bike with her on it into the dock then rent it himself, wouldn’t this receipt show that happened? That’s what it looks like to me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The larger issue here is that she yelled and screamed bloody murder over a bike, which could have ended up causing a much more dangerous situation for the young men. This is why people are upset!!! Even if the teens had the bike, and then redocked it in order to reset the system. While she might have assumed it was free, the way she carried on over a bike is absurd.

In the video we see her attempting to snatch his phone, yell her head off and then carry on about him touching her stomach, even though he narrates to her to stop touching him, she continues to touch him and then make it about her unborn baby.

This is why people are outraged.

She didn't yell and scream and stop making it about those men as the victim when they aren't. She grabbed his phone to see the receipt. If they are such fine men, why not stand up and say your side. The sisters side makes sense.

There is a double standard in your analysis. No woman should assault a man by grabbing at his phone to get her way. If this had been reversed, a man doing this to a group of women, there would be outcry. She should keep her hands to herself.

She was wrong to grab the phone but she was also probably trying to get her to let her go and he's basically restraining her. If he wanted that bike, his rear end should have been on it holding it. She was probably trying to look at the receipt.

How was he restraining her? He restrained the bike but not her person.

He reached across her pregnant belly to scan his QR code. He touched her then.

That doesn't really meet anyone's definition of restraining. Are you the same crazy person who said that she was kidnapped?

The things you are saying don't really exist in reality.

You're arguing in bad faith. Several pp's have explained to you that the guy held onto the bike with her on it, after pushing it back into the dock with her on it. That's bodily restraint.

Then, pp with the kidnapping was making an analogy. Presumably you know what an analogy is, but here you are pretending that was an actual claim.

Also, all your ad hominems are just childish.

If you want to persuade anybody about your position, you need to start arguing in good faith.

Your position borders on insanity, so it's not like you have any room to talk. You obviously know nothing about criminal law and the realities of our criminal justice system. Nobody is going to be charged for holding onto a bike. It's just not that serious.

I'm criticizing your rhetoric, not arguing about criminal law. But sure, throw in some red herrings about criminal law, that's sleazy rhetoric too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think the attorney released the unredacted receipts. Idk why this matters but it is an update.

Wow. Her story lines up exactly then with the sister’s attempt to exonerate.

7:19: He docks the bike and gets off it. Sister states he does this voluntarily.
7:24: She is on bike and rents it. He pushes her back into dock, ending rental.
7:24: Video starts with her upset due to forgoing. He has hand blocking the QR code
7:25: He rents bike while she is sitting on it

Conclusion: There is zero basis to claim she is a “thief”. That’s a defamatory statement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If he was trying to take the bike from her, eg shove the bike with her on it into the dock then rent it himself, wouldn’t this receipt show that happened? That’s what it looks like to me.

When you look at his receipt and hers, yes, its pretty clear he was trying to hold on to the bike to rent it at some point in the future but he was not renting it at the time per the receipts the sister posted. He rented it for a long ride, he docked it as you have a time limit, so either to rest, meet up with others or to rent it again but at the time she walked up, it wasn't being rented by him. He was nearby and it sounds like she asked to rent the bike twice and he said no, but she choose to rent it anyway as he was not renting it. Both handled the situation poorly in all reality but he was not renting the bike at the time she rented it. He docked it with her on it so he could rent it and switch the bike from her account to his account. Neither stole or was stealing the bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:So. Why were there multiple guys arguing over 1 bike with the PA? Had the other guys already rented bikes, or did they bring their own bikes?

This is an important question. Why did multiple men surround a lone, pregnant woman and proceed to terrorize her over the bike? Someone is filming the exchange and it ends up on social media.

Uh, huh.

Especially as there were other bikes available to rent, as she showed by giving up and renting one of these others.

[Anonymous]

It seems to me that her unredacted receipt and what the sister said prove that the PA was telling the truth and was right to be calling for help and scared.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the attorney released the unredacted receipts. Idk why this matters but it is an update.

Wow. Her story lines up exactly then with the sister’s attempt to exonerate.

7:19: He docks the bike and gets off it. Sister states he does this voluntarily.
7:24: She is on bike and rents it. He pushes her back into dock, ending rental.
7:24: Video starts with her upset due to forgoing. He has hand blocking the QR code
7:25: He rents bike while she is sitting on it

Conclusion: There is zero basis to claim she is a “thief”. That’s a defamatory statement.

The sister helped her out big time. I think from the sister's statement she asked him to rent the bike twice and he said no.