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

[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.

Yeah, this looks like it exonerates her. Weird how the sister supported the PA unintentionally.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um but he did assault her. “Docked the bike with her on it.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This isn't what is clear. There was another young man on a bike pulled out and I wonder if he put his bike back in the dock for her to rent as he wasn't participating and he was on his phone looking down and made some comments to the others to back off.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um but he did assault her. “Docked the bike with her on it.”

Technically yes, he did assault her and was aggressive toward her but overall they don't appear like they intended to harm or attack her (he was still absolutely in the wrong to grab the bike with her on it). I don't get why she (if what the sister is saying is true) would take this bike if he was holding onto it vs. another bike but maybe there was no other bike.

[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.

The receipt shows she rented the bike for one minute, and that's consistent with her renting it and then him shoving it back into the dock with her on it.

She has another receipt for a second bike she rented a few minutes later to get home.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yeah, this looks like it exonerates her. Weird how the sister supported the PA unintentionally.

The sister is young, didn't think it through, probably didn't talk to an attorney and did a video trying to defend her brother. Taking her story as fact, it is clear he wasn't renting the bike at the time (but planned to rent it at some point). It all makes sense as both stories kinda aligned but didn't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um but he did assault her. “Docked the bike with her on it.”

Technically yes, he did assault her and was aggressive toward her but overall they don't appear like they intended to harm or attack her (he was still absolutely in the wrong to grab the bike with her on it). I don't get why she (if what the sister is saying is true) would take this bike if he was holding onto it vs. another bike but maybe there was no other bike.

She rode home on a different bike. I presume/hope it was another electric bike, but I don't know that for sure. So yes to what you're saying, this bike must have looked untended to her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um but he did assault her. “Docked the bike with her on it.”

Technically yes, he did assault her and was aggressive toward her but overall they don't appear like they intended to harm or attack her (he was still absolutely in the wrong to grab the bike with her on it). I don't get why she (if what the sister is saying is true) would take this bike if he was holding onto it vs. another bike but maybe there was no other bike.

They both felt entitled to the bike, for different reasons. The whole thing is stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

The receipt shows she rented the bike for one minute, and that's consistent with her renting it and then him shoving it back into the dock with her on it.

She has another receipt for a second bike she rented a few minutes later to get home.

He had to be close by if he grabbed her on the bike and shoved it back in that quickly.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um but he did assault her. “Docked the bike with her on it.”

Technically yes, he did assault her and was aggressive toward her but overall they don't appear like they intended to harm or attack her (he was still absolutely in the wrong to grab the bike with her on it). I don't get why she (if what the sister is saying is true) would take this bike if he was holding onto it vs. another bike but maybe there was no other bike.

They both felt entitled to the bike, for different reasons. The whole thing is stupid.

Agree. I wouldn't call it a misunderstanding but both were absurd. It had nothing to do with race. Wasn't racism. Both wanted a bike to ride and for what ever reason either no other bikes were available or what insisted they get that particular bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yeah, this looks like it exonerates her. Weird how the sister supported the PA unintentionally.

The sister is young, didn't think it through, probably didn't talk to an attorney and did a video trying to defend her brother. Taking her story as fact, it is clear he wasn't renting the bike at the time (but planned to rent it at some point). It all makes sense as both stories kinda aligned but didn't.

The sister is an idiot who wanted a viral video

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This isn't what is clear. There was another young man on a bike pulled out and I wonder if he put his bike back in the dock for her to rent as he wasn't participating and he was on his phone looking down and made some comments to the others to back off.

This is a possibility. One of the guys definitely had reservations about what they others were doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This isn't what is clear. There was another young man on a bike pulled out and I wonder if he put his bike back in the dock for her to rent as he wasn't participating and he was on his phone looking down and made some comments to the others to back off.

Yes. That is what I think too. The video does not show the whole dock but there is the one guy sitting on a docked ebike and one guy behind behind her on an undocked ebike. I don’t see any unoccupied ebikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Yeah, this looks like it exonerates her. Weird how the sister supported the PA unintentionally.

The sister is young, didn't think it through, probably didn't talk to an attorney and did a video trying to defend her brother. Taking her story as fact, it is clear he wasn't renting the bike at the time (but planned to rent it at some point). It all makes sense as both stories kinda aligned but didn't.

The sister is an idiot who wanted a viral video

surprise

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Um but he did assault her. “Docked the bike with her on it.”

Technically yes, he did assault her and was aggressive toward her but overall they don't appear like they intended to harm or attack her (he was still absolutely in the wrong to grab the bike with her on it). I don't get why she (if what the sister is saying is true) would take this bike if he was holding onto it vs. another bike but maybe there was no other bike.

She rode home on a different bike. I presume/hope it was another electric bike, but I don't know that for sure. So yes to what you're saying, this bike must have looked untended to her.

The sister said she approached the man and asked to use the bike. He said no, she asked again and he said no. Since he wasn't renting it, she ignored him, rented the bike, and started to go home. He got mad, and grabbed the bike with her on it to dock it to claim it again as his. Technically this bike was free as he wasn't renting it. It's not clear if there were other bikes or if one was being docked or given to her by someone else to defuse the situation.