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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why do they have the 45 min policy? It seems like it would lead to lots of people potential doing this (docking bikes but just for five minutes to reset) and would really confuse users as to which bikes are available vs not in the app screen.

First off, it's not like they limit rides to 45 minutes. It's just you pay a flat fee for the first 45 minutes and after that they start charging by the minute. You can keep the bike as long as you want, but you must pay for it.

The policy exists because the bikes exist primarily as a mode of transportation, and the system works best when bikes are always re-entering the system so others can rent them. If there was no limit on how long you could hold onto a bike on that flat rate, people would literally walk them into their apartments and keep them there until they were ready to use them again. CitiBikes wants the bikes in use. Thus they discourage people from holding onto bikes for more than 45 minutes without actually riding them.

And the ONLY reason this is confusing is because of people trying to game the system. The vast majority of bikeshare users are using the bikes to get from one place to another, docking the bike, and then moving on with their lives. This is what the bikes are for. A small minority of users are using them to ride around town. Which is fine, but you have to pay for the bikes to do that.

Any bike shown in the app is available. It means it's in a dock and not in use. You cannot "claim" a bike that is currently docked, if you want the bike you must rent it. People saying otherwise are twisting themselves into a know to try and argue that the bike "belonged" to this kid. It did not. He wasn't using it, it was in the dock, it was available for rent from whomever needed it next.

THIS-
New Yorker within 2 blocks of 2 separate Citibike docks

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is that all of those kids are laughing right now because you guys have your panties in a bunch over their little prank.

No those kids are mad she's got a gofundme over $120K and they have.... nothing.

120k!!! Are you serious? According to a DCUM poster, her life was ruined and she was an assault victim. It sounds like she is actually doing pretty good!

After attorney fees, moving costs due to being doxed, and therapy (go ahead and make fun of that, I'd absolutely want to talk to a mental health professional after getting death threats and being publicly accused of being no different than the woman who got Emmett Till killed), she won't have much left. This is not a windfall.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Incoming, Monique Judge says she interviewed the kid and his mom.

Fabulous. I’m sure this will be very measured with very few references to tragic historical violence.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incoming, Monique Judge says she interviewed the kid and his mom.

What could they possibly say that hasn't been said? And unless it's a video of the interview, I don't trust Judge to "report" anything accurately. She is not a journalist, she's a hack.

At this point, the only useful contribution would be from CitiBike, of if someone has cctv footage or something. But really, we know all we're ever going to know.

It seems obvious the attack on the PA, and the doxing/threats, was a massive overreaction to something it doesn't look like she did (she didn't steal his bike, didn't fake crying either). Whatever you think of the incident, it is NOTHING like what was originally alleged. She wasn't trying to steal a bike the boy had rented and stick him with the $1200 charge to CitiBike for a lost bike. She was not faking distress in order to get the boys in trouble.

Seriously, we've gotten so far from the actual point. She's not a Karen. This was not "weaponizing whiteness." It was a run of the mill disagreement over a bike rental. The people who whipped up into a fury and called for her to be fired or investigated for racism at work should apologize and learn a lesson, the end. But they won't.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is that all of those kids are laughing right now because you guys have your panties in a bunch over their little prank.

No those kids are mad she's got a gofundme over $120K and they have.... nothing.

120k!!! Are you serious? According to a DCUM poster, her life was ruined and she was an assault victim. It sounds like she is actually doing pretty good!

It's all going to go to her lawyer for multiple lawsuits. Have you ever had to retain a lawyer?

Not for a BS case that has little chance of panning out. If she was smart, she would just pocket the Gofundme cash. I'm kind of jealous!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is that all of those kids are laughing right now because you guys have your panties in a bunch over their little prank.

No those kids are mad she's got a gofundme over $120K and they have.... nothing.

120k!!! Are you serious? According to a DCUM poster, her life was ruined and she was an assault victim. It sounds like she is actually doing pretty good!

After attorney fees, moving costs due to being doxed, and therapy (go ahead and make fun of that, I'd absolutely want to talk to a mental health professional after getting death threats and being publicly accused of being no different than the woman who got Emmett Till killed), she won't have much left. This is not a windfall.

You forgot to add that she will have to hire some Blackwater commandos to protect her from all of those twitter messages sent by 11 year olds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is that all of those kids are laughing right now because you guys have your panties in a bunch over their little prank.

No those kids are mad she's got a gofundme over $120K and they have.... nothing.

120k!!! Are you serious? According to a DCUM poster, her life was ruined and she was an assault victim. It sounds like she is actually doing pretty good!

It's all going to go to her lawyer for multiple lawsuits. Have you ever had to retain a lawyer?

Not for a BS case that has little chance of panning out. If she was smart, she would just pocket the Gofundme cash. I'm kind of jealous!

Have you learned nothing? Let’s see how it plays out. The Covington kid did well and people said he’d lose too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is that all of those kids are laughing right now because you guys have your panties in a bunch over their little prank.

No those kids are mad she's got a gofundme over $120K and they have.... nothing.

120k!!! Are you serious? According to a DCUM poster, her life was ruined and she was an assault victim. It sounds like she is actually doing pretty good!

It's all going to go to her lawyer for multiple lawsuits. Have you ever had to retain a lawyer?

Not for a BS case that has little chance of panning out. If she was smart, she would just pocket the Gofundme cash. I'm kind of jealous!

She has a very reasonable case. That’s why Crumb retreated and deleted, that’s why other progressives apologized.

Will it see trial? No, insurance will drive a settlement. But she’ll see some good money first.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incoming, Monique Judge says she interviewed the kid and his mom.

Fabulous. I’m sure this will be very measured with very few references to tragic historical violence.

I have complete confidence in Monique’s journalistic integrity and am sure she will check facts, remain impartial, not lead the mom, et cetera.

/s

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incoming, Monique Judge says she interviewed the kid and his mom.

Gawd, I hate clicking on her toxic screed. Can you summarize? TIA.

She hasn't released the interview or any reporting on it, just says that the mom "nearly" cried and that the boy is 17.

[b]I wonder if when the mom almost but didn't cry over how frustrating and upsetting this incident has been, someone shoved a camera phone in her face and said "Not a tear came down, miss" and then called her kids re****ed.

Hahaha but really though

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is that all of those kids are laughing right now because you guys have your panties in a bunch over their little prank.

No those kids are mad she's got a gofundme over $120K and they have.... nothing.

120k!!! Are you serious? According to a DCUM poster, her life was ruined and she was an assault victim. It sounds like she is actually doing pretty good!

It's all going to go to her lawyer for multiple lawsuits. Have you ever had to retain a lawyer?

Not for a BS case that has little chance of panning out. If she was smart, she would just pocket the Gofundme cash. I'm kind of jealous!

Have you learned nothing? Let’s see how it plays out. The Covington kid did well and people said he’d lose too.

The particulars of this case are different, but maybe you aren't aware. Also, 99.99999% of people don't know this ladies name and wouldn't recognize her if they saw her walking down the street, so the libel/reputation angle is going to be a major stretch.

[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 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

She came across very badly with the side comments but in reality, was very helpful in clearing up the situation. If you 100% believe everything she said and it does seem accurate (or possibly it could be accurate), then she was in the right to take the bike as it was docked and not being rented. However, if she asked to use the bike and he said he was planning to rent it, it was crummy of her to take it. But, as a man, seeing a pregnant woman leaving work, he could have been decent and offered her the bike. So many better ways this situation could have been handled by everyone involved. His friends were jerks to her but that's another discussion/issue.

She realized she doesn't need his permission to rent a bike that isn't his.

No, she doesn't need his permission. But, she was decent and asked.

Why ask if she was just going to ignore his response?

because people do that all the time... "do you mind if I just scoot past you??" and then you do it.

Anyways, the sister released the receipts for her darling brother and it shows he rented the bike right after her and docked it again 6 minutes later in the same place. He didn't even need it. It was all about just being a gigantic ass to her.

Is this really true that he rented the bike for ONLY 6 mins and docked it in the SAME PLACE??? I do not have access to receipts. If it is true, then it is a 100% setup. WOW

Yes, obviously a set up.

Where did he only rent it for 6 minutes. That was really crummy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incoming, Monique Judge says she interviewed the kid and his mom.

Fabulous. I’m sure this will be very measured with very few references to tragic historical violence.

I have complete confidence in Monique’s journalistic integrity and am sure she will check facts, remain impartial, not lead the mom, et cetera.

/s

Except she posted multiple reports without checking all the facts. What does this incident have to do with historical violence?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Incoming, Monique Judge says she interviewed the kid and his mom.

Fabulous. I’m sure this will be very measured with very few references to tragic historical violence.

I have complete confidence in Monique’s journalistic integrity and am sure she will check facts, remain impartial, not lead the mom, et cetera.

/s

Except she posted multiple reports without checking all the facts. What does this incident have to do with historical violence?

Pp here. I was being sarcastic, as I believe was “historical violence” pp.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The funny thing is that all of those kids are laughing right now because you guys have your panties in a bunch over their little prank.

No those kids are mad she's got a gofundme over $120K and they have.... nothing.

120k!!! Are you serious? According to a DCUM poster, her life was ruined and she was an assault victim. It sounds like she is actually doing pretty good!

It's all going to go to her lawyer for multiple lawsuits. Have you ever had to retain a lawyer?

Not for a BS case that has little chance of panning out. If she was smart, she would just pocket the Gofundme cash. I'm kind of jealous!

Have you learned nothing? Let’s see how it plays out. The Covington kid did well and people said he’d lose too.

The particulars of this case are different, but maybe you aren't aware. Also, 99.99999% of people don't know this ladies name and wouldn't recognize her if they saw her walking down the street, so the libel/reputation angle is going to be a major stretch.

“To prove prima facie defamation, a plaintiff must show four things: 1) a false statement purporting to be fact; 2) publication or communication of that statement to a third person; 3) fault amounting to at least negligence; and 4) damages, or some harm caused to the reputation of the person or entity who is the subject of the statement.”

https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/defamation

1) False statements that the PA was stealing the bike, was faking distress, and is a white supremacist
2) All published online and communicated to third parties, including via purported news organizations
3) The publishing parties were negligent in even baseline journalistic principles, such as interviewing witnesses, confirming origin of the video, hedging allegations, etc., and in some cases were malicious in intent (I.e. Monique Judge announced via Twitter that it was her intent to ensure the top Google result for the PA’s name was a piece she write, full of falsehoods about the event)
4) The PA has suffered damages in the form of reputational destruction, death threats, having her full name and address published online (sometimes egged on by those defaming her)

You don’t have to be a household name or recognizable to the average person to prove defamation. It’s actually harder for public figures to prove defamation than it is for private citizens.

Stop talking about stuff you don’t understand.

Sincerely,
A g*****n lawyer