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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "weaponizing white women's tears" and "white women aren't allowed to call for help" thing takes a hit with this. The guys in the video were clearly mocking her, calling her baby r***d, and they even admit to (a) not having the e-bike checked out when she got on it, (b) hoarding a rare e-bike, and (c) pushing the e-bike back into the dock with her on it.

Sure, not everybody wants to understand these behaviors were wrong. But some will certainly see that she felt threatened and had as much right to the e-bike as they did.

The PA is the one who instigated the whole situation. She has no one to blame but herself.

You’re so right. She shouldn’t have attempted to rent an unrented bike that belonged to no one. What a moron she is!

The guy specifically told her that he was getting ready to ride the bike back to the Bronx.

So why did not he? Why didn’t he ride back to the Bronx? He is a liar.

He did and on the same bike. His trip ended at 10pm.

[Anonymous]

It sounds like the boy-man only wanted the brand new bikes and that was why that bike.

It’s interesting no attorney will take his case for free.

It’s interesting he is screaming being poor but bike rides 4-5 hours a day. Why not get a job to help out?

It’s interesting all the hateful things they say about her and how she ruined his life but she did no such thing. The boys-men recorded that video and put it out there. She did nothing and did not call the police and let it go.

It’s interesting they are saying no one wanted their story but they were free to contact media and speak out.

I think that story is reasonably accurate. It sounds like the other bikes available were not e-bikes or newer which she wanted to get h home from work, which should have been a priority over joyrides for hours. I don’t think he’s lying nor she. I think it’s terrible he refused a pregnant lady who came off a 12 hour shift a bike and if that was my son I’d be pissed as if he’s joyriding he can use a regular bike but if he had that much free time to regularly take joyrides he can get a job or volunteer.

He cannot play victim when no one would have known this happened if he or his friends did not put the video out there.

No one was after him. No one knew who he was. They sent a racist mob after her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:he’s just 17 if you know what I mean

He’s turning 18 soon and graduating. He’s more of a man than child. So, can we blame the parents for poor parenting then?

[Anonymous]

I think it's perfectly plausible that he wanted to keep riding that bike for the entire evening. And I think it makes sense for a 17 year old who doesn't want to pay for a bike to use it less than 45 minutes, dock it, and then use it again. But if you're going to hang out at a location and eat fro-yo for an hour and aren't riding the bike, then you don't have a claim to the bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per the sister, it sounds like he rented the bike and used it. He then docked it and after 5-6 minutes, she approached him to use it, he declined (but he wasn't renting/paying for the bike), she asked again, he declined, and she then overrode his no and rented the bike. He was holding the bike, but hadn't paid for it and wasn't paying for it.

If he was holding it but hadn't yet paid for it, and she rented it out from underneath him, isn't that exactly what some posters here had thought he did to her, and argued that the bike belonged to the person sitting on it, before they paid?

There is no evidence he was "holding it." In fact, evidence is against this -- by his own receipts, he had docked the bike more than 5 minutes prior, and the PA says there was no one near the bike when she approached. Now, you can believe the PA or not, but to the average person, the fact that he'd docked it 5 minutes would indicate it was NOT in his possession.

She rents the bike, per her receipt, and sits on it. According to both the PA and the guy's sister, she is then redocked by the guy and his friends. Then the video starts.

There is no interpretation events that would say he was in possession of the bike. He had docked it. She rented it. She was sitting on it. He might feel that in his head, the bike was "his", but according the law and common sense, it was not.

She wasn't stealing the bike, and anyone who printed that she was stealing or was a thief may be liable for defamation. That's actually a pretty easy to prove case and I could see it be won on summary judgment based just on the facts as they have been presented by BOTH parties. You can't just go online and accuse someone of a felony because you feel like it.

It's not that I disagree with you, although I doubt we really know with any certainty if he was standing next to it, leaning on it, sitting on it, or a good space away. Nonetheless, in my opinion, if he hadn't rented it for the stretch of time, it wasn't his.

I had the same opinion about it not being hers unless she had rented out, even if she was sitting on it and fiddling in her purse. I mean, sounds like she wasn't, but that wasn't where the conversation was however many pages back before the receipts came up. Plenty of posts were claiming that if it was unrented and she was sitting in it, it was hers.

I think it's an interesting point of inconsistency, if it is indeed the same posters.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per the sister, it sounds like he rented the bike and used it. He then docked it and after 5-6 minutes, she approached him to use it, he declined (but he wasn't renting/paying for the bike), she asked again, he declined, and she then overrode his no and rented the bike. He was holding the bike, but hadn't paid for it and wasn't paying for it.

If he was holding it but hadn't yet paid for it, and she rented it out from underneath him, isn't that exactly what some posters here had thought he did to her, and argued that the bike belonged to the person sitting on it, before they paid?

He wasn’t holding it.

Where is that certainty coming from, PP?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The whole "weaponizing white women's tears" and "white women aren't allowed to call for help" thing takes a hit with this. The guys in the video were clearly mocking her, calling her baby r***d, and they even admit to (a) not having the e-bike checked out when she got on it, (b) hoarding a rare e-bike, and (c) pushing the e-bike back into the dock with her on it.

Sure, not everybody wants to understand these behaviors were wrong. But some will certainly see that she felt threatened and had as much right to the e-bike as they did.

The PA is the one who instigated the whole situation. She has no one to blame but herself.

You’re so right. She shouldn’t have attempted to rent an unrented bike that belonged to no one. What a moron she is!

The guy specifically told her that he was getting ready to ride the bike back to the Bronx.

So why did not he? Why didn’t he ride back to the Bronx? He is a liar.

It sounds like the boys regularly take out only the new e bikes for joyrides for hours at a time. They will only ride the brand new ones. I don’t think he lied and his version is his version of the truth. But was a young healthy 17 year old, it would be more impressive if the did those rides on a regular bike or was a good person and let a pregnant woman have the bike to get home. I’d be really pissed at my son for denying a pregnant woman a e-bike to get home after working.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Per the sister, it sounds like he rented the bike and used it. He then docked it and after 5-6 minutes, she approached him to use it, he declined (but he wasn't renting/paying for the bike), she asked again, he declined, and she then overrode his no and rented the bike. He was holding the bike, but hadn't paid for it and wasn't paying for it.

If he was holding it but hadn't yet paid for it, and she rented it out from underneath him, isn't that exactly what some posters here had thought he did to her, and argued that the bike belonged to the person sitting on it, before they paid?

He wasn’t holding it.

Where is that certainty coming from, PP?

He certainly didn't pay for it so he has no right to claim it forever and ever because he's thinking about using it later. That's not how life works.

[Anonymous]

Did anyone notice in the sisters video she says Comrie “impaled” herself on the bike?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it's perfectly plausible that he wanted to keep riding that bike for the entire evening. And I think it makes sense for a 17 year old who doesn't want to pay for a bike to use it less than 45 minutes, dock it, and then use it again. But if you're going to hang out at a location and eat fro-yo for an hour and aren't riding the bike, then you don't have a claim to the bike.

It’s not reasonable to dominate a specific bike for hours when someone needs it. He is healthy and strong and can use a regular bike.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the boy-man only wanted the brand new bikes and that was why that bike.

It’s interesting no attorney will take his case for free.

It’s interesting he is screaming being poor but bike rides 4-5 hours a day. Why not get a job to help out?

It’s interesting all the hateful things they say about her and how she ruined his life but she did no such thing. The boys-men recorded that video and put it out there. She did nothing and did not call the police and let it go.

It’s interesting they are saying no one wanted their story but they were free to contact media and speak out.

I think that story is reasonably accurate. It sounds like the other bikes available were not e-bikes or newer which she wanted to get h home from work, which should have been a priority over joyrides for hours. I don’t think he’s lying nor she. I think it’s terrible he refused a pregnant lady who came off a 12 hour shift a bike and if that was my son I’d be pissed as if he’s joyriding he can use a regular bike but if he had that much free time to regularly take joyrides he can get a job or volunteer.

He cannot play victim when no one would have known this happened if he or his friends did not put the video out there.

No one was after him. No one knew who he was. They sent a racist mob after her.

What case? He’s not being prosecuted and he has no one to sue.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone notice in the sisters video she says Comrie “impaled” herself on the bike?

She’s trying to make him look good. No attorney would take the case for free. Maybe he can get a job and pay for an attorney.

This incident became public and an issue as her brother and friends made it an issue. She let it go.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone notice in the sisters video she says Comrie “impaled” herself on the bike?

She’s trying to make him look good. No attorney would take the case for free. Maybe he can get a job and pay for an attorney.

This incident became public and an issue as her brother and friends made it an issue. She let it go.

If you embarrass yourself in public with your bad deeds, who can you sue?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It sounds like the boy-man only wanted the brand new bikes and that was why that bike.

It’s interesting no attorney will take his case for free.

It’s interesting he is screaming being poor but bike rides 4-5 hours a day. Why not get a job to help out?

It’s interesting all the hateful things they say about her and how she ruined his life but she did no such thing. The boys-men recorded that video and put it out there. She did nothing and did not call the police and let it go.

It’s interesting they are saying no one wanted their story but they were free to contact media and speak out.

I think that story is reasonably accurate. It sounds like the other bikes available were not e-bikes or newer which she wanted to get h home from work, which should have been a priority over joyrides for hours. I don’t think he’s lying nor she. I think it’s terrible he refused a pregnant lady who came off a 12 hour shift a bike and if that was my son I’d be pissed as if he’s joyriding he can use a regular bike but if he had that much free time to regularly take joyrides he can get a job or volunteer.

He cannot play victim when no one would have known this happened if he or his friends did not put the video out there.

No one was after him. No one knew who he was. They sent a racist mob after her.

What case? He’s not being prosecuted and he has no one to sue.

For the media and to guide him. He may have a case if she sues him but she probably would not bother.

In theory he should be prosecuted for grabbing the bike with her on it but reality is it would take years in the court system and a huge waste of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Did anyone notice in the sisters video she says Comrie “impaled” herself on the bike?

She’s trying to make him look good. No attorney would take the case for free. Maybe he can get a job and pay for an attorney.

This incident became public and an issue as her brother and friends made it an issue. She let it go.

If you embarrass yourself in public with your bad deeds, who can you sue?

In the us and ny, you can sue anyone you want.