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 eventually (I think - not so familiar with the addresses):
After the 6 minute checkout at the same station 7:25-7:31
He took at trip from 7:59-8:41pm
Then a third trip from 9:48-10:12pm
Same bike - so he was basically hoarding the bike all evening...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s 17.

And apparently a huge cry baby. Wah! She took a bike that didn't even belong to me. Mommy help, I created a big stink and can't fix it! Is he old enough to even rent these bikes?

+1.

A whole ass family of crybabies, beloved by WOC trolls who can’t get a grip on their own embarrassment over being stupid.

She makes her money by screaming racism and finding the bad in people of other races. She is a true racist. She has no other major story so she’s using this young man and woman as her money maker not caring that’s she’s destroying both of them. She did not think of the consequences of that young man either when she continues her attack. His name only came out because of her. He should have privately apologized as should she and let it go. It was an incident that should not have happened. I would not call it a misunderstanding but it was a silly exchange and he should not have denied the woman a bike and should have rented another bike and found a different new bike. Part of their ride is about finding the new e-bikes.

Agree. Monique is as much to blame as the boy or the PA. The boy and PA should have apologized to each other and gone home--although giving the e-bike to the pregnant woman would have been the kind thing to do, also not insulting her, also not filming her or posting it online, but I digress.

But here comes Monique using her large platform to put out highly racialized language about Karens and white women's tears and Emmet Till. The PA was certainly caught in the cross-fire Monique stirred up, but so was the boy and his family.

Monique is a race grifter and her aim is to stir up her base. It backfired once the PA's lawyer put her story out, and this enrages Monique, which is amusing to watch, but also it grates a bit that she's still getting tons of clicks and money from this. I hope the PA's lawyer sues it away from her based on her earlier claims of theft.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:At the end of the day, he and his friends brought this on themselves. One of them filmed it and one of them posted it online.

The Monique et al. mob went after Comrie first with the stuff about her weaponizing her stress and trying to get him killed. The mob doxxed and threatened her. Did the boy and his mom push back on that?

They're just unhappy the PA eventually got her story out. I'll admit the RW racists are having a field day with this, and that's wrong. But it's their own fault that plenty of reasonable people are also appalled at what happened to the Comrie.

There is a lot of racism on both sides (I don't think from the young man or Comrie). But, it makes no sense to say he is in danger when she is the one put in danger by the young men who took and posted the video online. What's sad is that they don't even understand what they did was wrong in posting the video and trying to ruin her life. What's also sad is the hospital has yet to give her her job back given she didn't put a patient or anyone else at risk (except herself if these boys choose to do more than they did but they didn't seem intentionally violent, just young people who weren't thinking or taught any manners or consideration for others needs).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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 eventually (I think - not so familiar with the addresses):
After the 6 minute checkout at the same station 7:25-7:31
He took at trip from 7:59-8:41pm
Then a third trip from 9:48-10:12pm
Same bike - so he was basically hoarding the bike all evening...

It sounds like this group of young men have an informal riding club where they regularly scout out the brand new ebikes and take very long joy rides. It would be more impressive if they used a regular bike doing what they are doing. The bike rental company should not allow you to rent the same bike twice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 eventually (I think - not so familiar with the addresses):
After the 6 minute checkout at the same station 7:25-7:31
He took at trip from 7:59-8:41pm
Then a third trip from 9:48-10:12pm
Same bike - so he was basically hoarding the bike all evening...

It sounds like this group of young men have an informal riding club where they regularly scout out the brand new ebikes and take very long joy rides. It would be more impressive if they used a regular bike doing what they are doing. The bike rental company should not allow you to rent the same bike twice.

+1 Citibike should tighten up their policies. I’m sure this isn’t the first or last time there’s been a disagreement between two people about one of the coveted newer e-bikes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:He’s 17.

And apparently a huge cry baby. Wah! She took a bike that didn't even belong to me. Mommy help, I created a big stink and can't fix it! Is he old enough to even rent these bikes?

+1.

A whole ass family of crybabies, beloved by WOC trolls who can’t get a grip on their own embarrassment over being stupid.

She makes her money by screaming racism and finding the bad in people of other races. She is a true racist. She has no other major story so she’s using this young man and woman as her money maker not caring that’s she’s destroying both of them. She did not think of the consequences of that young man either when she continues her attack. His name only came out because of her. He should have privately apologized as should she and let it go. It was an incident that should not have happened. I would not call it a misunderstanding but it was a silly exchange and he should not have denied the woman a bike and should have rented another bike and found a different new bike. Part of their ride is about finding the new e-bikes.

Agree. Monique is as much to blame as the boy or the PA. The boy and PA should have apologized to each other and gone home--although giving the e-bike to the pregnant woman would have been the kind thing to do, also not insulting her, also not filming her or posting it online, but I digress.

But here comes Monique using her large platform to put out highly racialized language about Karens and white women's tears and Emmet Till. The PA was certainly caught in the cross-fire Monique stirred up, but so was the boy and his family.

Monique is a race grifter and her aim is to stir up her base. It backfired once the PA's lawyer put her story out, and this enrages Monique, which is amusing to watch, but also it grates a bit that she's still getting tons of clicks and money from this. I hope the PA's lawyer sues it away from her based on her earlier claims of theft.

This is her income and livelihood. She doesn't care about that young man (I wouldn't call him a boy anymore as he's 17 and graduating high school this year). She is the only one gaining anything from this story going viral. He's not getting anything out of it and he probably wasn't the one posting the video and a friend did it or someone else.

As a parent, I'm kinda horrified that he denied a pregnant woman, regardless of race, an e-bike to get home after work. I'd also be annoyed he had that much free time to go joyriding but not work to contribute to the household costs if they are claiming they are poor or to save up for college. But, that's entirely another issue.

As a parent, I would have my child apologize for whatever his part was in it as it never should have escalated how it did. I wonder where the parents are in all this? It kinda seems like the sister is raising him.

The only racist here is Monique. And, she should be held accountable.

I kinda feel bad for the young man as most that age don't think about the consequences to others except if your parents teach you those things. I feel bad for him if he didn't post it nor did he think it would go viral but its something he and other young people need to understand that their actions can have serious consequences for themselves and others and this is a good example of it.

[Anonymous]

Its interesting a lot of media isn't covering the story anymore.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So you get from that to "he wasn't holding it?"

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Its interesting a lot of media isn't covering the story anymore.

I had the same thought. I think if there is any silver lining, it’s that the bigger publications have learned their lesson over viral videos and cancellations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So you get from that to "he wasn't holding it?"

Standing next to a bike does not mean its your bike. Having rented it means its your bike. These joyriders shouldn't be dominating these bikes for fun when others need them.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its interesting a lot of media isn't covering the story anymore.

I had the same thought. I think if there is any silver lining, it’s that the bigger publications have learned their lesson over viral videos and cancellations.

+2. The bigger media outlets are learning that somebody shouting "Karen!" isn't enough to run with a story, instead they need to nail down all the facts or they could be hit with a lawsuit.

The general public that's still following is learning that the Moniques of the world sometimes cry wolf about "Karen!" just to make money. They're learning not to cancel anybody until you have all the sides of a story. Which isn't to say there aren't racists out there, just that only sucky human beings apply blanket assumptions to anybody.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So you get from that to "he wasn't holding it?"

IT WAS NOT “HIS” TO HOLD.

I’m sure you have owned nothing at any point and never will, so maybe take a crash-course in property and contracts when you finish being completely wrong about 1A.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

So you get from that to "he wasn't holding it?"

Standing next to a bike does not mean its your bike. Having rented it means its your bike. These joyriders shouldn't be dominating these bikes for fun when others need them.

They clearly have nothing else to do.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Its interesting a lot of media isn't covering the story anymore.

I had the same thought. I think if there is any silver lining, it’s that the bigger publications have learned their lesson over viral videos and cancellations.

+2. The bigger media outlets are learning that somebody shouting "Karen!" isn't enough to run with a story, instead they need to nail down all the facts or they could be hit with a lawsuit.

The general public that's still following is learning that the Moniques of the world sometimes cry wolf about "Karen!" just to make money. They're learning not to cancel anybody until you have all the sides of a story. Which isn't to say there aren't racists out there, just that only sucky human beings apply blanket assumptions to anybody.

It’s not just “sucky.” It’s validating treating a group of women and girls like absolute garbage and treating another group of women and girls like wise sages and it is bullshit. Monique has her younger mirror in the sister. It has no end.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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 eventually (I think - not so familiar with the addresses):
After the 6 minute checkout at the same station 7:25-7:31
He took at trip from 7:59-8:41pm
Then a third trip from 9:48-10:12pm
Same bike - so he was basically hoarding the bike all evening...

It sounds like this group of young men have an informal riding club where they regularly scout out the brand new ebikes and take very long joy rides. It would be more impressive if they used a regular bike doing what they are doing. The bike rental company should not allow you to rent the same bike twice.

No, that's garbage. If a bike is available for rent, then anyone should be allowed to rent it. If someone wants a guarantee that an ebike will be available for them to ride, they need to just go ahead and buy their own ebike.