White male privilege at its finest.

He avoided the felony charges altogether--the ones pertaining to the cell phone (DB just paywalled me so I can't recheck the second article I found)

The article mentions the bottle of Lorazepam that had been filled the day before and was missing 78 out of the 90 pills. I have a friend who is bipolar, has PTSD, and is an alcoholic. Although she has been stable under a lot of supervision for 2 years now (and gets ECT 2x a month) her life was a major roller coaster for close to 20 years, in and out of psych units as well as state hospital. Once I went to her place because she was clearly spiraling. She was prescribed Klonipin as well as other psych drugs, and her just-filled bottle was open on the couch with pills spilled and, when I counted, a few dozen missing. I called 911, then went to the ER where they brought her.

She hadn't taken massive amounts of the drug, she was just totally wasted on alcohol (I was amazed that the ER gave her another 30 pills to take home, but I also called her MH provider and told them what was going on).

If he had taken all those pills he'd hardly be in shape to throw himself at a moving vehicle. And I'm sure they did an autopsy and would have determined the drugs were in his system when he died.

This is such an appalling reach. And whether he put himself in the path of the vehicle, it's still hit and run.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This was all a big nothingburger. The guy threw himself onto his car and Ravnsborg is the actual victim.

“ SIOUX FALLS, South Dakota—South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg is claiming the man he ran over and killed—allegedly while scrolling through his phone on highway at night—wanted to die.

In court documents filed Friday, the state’s top lawman claimed victim Joe Boever was depressed and suicidal and may have thrown himself in front of his car as he drove home from a Republican function on Sept. 12.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/south-dakota-ag-jason-ravnsborg-claims-his-crash-victim-wanted-to-die

That is some next level bull crap from Ravnsborg. That’s offensive as hell.

Yeah, and if the poster thinks that running over a man and leaving him like roadkill is a nothingburger based on a claim of the person accused of running him over, then the "nothingburger" person is too dumb to function in society. From the same article...

Nick Nemec, a former state legislator who has personally investigated the case and served as a family spokesman, is convinced Boever was not suicidal.

“Joe was on the shoulder of the road,” he said. “So, that I would think would indicate he wasn’t out trying to jump in front of the car.”

And then the part about how Ravensborg didn’t NOTICE he had hit a man? Where’s that?

Anonymous wrote:This was all a big nothingburger. The guy threw himself onto his car and Ravnsborg is the actual victim.

“ SIOUX FALLS, South Dakota—South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg is claiming the man he ran over and killed—allegedly while scrolling through his phone on highway at night—wanted to die.

In court documents filed Friday, the state’s top lawman claimed victim Joe Boever was depressed and suicidal and may have thrown himself in front of his car as he drove home from a Republican function on Sept. 12.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/south-dakota-ag-jason-ravnsborg-claims-his-crash-victim-wanted-to-die

That is some next level bull crap from Ravnsborg. That’s offensive as hell.

This was all a big nothingburger. The guy threw himself onto his car and Ravnsborg is the actual victim.

“ SIOUX FALLS, South Dakota—South Dakota Attorney General Jason Ravnsborg is claiming the man he ran over and killed—allegedly while scrolling through his phone on highway at night—wanted to die.

In court documents filed Friday, the state’s top lawman claimed victim Joe Boever was depressed and suicidal and may have thrown himself in front of his car as he drove home from a Republican function on Sept. 12.”

https://www.thedailybeast.com/south-dakota-ag-jason-ravnsborg-claims-his-crash-victim-wanted-to-die

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Despite the charge accusing Ravnsborg of being on his cellphone, he was not actually on his device at the time of the crash, authorities said. They said phone records showed he had been using his phone about one minute before.”

How was that proven? Was the phone turned off or was the browser closed? Because, if it's just data transfer then that doesnt mean that.

If he was texting or on twitter, they would only know each time he hit send. And honestly it would be very hard to identify the time of the crash within less than a minute.

No, when they downloaded both of his Android phones it apparently would have logs of swipes and scrolls, not just websites and apps loading.

Reading doesnt necessarily involve any of that

Exactly. He could have loaded his John Solomon crap site and then still be reading the BS a minute later. Not sure why this would need to be pointed out.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Despite the charge accusing Ravnsborg of being on his cellphone, he was not actually on his device at the time of the crash, authorities said. They said phone records showed he had been using his phone about one minute before.”

How was that proven? Was the phone turned off or was the browser closed? Because, if it's just data transfer then that doesnt mean that.

If he was texting or on twitter, they would only know each time he hit send. And honestly it would be very hard to identify the time of the crash within less than a minute.

No, when they downloaded both of his Android phones it apparently would have logs of swipes and scrolls, not just websites and apps loading.

Reading doesnt necessarily involve any of that

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Despite the charge accusing Ravnsborg of being on his cellphone, he was not actually on his device at the time of the crash, authorities said. They said phone records showed he had been using his phone about one minute before.”

How was that proven? Was the phone turned off or was the browser closed? Because, if it's just data transfer then that doesnt mean that.

If he was texting or on twitter, they would only know each time he hit send. And honestly it would be very hard to identify the time of the crash within less than a minute.

No, when they downloaded both of his Android phones it apparently would have logs of swipes and scrolls, not just websites and apps loading.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Despite the charge accusing Ravnsborg of being on his cellphone, he was not actually on his device at the time of the crash, authorities said. They said phone records showed he had been using his phone about one minute before.”

How was that proven? Was the phone turned off or was the browser closed? Because, if it's just data transfer then that doesnt mean that.

If he was texting or on twitter, they would only know each time he hit send. And honestly it would be very hard to identify the time of the crash within less than a minute.

IIRC he was drivng a 2011 Taurus. I just looked it up and it would have a black box. They would be able to tell the exact time of the accident. I wonder if there could be a calibration error on the time; the phone time would be accurate.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Despite the charge accusing Ravnsborg of being on his cellphone, he was not actually on his device at the time of the crash, authorities said. They said phone records showed he had been using his phone about one minute before.”

How was that proven? Was the phone turned off or was the browser closed? Because, if it's just data transfer then that doesnt mean that.

If he was texting or on twitter, they would only know each time he hit send. And honestly it would be very hard to identify the time of the crash within less than a minute.

Anonymous wrote:“Despite the charge accusing Ravnsborg of being on his cellphone, he was not actually on his device at the time of the crash, authorities said. They said phone records showed he had been using his phone about one minute before.”

How was that proven? Was the phone turned off or was the browser closed? Because, if it's just data transfer then that doesnt mean that.

“Despite the charge accusing Ravnsborg of being on his cellphone, he was not actually on his device at the time of the crash, authorities said. They said phone records showed he had been using his phone about one minute before.”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Not entirely. One of the articles he was reading was from Real Clear Politics, which, while right-leaning, is still considered a moderate source. So, some of what he was reading was news and some was right wing. In any event, what I wrote was still accurate despite what you want to think.

re: the phrase "he was reading," you forgot to add the clause "while driving a car" circa 75 mph. #details

You conveniently clipped out my previous comment. I was responding to someone who changed my text from "reading news" to "reading right-wing propaganda" and informing him that he was making a poor substitution.

Then that is negligent manslaughter. The point is that if he was paying attention to driving instead of reading news on his phone, he should have seen the victim before hitting and killing him.

You're one of those people who likes to take comments out of context and then lambast people for it. SMH.

Hilarious.... what a prissy little Republican snowflake you are... Are you male? If so, man-up.