|
|
|
2 Teens Stab Cabbie, Then Die in Crash
April 8, 2008, 7:25 PM PDT
Two teenage girls died Tuesday when the taxi cab they were riding in
crashed after one teen slashed the driver's face, police said.
The 50-year-old driver was taken to a local hospital and released after
receiving treatment for minor injuries including cuts to his neck and face,
Los Angeles Police Department spokeswoman Officer April Harding said.
His name was not immediately released.
Two 17-year-old girls flagged down the cab at about 12:30 a.m. in the
eastern Los Angeles neighborhood of Boyle Heights and asked to be taken to
the nearby Ramona Gardens housing project, police said.
The girls were Alexous Ann Sandoval and Daisy Orozco, both Los Angeles
residents, Craig Harvey of the coroner's office said.
When they pulled up, one girl said her boyfriend would come down to pay
their fare. Instead, he approached the cab with a gun, Harding said.
The cab driver apparently sped away with the women still in the back seat.
"The cab driver got scared," Harding said. "One of the females pulled out a
box cutter and began cutting the taxi cab driver and that's what caused him
to crash."
It appeared the cab driver believed he was being followed by a gunman,
police said. Two men were detained and being questioned about the incident,
Harding said.
Both girls were thrown from the cab and died.
"It is just something bizarre and it is something tragic that happens,"
Harding said
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 21:25:02 -0600, "Reality_Check" <Reality@Check.it>
wrote:
2 Teens Stab Cabbie, Then Die in Crash
April 8, 2008, 7:25 PM PDT
Two teenage girls died Tuesday when the taxi cab they were riding in
crashed after one teen slashed the driver's face, police said.
The 50-year-old driver was taken to a local hospital and released after
receiving treatment for minor injuries including cuts to his neck and face,
Los Angeles Police Department spokeswoman Officer April Harding said.
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers. Couldn't
he be charged with an offence?
Svenne
|
| |
| |
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 21:25:02 -0600, "Reality_Check"
<Reality@Check.it> wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his
passengers. Couldn't he be charged with an offence?
Svenne
You don't seem to get it. This is a Gun Nut group and only more GUNS will
solve the problems of the world. Death and pain to everyone else.
** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **
|
| |
| |
On 9 Apr, 09:11, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers. Couldn't
he be charged with an offence?
Svenne
=============================================
Only in Britain. Other tribes seem to have a bit of respect for
themselves and seem to have a half sane legal system.
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 4:11=A0am, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 21:25:02 -0600, "Reality_Check=A9" <Real...@Check.it>
wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers. Couldn't
he be charged with an offence?
Svenne
Yes, if they were passengers. Once people start attacking you with
weapons during a robbery attempt, then they are clearly are no longer
considered passengers.
He cannot be charged.
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 4:11 am, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 21:25:02 -0600, "Reality_Check" <Real...@Check.it>
wrote:
2 Teens Stab Cabbie, Then Die in Crash
April 8, 2008, 7:25 PM PDT
Two teenage girls died Tuesday when the taxi cab they were riding in
crashed after one teen slashed the driver's face, police said.
The 50-year-old driver was taken to a local hospital and released after
receiving treatment for minor injuries including cuts to his neck and
face,
Los Angeles Police Department spokeswoman Officer April Harding said.
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers. Couldn't
he be charged with an offence?
Svenne
Yes, if they were passengers. Once people start attacking you with
weapons during a robbery attempt, then they are clearly are no longer
considered passengers.
He cannot be charged.
When I first heard the story, I assumed that the taxi driver deliberately
crashed the car in self defense. After all, he had an airbag, and they
didn't. Wonder if he will ever admit that.
|
| |
| |
Wayne wrote:
On Apr 9, 4:11 am, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 21:25:02 -0600, "Reality_Check"
<Real...@Check.it> wrote:
2 Teens Stab Cabbie, Then Die in Crash
April 8, 2008, 7:25 PM PDT
Two teenage girls died Tuesday when the taxi cab they were riding
in crashed after one teen slashed the driver's face, police said.
The 50-year-old driver was taken to a local hospital and released
after receiving treatment for minor injuries including cuts to his
neck and face,
Los Angeles Police Department spokeswoman Officer April Harding
said.
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers.
Couldn't he be charged with an offence?
Svenne
When I first heard the story, I assumed that the taxi driver
deliberately crashed the car in self defense. After all, he had an
airbag, and they didn't. Wonder if he will ever admit that.
Doesn't matter if he did. His right to self defense trumps any duty
to care for his attackers.
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 4:11 am, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers. Couldn't
he be charged with an offence?
No you don't get it. When attacked his duty was to stand there and
take it rather than speed off away from the boyfriend with the gun!
If the cabbie had allowed the boyfriend to shoot and kill him, or even
just allowed the women to cut him up, there wouldn't now be two dead
young women in LA! Self-defense against crime only leads to more
violence as the death of these two wonderful young ladies shows! :)
Hey Svenne, how about you wake up? Even POLICE have no duty to
protect any individual! They can choose to help or not according to
their mood and not be held responsible if someone is injured or dies.
So why would a mere cabbie have some kind of responsibility to "take
care" of the two criminal females who were attacking him? What do you
want him charged with? Failure to allow criminals to complete their
crimes?
I nominate these two females for a "Darwin" award! We can only hope
they haven't had a chance to reproduce yet, but in that neighborhood
we may not have much of a chance in that regard.
|
| |
| |
Wayne wrote:
Doesn't matter if he did. His right to self defense trumps any duty
to care for his attackers.
Agreed. And I would have deliberately crashed vehicle in those
circumstances.
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:01:33 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
<theprof@jonez.net> wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers.
Couldn't he be charged with an offence?
Yes, if they were passengers. Once people start attacking you with
weapons during a robbery attempt, then they are clearly are no longer
considered passengers.
He cannot be charged.
When I first heard the story, I assumed that the taxi driver
deliberately crashed the car in self defense. After all, he had an
airbag, and they didn't. Wonder if he will ever admit that.
Doesn't matter if he did. His right to self defense trumps any duty
to care for his attackers.
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
Svenne
|
| |
| |
Svenne wrote:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:01:33 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
<theprof@jonez.net> wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers.
Couldn't he be charged with an offence?
Yes, if they were passengers. Once people start attacking you with
weapons during a robbery attempt, then they are clearly are no longer
considered passengers.
He cannot be charged.
When I first heard the story, I assumed that the taxi driver
deliberately crashed the car in self defense. After all, he had an
airbag, and they didn't. Wonder if he will ever admit that.
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
It must be rough, what with you being born retarded and all, eh?
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 7:28 pm, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:01:33 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
<thep...@jonez.net> wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers.
Couldn't he be charged with an offence?
Yes, if they were passengers. Once people start attacking you with
weapons during a robbery attempt, then they are clearly are no longer
considered passengers.
He cannot be charged.
When I first heard the story, I assumed that the taxi driver
deliberately crashed the car in self defense. After all, he had an
airbag, and they didn't. Wonder if he will ever admit that.
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
Svenne
Take your pick:
- Since they hadn't yet paid, there was no consideration, hence no
contract.
- They attempted to 'pay' by offering to relieve him of any funds he
was already carrying at gunpoint. By declining this offer, any
contract was pretty effectively frustrated, and no duty was owed to
the passengers.
IANAL, not even an American one, but I reckon at least one of those
will hold up just as well as your argument.
|
| |
| |
On Apr 9, 7:28 pm, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
Take your pick:
- Since they hadn't yet paid, there was no consideration, hence no
contract.
Look up "executory contract"
|
| |
| |
Janitor of Lunacy wrote:
Look up "executory contract"
Look up "The #@&@
es deserved to die, and the cabbie deserves a medal."
|
| |
| |
On 9 Apr, 21:43, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
Svenne wrote:
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
It must be rough, what with you being born retarded and all, eh?-
Not really, I was just giving American readers a taste of the spirit
behind English law.
In the UK you can go to jail for shooting intruders in your own home.
Svenne
|
| |
| |
tvaerskaegg@aol.com wrote:
On 9 Apr, 21:43, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
It must be rough, what with you being born retarded and all, eh?-
Not really, I was just giving American readers a taste of the spirit
behind English law.
English law sucks, and so do you.
That's why WE, In the USA, don't follow "English", or other stupid
countries like yours, law.
In the UK you can go to jail for shooting intruders in your own home.
Must be tough living in a retarded COUNTRY, born as a retard(like you)
and for not being able to defend your own home, eh?
The cabbie didn't kill anybody.
He is merely a survivor of a premeditated CRIME gone bad.
The two cunts killed themselves when they made their driver lose control
by cutting him while operating a moving vehical, and not wearing their
seatbelts.
Did you see the pictures and video? It was GREAT!
The two cunts were SPLATTERED when THEY caused the cabbie to lose
control, and they were ejected out of the vehical, ten yards away after
the pole almost split the car in two!
I am SO happy that they are dead, and that the cabbie is gonna be OK.
(Hope he never gets fooled again by that old "My boyfriend will pay
later" routine!)
I am GLAD that the two cunts are dead, and that their boyfriend is under
arrest, and the families of those two whores are grieving.
You Europeans are a stump stupid lot, eh?
|
| |
| |
On 9 Apr, 23:35, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
=A0 Did you see the pictures and video? It was GREAT!
=A0 The two cunts were SPLATTERED when THEY caused the cabbie to lose
control, and they were ejected out of the vehical, ten yards away after
the pole almost split the car in two!
I am SO happy that they are dead, and that the cabbie is gonna be OK.
(Hope he never gets fooled again by that old "My boyfriend will pay
later" routine!)
I am GLAD that the two cunts are dead, and that their boyfriend is under
arrest, and the families of those two whores are grieving.
=A0 You Europeans are a stump stupid lot, eh
You Americans always did have a bit of the Wild West about you.
Svenne
|
| |
| |
tvaerskaegg@aol.com wrote:
On 9 Apr, 23:35, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:01:33 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
<theprof@jonez.net> wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers.
Couldn't he be charged with an offence?
Yes, if they were passengers. Once people start attacking you with
weapons during a robbery attempt, then they are clearly are no longer
considered passengers.
He cannot be charged.
When I first heard the story, I assumed that the taxi driver
deliberately crashed the car in self defense. After all, he had an
airbag, and they didn't. Wonder if he will ever admit that.
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
Sorry, but they engaged in breach of contract when they attacked him. He was
contracted to transport them in safety from A to B. They have a contractual
obligation to allow him to do so in safety.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
Only in Liberaland.
|
| |
| |
On 9 Apr, 21:43, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
Not really, I was just giving American readers a taste of the spirit
behind English law.
We've already had a taste, and in 1776 we had enough of it.
|
| |
| |
tvaerskaegg@aol.com wrote:
On 9 Apr, 23:35, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
You Americans always did have a bit of the Wild West about you.
"Americans?"
Define, please, you stump stupid cunt.
The USA is made up of people from YOUR COUNTRY as well!
I am glad of that, as most immigrants are smart.
YOU were denied for a reason.
Was it the Herpes you have?
I noticed that you ran away from the argument, like the cowardly little
RETARD you are.
YOU want the cabbie charged for some stupid reason.
That proves that you are an idiot!
I rejoice in the death of the two retards that died in the commission of
a deadly crime.
See the diff?
|
| |
| |
On 10 Apr, 01:09, "Scout" <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
<tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote in message
Not really, I was just giving American readers a taste of the spirit
behind English law.
We've already had a taste, and in 1776 we had enough of it.
Yes, you were quite a lawless bunch back then as well.
Svenne
|
| |
| |
On 10 Apr, 01:34, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
tvaerska...@aol.com wrote:
On 9 Apr, 23:35, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
You Americans always did have a bit of the Wild West about you.
"Americans?"
=A0 Define, please, you stump stupid cunt.
You really are a people apart.
As Oscar Wilde eloquently put it:
"America is the first country to have gone from barbarism to decadence
without the usual intervening period of civilization."
Svenne
|
| |
| |
XXX wrote:
I am GLAD that the two cunts are dead, and that their boyfriend is
under arrest, and the families of those two whores are grieving.
What the @$#* is wrong with you??? You are one sick @$#*!
Nothing wrong with me.
Why are _you_ saddened by the death of two idiot whores that failed to
commit a PREMEDITATED Murder/Robbery?
Those cunts are dead, by their own hands, and they will never commit
another crime again!
WOO HOO!
They got killed instantly after being ejected from the car they
hijacked! SPLATTERED! Cut in pieces! DEAD IN A SPLIT SECOND!
I wish I saw it happen, live!
I wish the same equal demise upon each and every low life that tries to
commit a crime!
Don't you?
Oh my.. YOU don't!
YOU "feel" for the criminals that messed up.
I bet you will vote for Hillary and other Liberals.
The rest of the real world REJOICES that the real VICTIM survived... the
Cab driver!
So, the real question is, what the @$#* is wrong with you?
|
| |
| |
On 10 Apr, 01:09, "Scout" <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
Not really, I was just giving American readers a taste of the spirit
behind English law.
Yes, you were quite a lawless bunch back then as well.
Damn straight. We've always had a problem with tyrannical and oppressive
law.
You, on the other hand, LIKE being oppressed by the law.
|
| |
| |
Tony Levin <KingCrimson@Bass.gov.> wrote:
XXX wrote:
I am GLAD that the two cunts are dead, and that their boyfriend is
under arrest, and the families of those two whores are grieving.
Nothing wrong with me.
Why are _you_ saddened by the death of two idiot whores that failed to
commit a PREMEDITATED Murder/Robbery?
Those cunts are dead, by their own hands, and they will never commit
another crime again!
WOO HOO!
They got killed instantly after being ejected from the car they
hijacked! SPLATTERED! Cut in pieces! DEAD IN A SPLIT SECOND!
I wish I saw it happen, live!
I wish the same equal demise upon each and every low life that tries to
commit a crime!
Don't you?
Oh my.. YOU don't!
YOU "feel" for the criminals that messed up.
I bet you will vote for Hillary and other Liberals.
The rest of the real world REJOICES that the real VICTIM survived... the
Cab driver!
So, the real question is, what the @$#* is wrong with you?
I guess that what is wrong with me is that I am not a sick blood-thirsty
misogynist @$#*-up!
|
| |
| |
On 10 Apr, 01:59, "Scout" <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
<tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote in message
Yes, you were quite a lawless bunch back then as well.
Damn straight. We've always had a problem with tyrannical and oppressive
law.
You, on the other hand, LIKE being oppressed by the law.
For people who say they have a problem with tyranny and oppression you
seem to like your President Bush.
Svenne
|
| |
| |
"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote in
news:N8bLj.4614$NM.4007@trnddc01:
We've already had a taste, and in 1776 we had enough of it.
At this point I usually ask, "Does it hurt to be this ignorant?"
Unless you're living in Louisiana, you're pretty much living under a
version of English common law.
In 1776, we got sick of English colonial policy.
|
| |
| |
On 10 Apr, 01:59, "Scout" <me4g...@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net>
wrote:
Yes, you were quite a lawless bunch back then as well.
For people who say they have a problem with tyranny and oppression you
seem to like your President Bush.
You have no idea what I like or don't like.
|
| |
| |
In article <662r8cF2ifbnjU1@mid.individual.net>,
Reality_Check <Reality@Check.it> wrote:
2 Teens Stab Cabbie, Then Die in Crash
April 8, 2008, 7:25 PM PDT
Two teenage girls died Tuesday when the taxi cab they were riding in
crashed after one teen slashed the driver's face, police said.
The 50-year-old driver was taken to a local hospital and released after
receiving treatment for minor injuries including cuts to his neck and face,
Los Angeles Police Department spokeswoman Officer April Harding said.
[...]
"The cab driver got scared," Harding said. "One of the females pulled out a
box cutter and began cutting the taxi cab driver and that's what caused him
to crash."
[...]
Both girls were thrown from the cab and died.
"It is just something bizarre and it is something tragic that happens,"
Harding said
What's the tragedy? Two armed robbers (at least) killed and the cab
driver only with minor injuries. Too bad about the injuries, but
overall it's a definite win.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.
|
| |
| |
Svenne wrote:
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 11:01:33 -0600, "_ Prof. Jonez _"
<theprof@jonez.net> wrote:
Didn't the taxi driver have a duty of care to his passengers.
Couldn't he be charged with an offence?
Yes, if they were passengers. Once people start attacking you with
weapons during a robbery attempt, then they are clearly are no
longer considered passengers.
He cannot be charged.
When I first heard the story, I assumed that the taxi driver
deliberately crashed the car in self defense. After all, he had an
airbag, and they didn't. Wonder if he will ever admit that.
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
The contract was entered when they got into the cab and requested
his services.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
No, he surely should not.
Svenne
|
| |
| |
tvaerskaegg@aol.com wrote:
On 9 Apr, 21:43, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
They hadn't paid him so the contract hadn't been concluded and they
were still his passengers.
He killed them so surely he should be held to account.
Not really, I was just giving American readers a taste of the spirit
behind English law.
In the UK you can go to jail for shooting intruders in your own home.
If they aren't posing an immediate risk to your life, why should you
be allowed to shoot them?
|
| |
| |
tvaerskaegg@aol.com wrote:
On 9 Apr, 23:35, Tony Levin <KingCrim...@Bass.gov.> wrote:
You Americans always did have a bit of the Wild West about you.
Which explains why the UK follows any stupid U$ decision like
a pathetic lap-dog.
|
| |
| |
In talk.politics.guns "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote:
tvaerskaegg@aol.com wrote:
If they aren't posing an immediate risk to your life, why should you
be allowed to shoot them?
Why should you have to wait until the risk is immediate if they're in
your home?
|
| |
| |
TimB wrote:
On Apr 9, 7:28 pm, Svenne <tvaerska...@aol.com> wrote:
Take your pick:
- Since they hadn't yet paid, there was no consideration, hence no
contract.
So your claim is that there is NO contract entered regarding any
Taxi service where the passenger agrees to pay at the destination,
but has not yet arrived and paid?
- They attempted to 'pay' by offering to relieve him of any funds he
was already carrying at gunpoint.
So what was the consideration at that point?
By declining this offer, any
contract was pretty effectively frustrated, and no duty was owed to
the passengers.
His right to self-defense trump any "duty" toward his attackers.
|
| |
| |
Buck Mulligan wrote:
In talk.politics.guns "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote:
Why should you have to wait until the risk is immediate if they're in
your home?
Because Trespassing isn't a Capital Offense in any Civilized Society.
|
| |
| |
In talk.politics.guns "_ Prof. Jonez _" <theprof@jonez.net> wrote:
Buck Mulligan wrote:
Because Trespassing isn't a Capital Offense in any Civilized Society.
So you don't see any danger in | | |
