Giving the finger is a ‘God-given right’, Canadian judge rules

Post by JohnFen » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 8:54 PM UTC

UncleEntity wrote: post #14

belval wrote: post #8

If you look past the headline, this story is almost "basic sanity". The guy's neighbour didn't want the accused's kids playing in the street (in the suburbs) because they have a yard. To "prove" his point that it was dangerous he drove recklessly around the kids in the street. The accused flipped him off and (allegedly because he denies it) threatened him. Now frankly, I don't see why this would be hackernews-worthy,…

> To "prove" his point that it was dangerous he drove recklessly around the kids in the street. It probably is dangerous [0] because people don’t let their kids play in the street anymore so drivers aren’t used to having them there. Not like when I was a kid where we would get ball games going and pause to let the cars pass. People expected kids to be playing in the street so didn’t drive like complete lunatics. Can’…

Post by namuol » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 8:58 PM UTC

belval wrote: post #8

If you look past the headline, this story is almost "basic sanity". The guy's neighbour didn't want the accused's kids playing in the street (in the suburbs) because they have a yard. To "prove" his point that it was dangerous he drove recklessly around the kids in the street. The accused flipped him off and (allegedly because he denies it) threatened him. Now frankly, I don't see why this would be hackernews-worthy,…

Post by setgree » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 8:59 PM UTC

namuol wrote: post #53

belval wrote: post #8

If you look past the headline, this story is almost "basic sanity". The guy's neighbour didn't want the accused's kids playing in the street (in the suburbs) because they have a yard. To "prove" his point that it was dangerous he drove recklessly around the kids in the street. The accused flipped him off and (allegedly because he denies it) threatened him. Now frankly, I don't see why this would be hackernews-worthy,…

[flagged]

Post by vkou » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 9:04 PM UTC

Rumudiez wrote: post #48

cldellow wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the one hand, knowing what we know now, I certainly agree it would be preferable if he wasn't arrested. On the other hand, the neighbour had made at least 4 reports to the police about harassment and death threats. I believe the neighbour's brother and parents had also spoken to the police in support of these claims. On the day of the arrest, the neighbour had _just_ made the most serious claim yet--about death th…

The kind of person it takes to make 4(!) official complaints and have the local police office in their contact list is exactly the same person to exaggerate dramatically, play the victim, and ultimately be the true source of anti-social behavior. I don’t believe there’s any veracity behind their claims, and the police department should have forwarded their calls to a therapist instead.

Post by sangnoir » Fri, Mar 10, 2023, 9:04 PM UTC

908B64B197 wrote: post #54

rossdavidh wrote: post #49

I admit, it's long. But the ending was brilliant. "In the modern-day vernacular, people often refer to a criminal case “being thrown out”. Obviously, this is little more than a figurative expression. Cases aren’t actually thrown out, in the literal or physical sense. Nevertheless, in the specific circumstances of this case, the Court is inclined to actually take the file and throw it out the window, which is the only…

Wow that's colorful for court documents. I don't see how it could have turned out any other way. I'm just surprised he was actually arrested for something that's obviously covered by the first amendment. This reeks incompetence from the district attorney, trying to intimidate the man out of his rights like that.