Of course it is. Unquestionably.
You're having a dispute, and you want to leave, and someone puts their forearm out to stop you from entering your own vehicle? Yeah, you've been threatened.
Abdul Carter
- Thread starter knickslions
- Start date
Of course it is. Unquestionably.
You're having a dispute, and you want to leave, and someone puts their forearm out to stop you from entering your own vehicle? Yeah, you've been threatened.
Of course it is ... "stop assaulting me, I'm trying to leave ... get out of my way, as I feel threatened ..." Obviously the driver felt intimidated enough that simply asking, or telling, Carter to let him leave wouldn't have worked, so he tried to even the playing field by putting forth a threat of self-defense.
And, as further evidence of this, when Carter complied by getting out of the way, what happened? The driver didn't attack him ... he got in his truck and tried to leave. The tow truck driver was ending the assault with the threat of self-defense, it worked and he tried to head out before Carter actually physically assaulted him.
Disagree. There is no threat by standing in someone's way, especially when there is a disagreement about the legality of the attempt to remove someone's property (i.e. Carter wanted to call the police).
He escalated the incident by brandishing a deadly weapon. Full stop.
Incorrect.
1072. Special Considerations in Proving a Threat
This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.
The law would disagree with you, as would common sense. But you stand your ground if you want.
If Carter wanted to call the police, he could have just done so. "Hey, I think some guy is stealing my car, posing as a tow truck driver ... license plate blah blah blah." Pretty simple. He chose to assault the guy and keep him from leaving (again, false imprisonment enters the picture, as well ... though that's an unlikely charge despite its potential presence here). And when the guy actually WAS leaving, Carter provided further evidence that he was assaulting the man earlier by physically attacking him.
Last edited:
Incorrect. He evened out the situation by presenting a weapon in defense of himself when he obviously felt threatened by a large man physically stopping him from getting into his truck to leave. Most fullest stop. No more stoppiness to be had stop.
Last edited:
Your link does absolutely nothing to prove or disprove your assertion. It’s not instructive on whether physically preventing someone from entering their own vehicle is a threat that rises to the level of assault.Incorrect.
1072. Special Considerations in Proving a Threat
This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.www.justice.gov
Because he's white in State College and students don't have rights or safety to protect.
Dude. how about you pay for your parking and then don't break the tow truck operator's ribs?
Take some responsibility, for crying out loud.
So now it is a crime to be a big athletic black guy? If an only lady put her forearm in front of the access to the truck, would it also be a threat? Is it only a threat because Carter is a big, athletic black guy? Do big, athletic black guys have different legal rights?
And you are now blaming Carter for the tow guy picking up a large metal bar and threatening Carter with it? This isn't S. Carolina circa 1800. Only the tow op is responsible for the tow op's actions. In this case, that is criminally using a deadly weapon to make terroristic threats. Charge the tow operator for his crime as they have charged Carter for his. Or does State College see these men differently under the law?
Carter was charged. He will have to take responsibility for his actions.
Why does the tow op not have to take responsibility for making terroristic threats with a deadly weapon to a student? Charge this man for his crime as well.
Wow...you are going off the deep end.
- carter parked illegally
- carter confronted the tow truck operator who was simply doing his job
- carter physically imposed himself on the driver in a manner to intimidate him into not entering his vehicle
- carter is a uber fit professional athlete
- carter pulled him from the truck and broke his ribs
This isn't a black/white thing or even a student/citizen thing. Carter illegally parked, and then got pissed off when he had to pay the consequences.
Next time Carter is about to be towed he can utilize this technique instead.
You're very emotionally-driven and you're eschewing facts and logic.
No, it's not a crime to be a big athletic black guy. If an "only lady" put her forearm in front of the access to the truck (and, apparently, in front of the access to the English), you would consider the circumstances ... absolutely. So the threat of harm from a huge, young athlete is different than the threat of harm from an old lady. That's a thing. So is the specific circumstances of the alleged victim. If it was a big, athletic white guy it'd be the same consideration as a big, athletic black guy ... so stop pushing that false racism narrative. It's weak, like your argument. Why do you think Carter physically got in the way of the tow truck driver and stuck his forearm out to prevent him from entering said vehicle? Why didn't he, instead, ask nicely ... "please, sir, don't enter your vehicle ... stay here and continue to converse with me."? Because he knew the threat of force, and actual physical impediment, would help him get his way.
Your characterization of the tow truck driver's actions are incredibly illogical. He felt threatened ... he was being prohibited from entering his own truck. Yes, that justifies presenting a metal bar and saying the equivalent of "let me get to my truck." You are allowed to defend yourself from assault and false imprisonment. There is no crime there, absent other circumstances that haven't been disclosed, as yet.
Time for a new moniker for you.
No ability to think or reason, but a second childish personal attack from you. Are an adolescent?Show us on the doll where the tow truck driver touched you
And Carter was charged.
The tow op escalated a non-violent misunderstanding to violence when he picked up a large metal bar that could kill someone and threatened a student with it.
The tow op committed a crime and must be charged.
You can continue showing your ignorance of the law, but that's a YOU problem. Take care of it.
OK, if you say so. The guy will get off stating that he was physically restrained and was defending himself. It would be a waste of time.
you*
You are making racial accusations in this thread, yet you're crying about personal attacks. You need to up your meds
Last edited:
Again, he was not restrained. He was blocked. Physical restrained implies grabbed and held. Carter hadn't touched him until after the guy picked up a large metal bar and shouted threats of using it on Carter. Stop being dishonest.
Glad you aren't arguing this for Carter in court. He'd be in jail with your rebuttal.
I don't know what you think happened but if a big guy physically restrains me from entering my vehicle I am "restrained" and feeling quite threatened. Especially when he is wrong and in a heightened emotional condition. Unless the article is wrong or left out key information, I've got no problem with what the driver did. And if I was on a jury, would find the same.
Restraint doesn't require physical contact. You guys have to just stop making things up.
If you block someone's path ... even without touching them ... it can be harassment, assault or false imprisonment, depending on the circumstances.
Especially if you are blocking block their path to the inside of their vehicle as they are trying to do their job.
It's been 5 days and you guys are still arguing about this?
Physically restrains implies contact. There was no contact and you know that from the report. You simply keep wanting to use language that implies that there was contact.
What is not debatable at all from the official report is that the tow operator without having been touched or threatened, picked up a large metal bar and began yelling threats as he approached Carter. That is a crime known as terroristic threats with a deadly weapon in PA law. He must be charged.
Lots of comments from nobody that was actually there lolIt's been 5 days and you guys are still arguing about this?
Physically restraining means that you are using your body to restrain someone. the tow truck operator should have been free to enter his truck. He was "physically restrained" from entering his truck.
There is a reason the official report uses the language blocked with forearm. Carter put his arm across the entrance of the door. He did not touch or threaten the driver who then went and picked up a large metal tow bar and physically threatened Carter with it as he approached him.
The tow driver committed a crime in the state of PA known as terroristic threats with a deadly weapon. It is time to charge him and let the courts decide.
ok...you can't do that. you can't physically keep someone from accessing his vehicle when it is of no physical threat to you. it is against the law.
When they are taking your property you can.
You absolutely cannot having not been touched or threatened, go pick up a large metal bar and approach someone shouting threats of physical harm to them. It is against the law.
It's been 5 days and you guys are still arguing about this?
Yes, the exchange has taken on a circular character...like, four pages ago.
The irony is that when the dust settles, it's a misdemeanor charge that will amount to nothing. Carter has a court date of May 22, and he's going to get the equivalent of a slap on the wrist, which makes the entire debate academic. I mean, you can argue whether a slap on the wrist is the appropriate outcome, but that's what's going to happen.
I do think the coach should pull him into the office and say, strike 1 was the misdemeanor marijuana charge last September, strike 2 is the misdemeanor assault charge in March...I would highly advise that there not be a strike 3. Then to drive the point home, sit his ass for the first half of the West Virginia game. I mean, if we need Abdul Carter in order to beat the Mountaineers, we're in big trouble.
that is the criminal side. you can bet the farm that the tow truck operator will file a civil suit unless, of course, they agree to a payment with an NDA attached.
If I were Carter, I would sue the tow company and the operator. Look how much he had to lose with a guy threatening him with a large metal bar.
