| Page 1 of 2 | 1 | 2 |
|
|
|
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800
Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ....a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) ------------- |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:46:24 -0800 (PST), Mike Vandeman
wrote: Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800 Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) ------------- Link please? |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 18, 2:41*am, Harry Brogan
wrote: On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:46:24 -0800 (PST), Mike Vandeman wrote: Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800 Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) ------------- Link please?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BAVR1LVK2F.DTL |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message
... Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800 Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) How about 20 years in prison instead. Then the asshole will be 43 when he gets out and less liable to be running people over on his ****ing bicycle. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 18, 9:24*am, "Edward Dolan" wrote:
"Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800 Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) How about 20 years in prison instead. Then the asshole will be 43 when he gets out and less liable to be running people over on his ****ing bicycle.. -- Ed Dolan the Great - Minnesota aka Saint Edward the Great - Order of the Perpetual Sorrows - Minnesota- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - At 09:51 AM 11/18/2011, [a friend] wrote: One of the best friends of a friend of ours was hit & killed by a cyclist who ran a red light at Columbus & Bay street in S.F. about 28 years ago. She was crossing at the crosswalk on a light that just turned green and a cyclist was bombing down the street through the red light. He knocked her in the air. She landed on her head, went into a coma & died 2 weeks later. This situation that just happened is nothing new - same mentality. It sure seems like "gross negligence" to me! |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
Where is the reference to a mountain bike in the article
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BAVR1LVK2F.DTL ? I read the article and saw it nowhere. Is there another link that says it was a mountain bike? Just curious. "Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... On Nov 18, 2:41 am, Harry Brogan wrote: On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:46:24 -0800 (PST), Mike Vandeman wrote: Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800 Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) ------------- Link please?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BAVR1LVK2F.DTL |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 21:53:11 -0700, "Elrod Farggernugget"
wrote: Where is the reference to a mountain bike in the article http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BAVR1LVK2F.DTL ? I read the article and saw it nowhere. Is there another link that says it was a mountain bike? Just curious. It wasn't a mountain bike. http://www.baycitizen.org/bikes/stor...-womans-death/ This article has a photograph of the biker being questioned by police after the accident. The Racing/road bicycle appears to be undamaged. "Mike Vandeman" wrote in message ... On Nov 18, 2:41 am, Harry Brogan wrote: On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:46:24 -0800 (PST), Mike Vandeman wrote: Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800 Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) ------------- Link please?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BAVR1LVK2F.DTL |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 19, 5:27*am, T. Keating wrote:
On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 21:53:11 -0700, "Elrod Farggernugget" wrote: Where is the reference to a mountain bike in the article http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BAVR1LVK2....? I read the article and saw it nowhere. Is there another link that says it was a mountain bike? Just curious. It wasn't a mountain bike. http://www.baycitizen.org/bikes/stor...-womans-death/ This article has a photograph of the biker being questioned by police after the accident. * The Racing/road bicycle appears to be undamaged. "Mike Vandeman" *wrote in message .... On Nov 18, 2:41 am, Harry Brogan wrote: On Fri, 18 Nov 2011 00:46:24 -0800 (PST), Mike Vandeman wrote: Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800 Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) ------------- Link please?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/articl...BAVR1LVK2....- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Did you have a point? |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote:
On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 20, 12:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Dude, she WASN'T HIT BY A MOUNTAIN BIKE! Therefore YOU LIED! Your claims that I'm lying because you say she was hit by a mountain bike despite photographic evidence that she was hit by a drop-bar road bike establish your frail grip on reality. Which brings us back to the original conclusion: you are insane. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 21, 7:50*am, Opus wrote:
On Nov 20, 12:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Dude, she WASN'T HIT BY A MOUNTAIN BIKE! Therefore YOU LIED! BS. CB made a mistake. Your claims that I'm lying because you say she was hit by a mountain bike despite photographic evidence that she was hit by a drop-bar road bike establish your frail grip on reality. Which brings us back to the original conclusion: you are insane. You are the insane one.You can't read. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie.... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry? |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie.... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 22, 7:32*pm, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. Yeah, I know. Thinking can be fatiguing when you're not accustomed to it. Now run away and hide from a simple question, coward. Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 23, 12:05*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 22, 7:32*pm, Shraga wrote: On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. Yeah, I know. Thinking can be fatiguing when you're not accustomed to it. Now run away and hide from a simple question, coward. Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 23, 11:14*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 23, 12:05*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 7:32*pm, Shraga wrote: On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. Yeah, I know. Thinking can be fatiguing when you're not accustomed to it. Now run away and hide from a simple question, coward. Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Oh my! I just threw up a little in my mouth. What a haggard, insane looking little man. He has that distant stare, the type I always see on those Megan's Law websites. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 23, 8:14*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 23, 12:05*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 7:32*pm, Shraga wrote: On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. Yeah, I know. Thinking can be fatiguing when you're not accustomed to it. Now run away and hide from a simple question, coward. Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Charge dismissed. What else do you need to know? You're barking up a nonexistent tree. My mugshot is there because two mountain bikers LIED about me, as I already explained. But mountain bikers don't hear, when they don't agree with what they are hearing. Nothing new there! |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 23, 11:25*am, Kayak 44 wrote:
On Nov 23, 11:14*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 23, 12:05*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 7:32*pm, Shraga wrote: On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. Yeah, I know. Thinking can be fatiguing when you're not accustomed to it. Now run away and hide from a simple question, coward. Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Oh my! I just threw up a little in my mouth. Liar. What a haggard, insane looking little man. He has that distant stare, the type I always see on those Megan's Law websites. Looking to see if you will be caught? |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 23, 2:30*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 23, 8:14*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 23, 12:05*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 7:32*pm, Shraga wrote: On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. Yeah, I know. Thinking can be fatiguing when you're not accustomed to it. Now run away and hide from a simple question, coward. Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Charge dismissed. What else do you need to know? You're barking up a nonexistent tree. My mugshot is there because two mountain bikers LIED about me, as I already explained. But mountain bikers don't hear, when they don't agree with what they are hearing. Nothing new there! Oh come on. You were GUILTY on two counts of exhibiting a deadly weapon and one count of battery. Are you telling me those were dismissed too, or are you hiding that fact (i.e., lying)? You claim the mountain bikers "lied" but, just as you're doing with me, you don't say what they lied about. Given your history of baseless accusation, you're going to have to do better than vague unsubstantiated accusations. So obviousy, I hear just fine. You seem to be the one struggling to understand my posts. You claim here, "charge dismissed," and the mountain bikers lied, but you were still guilty on three charges. When I ask you to clarify this discrepancy, you evade the question by projecting behaviors onto me. All I'm asking for is your account of the events that led to the charges against you to set the story straight, nothing more. In other words, I am asking to hear the TRUTH. Yet you are afraid to tell the truth for some reason. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 23, 12:21*pm, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 23, 2:30*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 23, 8:14*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 23, 12:05*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 7:32*pm, Shraga wrote: On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. Yeah, I know. Thinking can be fatiguing when you're not accustomed to it. Now run away and hide from a simple question, coward. Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Charge dismissed. What else do you need to know? You're barking up a nonexistent tree. My mugshot is there because two mountain bikers LIED about me, as I already explained. But mountain bikers don't hear, when they don't agree with what they are hearing. Nothing new there! Oh come on. You were GUILTY on two counts of exhibiting a deadly weapon and one count of battery. Are you telling me those were dismissed too, or are you hiding that fact (i.e., lying)? Every time I answer you, you change the subject! You asked me about a "handsaw". Charge dismissed! How many times do I have to say it, before you hear it, idiot? Repeat after me: "Charge dismissed!" Obviously, I can't discuss something that didn't happen.... Sheesh. You claim the mountain bikers "lied" but, just as you're doing with me, you don't say what they lied about. Given your history of baseless accusation, you're going to have to do better than vague unsubstantiated accusations. They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. So obviousy, I hear just fine. You seem to be the one struggling to understand my posts. You claim here, "charge dismissed," and the mountain bikers lied, but you were still guilty on three charges. When I ask you to clarify this discrepancy, you evade the question by projecting behaviors onto me. All I'm asking for is your account of the events that led to the charges against you to set the story straight, nothing more. In other words, I am asking to hear the TRUTH. Yet you are afraid to tell the truth for some reason. BS. This is the first time you asked that. Since all the charges were based on LIES, there is no point in discussing them. Sorry to disappoint you, but you aren't going to make any points. I did not brandish (except in self-defense, which is not a crime), nor did I commit battery -- the mountain biker did, by running into me. All you want to do is LIE ("you were still guilty"), so there's no point in trying to have a rational conversation with you. Just like ALL mountain bikers, all you want to do is twist the facts, since they don't support your bizarre ideas. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 23, 2:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 23, 11:25*am, Kayak 44 wrote: On Nov 23, 11:14*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 23, 12:05*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 7:32*pm, Shraga wrote: On Nov 22, 4:31*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 22, 9:45*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 21, 11:21*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 21, 11:53*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 20, 1:24*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 20, 7:34*am, Opus wrote: On Nov 19, 10:20*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: Did you have a point? She wasn't hit by a mountain bike, therefore the premise stated in your header is false. Your irrational hatred of mountain bikes has conflated a road bike wreck on a road with the subject "mountain bikes" where no such connection exists. QED you are insane. "Beautiful Mind" insane, but without the genius of the charcter in the movie... BS. Your hatred of people who tell the truth about mountain biking led you to ascribe that statement to me, when it obviously came from someone else named "CB". Learn to read, idiot. Sheesh. And even if I HAD made a mistake, it wouldn't lead to a diagnosis of "insane", dumdum. "Insane" is what you call people who mountain bike, leading inevitably to serious injury or death. Have you had an accident on your mountain bike yet? Tell the truth.... Did "CB" write the subject heading of this thread? No. You did, liar. Why are you trying to blame someone else for your lie, coward? Since you're slow and have a short memory, I'll repeat the heading here for you: "Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian" It wasn't a mountain bike. Now, go ahead and explain why you needed to lie about this. Are you running out of examples? BS. Those weren't my words. Learn to read, idiot. Mountain bikers are insane. Still trying to sell out "CB" and refusing responsibility, I see. What's the matter, your father never teach you anything about building character or integrity, coward? You're neither capable of admitting YOUR mistake, nor admitting YOUR lie. How many other stories have you posted like this? How much of your anecdotal evidence about mountain bikers is completely fabricated, like this example? This, of course, is why you have no credibility. So why did YOU initiate a thread under YOUR name, with a subject YOU entered, that includes an OBVIOUS lie, Dr. Vandeman? Wait... I'll write that again, in single syl-la-bles for you, since you're so amazingly dense: Why did you re-post this sto-ry?- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Yawn. Yeah, I know. Thinking can be fatiguing when you're not accustomed to it. Now run away and hide from a simple question, coward. Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Oh my! I just threw up a little in my mouth. Liar. What a haggard, insane looking little man. He has that distant stare, the type I always see on those Megan's Law websites. Looking to see if you will be caught? Looking to make sure people like you are not in my neighborhood. |
Mountain [NOT!] Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
"CB" writes:
Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. =v= It was a road bike, not a mountain bike. Why does "CB" presume to make an assertion that is completely false? This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality ... =v= That being their 5th article on this incident from that newspaper (there have been 2 more since), it being the typical overhyped nonrepresentative "news" story because the incident is such a rarity. This is the only such San Francisco fatality I know of in the last 21 years, but the _Chronicle_ and other media haven't taken the time to provide that context. =v= Speaking of entitlement, motorists kill a pedestrian every 21 *days* in San Francisco, but we don't get wall-to-wall news coverage like this to be used as fodder to concoct stories with (were they tourists? what was going in the drivers' minds? can we just make up something mean?). _Jym_ |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 23, 6:22*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 23, 12:21*pm, Shraga wrote: Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind.. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Charge dismissed. What else do you need to know? You're barking up a nonexistent tree. My mugshot is there because two mountain bikers LIED about me, as I already explained. But mountain bikers don't hear, when they don't agree with what they are hearing. Nothing new there! Oh come on. You were GUILTY on two counts of exhibiting a deadly weapon and one count of battery. Are you telling me those were dismissed too, or are you hiding that fact (i.e., lying)? Every time I answer you, you change the subject! You asked me about a "handsaw". Charge dismissed! How many times do I have to say it, before you hear it, idiot? Repeat after me: "Charge dismissed!" Obviously, I can't discuss something that didn't happen.... Sheesh. No, stupid. I asked you to "tell your side of the 'handsaw' story" (i.e., your account of the events). You've never answered that, apparently because you can't read. If you would like me to call it something with fewer syl-la-bles, feel free to make a suggestion. Furthermore, I'm being very consistent in my request. You're the one dodging, for some reason. Stop blaming me for your inability to read. You claim the mountain bikers "lied" but, just as you're doing with me, you don't say what they lied about. Given your history of baseless accusation, you're going to have to do better than vague unsubstantiated accusations. They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. Really? So you weren't there? They weren't there? If they lied about "EVERYTHING," then they must have lied about being there. They must have lied about you having a handsaw, yet below you admit to having one. So now you are OBVIOUSLY lying. There is NO WAY they lied about "EVERYTHING." You wrote yourself, "three of the charges..." What about the other three? Get it yet, stupid? This is the whole point of my question, although by now I've given up on a coherent response, because you're either too scared to respond, or you're simply a compulsive liar. So obviousy, I hear just fine. You seem to be the one struggling to understand my posts. You claim here, "charge dismissed," and the mountain bikers lied, but you were still guilty on three charges. When I ask you to clarify this discrepancy, you evade the question by projecting behaviors onto me. All I'm asking for is your account of the events that led to the charges against you to set the story straight, nothing more. In other words, I am asking to hear the TRUTH. Yet you are afraid to tell the truth for some reason. BS. This is the first time you asked that. No it isn't, liar: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...de2a503f891fd4 Still, your evading the question AGAIN is duly noted, coward. Since all the charges were based on LIES, there is no point in discussing them. Sorry to disappoint you, but you aren't going to make any points. What gave you the silly idea I'm going for "points?" I'm just asking for information, which you fail to grasp, somehow, stupid. I did not brandish (except in self-defense, which is not a crime), nor did I commit battery -- the mountain biker did, by running into me. All you want to do is LIE ("you were still guilty"), so there's no point in trying to have a rational conversation with you. Just like ALL mountain bikers, all you want to do is twist the facts, since they don't support your bizarre ideas. Three of the six charges were neither dismissed nor acquitted. What facts am I twisting? Only an idiot like you would mistake a line of questioning for a lie. I tried asking you a question; you refuse to answer it. I explain my understanding of the details (which may be wrong), hoping you will illuminate the facts; you continue to evade the question, and call me a liar. You continue to use projection as a means to dodge the question. Again, you claim to respect the truth, yet you refuse to provide it here as a means of refuting the charges against you. Moreover, you LIE with generalities as a excuse to answer the question. Your dishonesty in this forum is repulsive. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On 11/18/2011 09:46 AM, Mike Vandeman wrote:
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2011 21:21:37 -0800 Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality we trail users are battling in Marin County. CB --- "Bicyclist faces manslaughter charge in pedestrian's death." "A bicyclist who hit and killed a pedestrian when he ran a red light along San Francisco's waterfront has been charged with misdemeanor vehicular manslaughter, authorities said Tuesday. "Rudolph Ang, 23, of San Francisco collided with 68-year-old Dionette Cherney at Mission Street and the Embarcadero about 8:30 a.m. July 15, prosecutors said. Cherney, who was visiting from Washington, DC, died of head injuries at a hospital Aug. 11. "Cherney was crossing the Embarcadero in a crosswalk with the green light at Mission when she was hit by Ang, who was travelling north, police said. "Ang remained at the scene and was interviewed by police. There was no evidence he was drunk or on drugs, prosecutors said. "Ang was charged with only a misdemeanor because investigators determined that he had not acted with criminal intent or gross negligence, said Stephanie Ong Stillman, a spokeswoman for DA George Gascon. Running a red light is not gross negligence? "Ang faces a maximum sentence of a year in jail if convicted. " (Email Henry K. Lee at ) ------------- |
Mountain [NOT!] Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 25, 8:54*am, Jym Dyer wrote:
"CB" writes: Subject: Death of a Pedestrian due to.... ...a mountain biker, in San Francisco. =v= It was a road bike, not a mountain bike. *Why does "CB" presume to make an assertion that is completely false? Beats me. This story was in the 16 Nov. 2011 'San Francisco Chronicle.' The poor woman -- being a tourist, she obviously didn't know that in San Francisco people are supposed to jump out of the way and let the biker just ride through. This is the same "entitlement" mentality ... =v= That being their 5th article on this incident from that newspaper (there have been 2 more since), it being the typical overhyped nonrepresentative "news" story because the incident is such a rarity. *This is the only such San Francisco fatality I know of in the last 21 years, but the _Chronicle_ and other media haven't taken the time to provide that context. It wouldn't change the fact that a bicyclist killed a pedestrian. Do auto-caused deaths make that okay? Sheesh. =v= Speaking of entitlement, motorists kill a pedestrian every 21 *days* in San Francisco, but we don't get wall-to-wall news coverage like this to be used as fodder to concoct stories with (were they tourists? what was going in the drivers' minds? can we just make up something mean?). * * _Jym_ |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 23, 6:22*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 23, 12:21*pm, Shraga wrote: Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Charge dismissed. What else do you need to know? You're barking up a nonexistent tree. My mugshot is there because two mountain bikers LIED about me, as I already explained. But mountain bikers don't hear, when they don't agree with what they are hearing. Nothing new there! Oh come on. You were GUILTY on two counts of exhibiting a deadly weapon and one count of battery. Are you telling me those were dismissed too, or are you hiding that fact (i.e., lying)? Every time I answer you, you change the subject! You asked me about a "handsaw". Charge dismissed! How many times do I have to say it, before you hear it, idiot? Repeat after me: "Charge dismissed!" Obviously, I can't discuss something that didn't happen.... Sheesh. No, stupid. I asked you to "tell your side of the 'handsaw' story" (i.e., your account of the events). You've never answered that, I've answered it several times, LIAR: charge dismissed. I.e., it didn't happen. I.e., the mountain biker LIED, just as you are doing. I guess you aren'a happy with the truth. Nothing new there! apparently because you can't read. If you would like me to call it something with fewer syl-la-bles, feel free to make a suggestion. Furthermore, I'm being very consistent in my request. You're the one dodging, for some reason. Stop blaming me for your inability to read. You can't (won't) read. You claim the mountain bikers "lied" but, just as you're doing with me, you don't say what they lied about. Given your history of baseless accusation, you're going to have to do better than vague unsubstantiated accusations. They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. Really? So you weren't there? They weren't there? If they lied about "EVERYTHING," then they must have lied about being there. They must have lied about you having a handsaw, yet below you admit to having one. So now you are OBVIOUSLY lying. There is NO WAY they lied about "EVERYTHING." You wrote yourself, "three of the charges..." What about the other three? Dismissed or innocent. Get it yet, stupid? This is the whole point of my question, although by now I've given up on a coherent response, because you're either too scared to respond, or you're simply a compulsive liar. I have never lied. I don't need to, because I'm right. So obviousy, I hear just fine. You seem to be the one struggling to understand my posts. You claim here, "charge dismissed," and the mountain bikers lied, but you were still guilty on three charges. When I ask you to clarify this discrepancy, you evade the question by projecting behaviors onto me. All I'm asking for is your account of the events that led to the charges against you to set the story straight, nothing more. In other words, I am asking to hear the TRUTH. Yet you are afraid to tell the truth for some reason. BS. This is the first time you asked that. No it isn't, liar: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...rm/thread/9207... Still, your evading the question AGAIN is duly noted, coward. Since all the charges were based on LIES, there is no point in discussing them. Sorry to disappoint you, but you aren't going to make any points. What gave you the silly idea I'm going for "points?" I'm just asking for information, which you fail to grasp, somehow, stupid. No, you aren't, because you aren't satisfied after I answer you. I did not brandish (except in self-defense, which is not a crime), nor did I commit battery -- the mountain biker did, by running into me. All you want to do is LIE ("you were still guilty"), so there's no point in trying to have a rational conversation with you. Just like ALL mountain bikers, all you want to do is twist the facts, since they don't support your bizarre ideas. Three of the six charges were neither dismissed nor acquitted. What facts am I twisting? Most of them. The mountain bikers lied. That's all you need to know. Only an idiot like you would mistake a line of questioning for a lie. I tried asking you a question; you refuse to answer it. I explain my understanding of the details (which may be wrong), hoping you will illuminate the facts; you continue to evade the question, and call me a liar. Because you ARE a liar: I already answered the question, several times, AS YOU WELL KNOW. You continue to use projection as a means to dodge the question. Again, you claim to respect the truth, yet you refuse to provide it here as a means of refuting the charges against you. Moreover, you LIE with generalities as a excuse to answer the question. Your dishonesty in this forum is repulsive. You have yet to demonstrate ANY "dishonesty", except your own. FACT: You don't accept the truth, because you don't like it. It doesn't favor your pro-mountain-biker view. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 23, 6:22*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 23, 12:21*pm, Shraga wrote: Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Charge dismissed. What else do you need to know? You're barking up a nonexistent tree. My mugshot is there because two mountain bikers LIED about me, as I already explained. But mountain bikers don't hear, when they don't agree with what they are hearing. Nothing new there! Oh come on. You were GUILTY on two counts of exhibiting a deadly weapon and one count of battery. Are you telling me those were dismissed too, or are you hiding that fact (i.e., lying)? Every time I answer you, you change the subject! You asked me about a "handsaw". Charge dismissed! How many times do I have to say it, before you hear it, idiot? Repeat after me: "Charge dismissed!" Obviously, I can't discuss something that didn't happen.... Sheesh. No, stupid. I asked you to "tell your side of the 'handsaw' story" (i.e., your account of the events). You've never answered that, apparently because you can't read. If you would like me to call it something with fewer syl-la-bles, feel free to make a suggestion. Furthermore, I'm being very consistent in my request. You're the one dodging, for some reason. Stop blaming me for your inability to read. You claim the mountain bikers "lied" but, just as you're doing with me, you don't say what they lied about. Given your history of baseless accusation, you're going to have to do better than vague unsubstantiated accusations. They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. Really? So you weren't there? They weren't there? If they lied about "EVERYTHING," then they must have lied about being there. They must have lied about you having a handsaw, yet below you admit to having one. So now you are OBVIOUSLY lying. There is NO WAY they lied about "EVERYTHING." You wrote yourself, "three of the charges..." What about the other three? Get it yet, stupid? This is the whole point of my question, although by now I've given up on a coherent response, because you're either too scared to respond, or you're simply a compulsive liar. So obviousy, I hear just fine. You seem to be the one struggling to understand my posts. You claim here, "charge dismissed," and the mountain bikers lied, but you were still guilty on three charges. When I ask you to clarify this discrepancy, you evade the question by projecting behaviors onto me. All I'm asking for is your account of the events that led to the charges against you to set the story straight, nothing more. In other words, I am asking to hear the TRUTH. Yet you are afraid to tell the truth for some reason. BS. This is the first time you asked that. No it isn't, liar: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.b...rm/thread/9207... Still, your evading the question AGAIN is duly noted, coward. Since all the charges were based on LIES, there is no point in discussing them. Sorry to disappoint you, but you aren't going to make any points. What gave you the silly idea I'm going for "points?" I'm just asking for information, which you fail to grasp, somehow, stupid. I did not brandish (except in self-defense, which is not a crime), nor did I commit battery -- the mountain biker did, by running into me. All you want to do is LIE ("you were still guilty"), so there's no point in trying to have a rational conversation with you. Just like ALL mountain bikers, all you want to do is twist the facts, since they don't support your bizarre ideas. Three of the six charges were neither dismissed nor acquitted. What facts am I twisting? Only an idiot like you would mistake a line of questioning for a lie. I tried asking you a question; you refuse to answer it. I explain my understanding of the details (which may be wrong), hoping you will illuminate the facts; you continue to evade the question, and call me a liar. You continue to use projection as a means to dodge the question. Again, you claim to respect the truth, yet you refuse to provide it here as a means of refuting the charges against you. Moreover, you LIE with generalities as a excuse to answer the question. Your dishonesty in this forum is repulsive. Your FIRST lie, of course, is never using your real name. That's the first sign of a LIAR. You can't even tell the truth about your own name! Sheesh. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 23, 6:22*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 23, 12:21*pm, Shraga wrote: Mountain bikers are coward, because they are unwilling to tell the truth. You are both deliberately lying. Nothing useful can be done with scum like that, except use you as examples of the typical mountain biker. "Mountain bikers are coward...?" Silly man. You're the one unwilling to tell the truth in this thread. I've asked you twice, and you keep trying to change the subject, which is typical behavior for a liar. Why are you afraid of the truth, coward? I was specific about your lie, yet you vaguely accuse me of lying with ZERO evidence. As I wrote before, this is typical of your naive approach to science. In the past, I asked you to tell your side of the "handsaw" story, and you ran and hid at that request too. You're really good at badgering people to respond to you, but you really suck at responding in kind. Guess that's your problem, though. You're the one who has to explain why his mugshot is on the Internet: http://police.berkeley.edu/crimealer...52810-37NC.htm Charge dismissed. What else do you need to know? You're barking up a nonexistent tree. My mugshot is there because two mountain bikers LIED about me, as I already explained. But mountain bikers don't hear, when they don't agree with what they are hearing. Nothing new there! Oh come on. You were GUILTY on two counts of exhibiting a deadly weapon and one count of battery. Are you telling me those were dismissed too, or are you hiding that fact (i.e., lying)? Every time I answer you, you change the subject! You asked me about a "handsaw". Charge dismissed! How many times do I have to say it, before you hear it, idiot? Repeat after me: "Charge dismissed!" Obviously, I can't discuss something that didn't happen.... Sheesh. No, stupid. I asked you to "tell your side of the 'handsaw' story" (i.e., your account of the events). You've never answered that, apparently because you can't read. If you would like me to call it something with fewer syl-la-bles, feel free to make a suggestion. Furthermore, I'm being very consistent in my request. You're the one dodging, for some reason. Stop blaming me for your inability to read. You claim the mountain bikers "lied" but, just as you're doing with me, you don't say what they lied about. Given your history of baseless accusation, you're going to have to do better than vague unsubstantiated accusations. They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. Really? So you weren't there? They weren't there? If they lied about "EVERYTHING," then they must have lied about being there. They must have lied about you having a handsaw, yet below you admit to having one. Where, liar? |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 29, 4:33*am, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote: Your FIRST lie, of course, is never using your real name. That's the first sign of a LIAR. You can't even tell the truth about your own name! Sheesh. Now you're just getting desperate. Did I upset you that much? Also: you just lied AGAIN, liar. Twice. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 28, 7:43*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote: They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. Really? So you weren't there? They weren't there? If they lied about "EVERYTHING," then they must have lied about being there. They must have lied about you having a handsaw, yet below you admit to having one. So now you are OBVIOUSLY lying. There is NO WAY they lied about "EVERYTHING." You wrote yourself, "three of the charges..." What about the other three? Dismissed or innocent. You continue to use projection as a means to dodge the question. Again, you claim to respect the truth, yet you refuse to provide it here as a means of refuting the charges against you. Moreover, you LIE with generalities as a excuse to answer the question. Your dishonesty in this forum is repulsive. You have yet to demonstrate ANY "dishonesty", except your own. FACT: You don't accept the truth, because you don't like it. It doesn't favor your pro-mountain-biker view. Bitch, please. Go look up the word "everything" in a dictionary, moron, and then consider the definition in the context of the sentence, "They lied about EVERYTHING." When you're done, look up "fact," because you are confusing it with the word, "assumption" or "bias." Dishonesty demonstrated. That was too easy. Unless you want to provide your version of the events that led to the charges being filed against you, along with a narrative that includes your perspective of the trial, you can just save your ramblings and lies for someone else. Now, I'm off to the magazine stands to purchase the published version of your trial, which stands alone in its detail of the events. Lies or not, since you refuse to tell your side of the story, it's all anyone has if they are interested in reading an article about it. Enjoy your infamy. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 29, 9:14*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 29, 4:33*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote: Your FIRST lie, of course, is never using your real name. That's the first sign of a LIAR. You can't even tell the truth about your own name! Sheesh. Now you're just getting desperate. Did I upset you that much? Also: you just lied AGAIN, liar. Twice. Where is the lie? You are afraid to use your real name, just as I said. You just lied AGAIN. So what IS your real name? |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 29, 9:51*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 28, 7:43*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote: They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. Really? So you weren't there? They weren't there? If they lied about "EVERYTHING," then they must have lied about being there. They must have lied about you having a handsaw, yet below you admit to having one. So now you are OBVIOUSLY lying. There is NO WAY they lied about "EVERYTHING." You wrote yourself, "three of the charges..." What about the other three? Dismissed or innocent. You continue to use projection as a means to dodge the question. Again, you claim to respect the truth, yet you refuse to provide it here as a means of refuting the charges against you. Moreover, you LIE with generalities as a excuse to answer the question. Your dishonesty in this forum is repulsive. You have yet to demonstrate ANY "dishonesty", except your own. FACT: You don't accept the truth, because you don't like it. It doesn't favor your pro-mountain-biker view. Bitch, please. Go look up the word "everything" in a dictionary, moron, and then consider the definition in the context of the sentence, "They lied about EVERYTHING." When you're done, look up "fact," because you are confusing it with the word, "assumption" or "bias." Dishonesty demonstrated. That was too easy. Unless you want to provide your version of the events that led to the charges being filed against you, along with a narrative that includes your perspective of the trial, you can just save your ramblings and lies for someone else. Now, I'm off to the magazine stands to purchase the published version of your trial, which stands alone in its detail of the events. BS. It is mostly lies, as you well know. "Bike" Magazine & Peter Frick- Wright are not where an intelligent person would go to get the truth about mountain biking, since they are profiting from it. That's obvious to everyone but mountain bikers. Why don't you pay for the trial transcript? Then you can hear the police & mountain bikers lying. Lies or not, since you refuse to tell your side of the story, I already did. How many times do I have to do it, before you hear it?: "charge dismissed". End of story. Did you get it yet? If not, ask your mommie to explain it to you. it's all anyone has if they are interested in reading an article about it. Enjoy your infamy. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 29, 9:51*am, Shraga wrote:
On Nov 28, 7:43*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote: They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. Really? So you weren't there? They weren't there? If they lied about "EVERYTHING," then they must have lied about being there. They must have lied about you having a handsaw, yet below you admit to having one. So now you are OBVIOUSLY lying. There is NO WAY they lied about "EVERYTHING." You wrote yourself, "three of the charges..." What about the other three? Dismissed or innocent. You continue to use projection as a means to dodge the question. Again, you claim to respect the truth, yet you refuse to provide it here as a means of refuting the charges against you. Moreover, you LIE with generalities as a excuse to answer the question. Your dishonesty in this forum is repulsive. You have yet to demonstrate ANY "dishonesty", except your own. FACT: You don't accept the truth, because you don't like it. It doesn't favor your pro-mountain-biker view. Bitch, please. Go look up the word "everything" in a dictionary, moron, and then consider the definition in the context of the sentence, "They lied about EVERYTHING." When you're done, look up "fact," because you are confusing it with the word, "assumption" or "bias." Dishonesty demonstrated. That was too easy. Unless you want to provide your version of the events that led to the charges being filed against you, along with a narrative that includes your perspective of the trial, you can just save your ramblings and lies for someone else. Now, I'm off to the magazine stands to purchase the published version of your trial, which stands alone in its detail of the events. Lies or not, since you refuse to tell your side of the story, it's all anyone has if they are interested in reading an article about it. Enjoy your infamy. Only in the minds (such as they are) of mountain bikers. Everyone else knows I'm telling the truth. |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 29, 3:10*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 29, 9:51*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 28, 7:43*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote: They lied about EVERYTHING. That's why three of the charges were dismissed or acquitted. Really? So you weren't there? They weren't there? If they lied about "EVERYTHING," then they must have lied about being there. They must have lied about you having a handsaw, yet below you admit to having one. So now you are OBVIOUSLY lying. There is NO WAY they lied about "EVERYTHING." You wrote yourself, "three of the charges..." What about the other three? Dismissed or innocent. You continue to use projection as a means to dodge the question. Again, you claim to respect the truth, yet you refuse to provide it here as a means of refuting the charges against you. Moreover, you LIE with generalities as a excuse to answer the question. Your dishonesty in this forum is repulsive. You have yet to demonstrate ANY "dishonesty", except your own. FACT: You don't accept the truth, because you don't like it. It doesn't favor your pro-mountain-biker view. Bitch, please. Go look up the word "everything" in a dictionary, moron, and then consider the definition in the context of the sentence, "They lied about EVERYTHING." When you're done, look up "fact," because you are confusing it with the word, "assumption" or "bias." Dishonesty demonstrated. That was too easy. Unless you want to provide your version of the events that led to the charges being filed against you, along with a narrative that includes your perspective of the trial, you can just save your ramblings and lies for someone else. Now, I'm off to the magazine stands to purchase the published version of your trial, which stands alone in its detail of the events. BS. It is mostly lies, as you well know. "Bike" Magazine & Peter Frick- Wright are not where an intelligent person would go to get the truth about mountain biking, since they are profiting from it. That's obvious to everyone but mountain bikers. Why don't you pay for the trial transcript? Then you can hear the police & mountain bikers lying. A transcript is written or printed, you wouldn't hear anything but paper flapping idiot, DUH!! |
Mountain Biker Runs Red Light, Kills Pedestrian
On Nov 29, 3:01*pm, Mike Vandeman wrote:
On Nov 29, 9:14*am, Shraga wrote: On Nov 29, 4:33*am, Mike Vandeman wrote: On Nov 27, 11:38*am, Shraga wrote: Your FIRST lie, of course, is never using your real name. That's the first sign of a LIAR. You can't even tell the truth about your own name! Sheesh. Now you're just getting desperate. Did I upset you that much? Also: you just lied AGAIN, liar. Twice. Where is the lie? You are afraid to use your real name, just as I said. You just lied AGAIN. So what IS your real name? Are you going to call his employer like you have on others? |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:45 AM. |
|
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
CycleBanter.com