Stand Your Ground: Chai Vang Case Revisited

[HUNG TU LO]

You don't seem to understand that we are not talking about truth.  We are talking about whether or not 1/12 jurors can find reasonable doubt. 

  

And how do you go about convincing someone that there is reasonable doubt that Chai Vang is not guilty of 1st degree intentional homicide?

He shot people in the back. Please explain an alternative. The white people are very good at shooting while facing their backs to their target? 

He shot some victims multiple times. Please explain an alternative. Were those super serum soldiers that even when shot, continued to get up and keep fighting? 

He didn't attempt to call police, notify his other friends, or signal for help from other people in the area. Please explain an alternative. He was called chink and gook and was shot at by 6 armed white hunters but he stayed so calm in order to avoid being judged in a white people's county even though he was the self-defense Hmong hero of the century? 


If you could explain this case to some rainforest aboriginal who has no interest in either side, and he/she had reasonable doubt that this was not a case of some guy who snapped and intended to kill everyone in sight, I will eat horse shit at St. Paul Xcel Center Hmong Year for the world to fukken see.

So how did the 1:12 odds work out in the Zimmerman trial where he even admitted to chasing down Trayvon into an enclosed area along with 911 call with the operator yelling "Don't follow him!"? Let's be reminded that it is actually 1:14 odd because there are always two juror who are backups and are not revealed until deliberation in the case that one "real" juror cannot continue. Yeah. Great odds! 

[bulbasaur]

*yawns*

Again, "You don't seem to understand that we are not talking about truth.  We are talking about whether or not 1/12 jurors can find reasonable doubt."    You quoted it, but you don't seem to understand it. 

1.  There are 7 pages explaining how there could be reasonable doubt. 

2.  Shots in the back do not disqualify Stand Your Ground or even self-defense. 

3.  Multiple shots do not disqualify Stand Your Ground or even self-defense. 

4.  Vang didn't have the means of communication.  Did he happen to have a secret satellite phone that only you know of? 

5.  You have this obsession with aliens and rain forest aboriginals.  These examples do not support you.  First, aliens and rain forest aboriginals are not considered "peers."  This is one of the reasons why people felt the trial was not fair.  Second, you have no idea what judicial system or personal beliefs your aliens or rain forest aboriginals even have.  You are PRESUMING (again) that they carry the same as you.  What if these aliens and rain forest aboriginals think it is totally fine for a person to be killed for spewing racial slurs?  Hypothetically, Vang could be free today if his jury were aliens or rain forest aboriginals.  Should I continue to explain why this argument is poor? 

6.  1//14 is actually better than 1/12.  More jurors mean more chances.  In any case, those odds worked for Zimmerman.  This doesn't help your argument. 

You don't seem to understand that to some people, the poor police work and the contradicting testimonies from the white hunters are already enough to step away from 1st degree murder even if they still believe everything you do.  You said it yourself, the white hunters called him racial slurs.  Thus, they are the instigators.  Because they are already the aggressors, it is plausible that the white hunters shot first.  Add all of this together, a juror may step away from 1st degree murder despite everything else.  Reasonable doubt. 

You presumed things about me, and you were wrong.  You continue to presume things. 

 

And how do you go about convincing someone that there is reasonable doubt that Chai Vang is not guilty of 1st degree intentional homicide?

He shot people in the back. Please explain an alternative. The white people are very good at shooting while facing their backs to their target? 

He shot some victims multiple times. Please explain an alternative. Were those super serum soldiers that even when shot, continued to get up and keep fighting? 

He didn't attempt to call police, notify his other friends, or signal for help from other people in the area. Please explain an alternative. He was called chink and gook and was shot at by 6 armed white hunters but he stayed so calm in order to avoid being judged in a white people's county even though he was the self-defense Hmong hero of the century? 


If you could explain this case to some rainforest aboriginal who has no interest in either side, and he/she had reasonable doubt that this was not a case of some guy who snapped and intended to kill everyone in sight, I will eat horse shit at St. Paul Xcel Center Hmong Year for the world to fukken see.

So how did the 1:12 odds work out in the Zimmerman trial where he even admitted to chasing down Trayvon into an enclosed area along with 911 call with the operator yelling "Don't follow him!"? Let's be reminded that it is actually 1:14 odd because there are always two juror who are backups and are not revealed until deliberation in the case that one "real" juror cannot continue. Yeah. Great odds! 

[bulbasaur]

You don't realize how oblivious you are.  You wrote, "Dodging the question."  You are so oblivious that you don't even realize that you never asked a question.   

Moreover, you need to read what the thread is actually about.  It's not what you think it is. 

Dodging the question.  Go do your homework.  Come back with the new evidence or present new fact and if you can convince the PH community, the PH community will raise hell and money to get the brother out.  If you can't even start there, then I guess you are just like us...you don't support CV because support actually means to put work and effort into something.

[bulbasaur]

What was the question again?   And how dare people dodge your questions.  They need to go do their homework! 

And BTW, what you learned growing up is not always true.  Sometimes you have to look back at tragic events to get a better understanding and perspective.  It's not always about "doing something."  For example, a bad break up.  There is probably nothing you can do about it, and it is probably painful to think about it.  However, a person probably should look back on it simply to get a better understand and perspective.  It's about personal growth.  Looking back on the Chai Vang case is more of a community growth.  As individuals, as a community, and as a society, we should look back at tragic events.  We should look back at Hiroshima.  We should look back at the Holocaust.  We should look back at 17th century scholars and what they thought of a flat earth.   

CV is in jail and the problem is over for him at least.  I feel bad for the families of all involved.  Let's not pick on an old wound if we are not going to do something about it.  The wound might get infected and fester.  Something I was taught growing up.

[HUNG TU LO]

However, a person probably should look back on it simply to get a better understand and perspective.  It's about personal growth.  Looking back on the Chai Vang case is more of a community growth.  As individuals, as a community, and as a society, we should look back at tragic events.  We should look back at Hiroshima.  We should look back at the Holocaust.  We should look back at 17th century scholars and what they thought of a flat earth.   

What needed to be learned from this situation was lost. This whole situation would've never happened had Chai Vang stayed put on public hunting grounds. This is a huge FUKKEN problem within the Hmong community. Instead of accepting it, all Hmong people wanted to say was "Don't stereotype us! We don't all do it!" The fact is, that Hmong only make up 1% of the total Minnesota and Wisconsin population but we account for WAAAAAAAAAAYYY Y fukken more game poaching and trespassing than a people who are only 60,xxx population in Minnesota! It's alot like black people only make up 5% of the Minnesota population but accounts for an insane amount of muggings, batteries, robberies, gang activity, unnecessary welfare recipient, drugs, etc., but every black person is like "Yo yo yo yo that ain't me! Don't say all black people are like that!" Well you fukken dumbshit, white people make 80% of the population and you do more bad shit than they do even though you are only 5% - what does that tell you? THAT THERE'S A FUKKEN PROBLEM IN THE COMMUNITY AND YOU NEED TO FIX IT AND TO FIRST FIX IT YOU NEED TO ADMIT THERE'S A FUKKEN PROBLEM.

Meanwhile, everyone just keeps focusing on "B,b,b,b,b,b,but what about the white people's actions? Why didn't they approach him differently!? Why did they call him a gook and chink?!" Awwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwww your wittle feelings hurt? Awwwwwwwww you gonna cwwwwy because white man told you have small peenis? YOU FUKKEN TRESPASSED BIITCH!!! YOU DROPPED THE FIRST DOMINO ON THIS WHOLE CAUSE-AND-EFFECT SITUATION. IF I HAD LAND AND HMONG PEOPLE TRESPASS, I'LL CHEW YOUR haha ASS OUT TOOO AND YOU'LL PROBABLY KILL MY FAMILY TOO YOU FUKKEN MONKEY BARBARIAN PEOPLE.

You just look at this situation and use it as a satisfaction for your wittle ego that was hurt by white man. Please don't make it seem like you're the unbiased, objective person here. You're embarrassing yourself. And the white people, they are fukkked up as much as the rest of you. They never took this situation and realized that they need to change as a community; that you can't just be a nice person to your little 10,000 population county but be a dipshiit to everyone outside even if they are from a different race and breaking the law on your property.

[YeejKoob13]

A few weeks ago I saw the documentary on Chai Vang. And these are some of the impressions I got:

1) Chai Vang's lawyer was incompetent, just didn't care, or wanted him to be found guilty. The lawyer put him on the stand and didn't even advise or object to the things he said (which were perhaps lost in the translation?) and reflected badly on him, particularly where the prosecutor asked him, "who deserved to die?"

2) How can it really be a jury of peers when every juror is white? And they tried Chai in the very county that the incident happened in,,, Shouldn't the lawyer protest vigorously to have him tried in a more mixed race location, like Madison or Milwaukee, etc?

3) The punk kid (has a face which invites a brick) who blocked Chai's escape route deserved it.

Whatever anybody says that this was a fair trial, I just can't really believe that. A mixed race jury may have came out with a different decision. And even if found guilty, may have opted for a lesser sentence.

Lastly, didn't realize there were this many White apologists/Hmong-self-haters around. Maybe the argument against certain posters have polarized their stances, but sheesh, still the tone is cringe worthy.

[YeejKoob13]

I'm not entirely familiar with "Stand Your Ground," but doesn't this law permit you to ping off any threat, real or perceived?

If I was in Chai's situation, I'd probably mow them all down too. Yes, even a few bullets through the backs. Why? Well because,,,

I'm lost (assume this is true), and I'm confronted with hostile ppl using racial slurs. Obviously this means they consider me a lesser human or even an animal so who knows what they will do. And then one punk kid blocks my escape route. Another guy fires at me as a parting shot... Here I'm lost. I don't know where to go. My mind is spinning. I fear for my safety. Basically I got my back to the wall... well, ping, ping, ping, until all are down, as any one left alive may call for backup. And not only that they know the terrain and I don't, so they may come after me again later on, so might as well neutralize the threat at this very moment. Then hasty retreat. Not going to say one word to anybody I run across, especially white/other folks, until I'm in a safe zone.

[bulbasaur]

Again, you are making conclusions based on presumptions.   

YeejKoob13 is my 1/12 jurors.  You fall with the other 11 jurors, and that is fine.   You may convince 92% of the people to agree with you.  I only  need one to win the debate.  You apparently need an entire race of aliens and a society of rain forest aboriginals. 

What needed to be learned from this situation was lost. This whole situation would've never happened had Chai Vang stayed put on public hunting grounds. This is a huge FUKKEN problem within the Hmong community. Instead of accepting it, all Hmong people wanted to say was "Don't stereotype us! We don't all do it!" The fact is, that Hmong only make up 1% of the total Minnesota and Wisconsin population but we account for WAAAAAAAAAAYYY Y fukken more game poaching and trespassing than a people who are only 60,xxx population in Minnesota! It's alot like black people only make up 5% of the Minnesota population but accounts for an insane amount of muggings, batteries, robberies, gang activity, unnecessary welfare recipient, drugs, etc., but every black person is like "Yo yo yo yo that ain't me! Don't say all black people are like that!" Well you fukken dumbshit, white people make 80% of the population and you do more bad shit than they do even though you are only 5% - what does that tell you? THAT THERE'S A FUKKEN PROBLEM IN THE COMMUNITY AND YOU NEED TO FIX IT AND TO FIRST FIX IT YOU NEED TO ADMIT THERE'S A FUKKEN PROBLEM.

Meanwhile, everyone just keeps focusing on "B,b,b,b,b,b,but what about the white people's actions? Why didn't they approach him differently!? Why did they call him a gook and chink?!" Awwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwww your wittle feelings hurt? Awwwwwwwww you gonna cwwwwy because white man told you have small peenis? YOU FUKKEN TRESPASSED BIITCH!!! YOU DROPPED THE FIRST DOMINO ON THIS WHOLE CAUSE-AND-EFFECT SITUATION. IF I HAD LAND AND HMONG PEOPLE TRESPASS, I'LL CHEW YOUR haha ASS OUT TOOO AND YOU'LL PROBABLY KILL MY FAMILY TOO YOU FUKKEN MONKEY BARBARIAN PEOPLE.

You just look at this situation and use it as a satisfaction for your wittle ego that was hurt by white man. Please don't make it seem like you're the unbiased, objective person here. You're embarrassing yourself. And the white people, they are fukkked up as much as the rest of you. They never took this situation and realized that they need to change as a community; that you can't just be a nice person to your little 10,000 population county but be a dipshiit to everyone outside even if they are from a different race and breaking the law on your property.

[HUNG TU LO]

THAT THERE'S A FUKKEN PROBLEM IN THE COMMUNITY AND YOU NEED TO FIX IT AND TO FIRST FIX IT YOU NEED TO ADMIT THERE'S A FUKKEN PROBLEM.

Meanwhile, everyone just keeps focusing on "B,b,b,b,b,b,but what about the white people's actions? Why didn't they approach him differently!? Why did they call him a gook and chink?!" Awwwwwwwwwwwww wwwwww your wittle feelings hurt? ...YOU FUKKEN TRESPASSED BIITCH!!! YOU DROPPED THE FIRST DOMINO ON THIS WHOLE CAUSE-AND-EFFECT SITUATION. IF I HAD LAND AND HMONG PEOPLE TRESPASS, I'LL CHEW YOUR haha ASS OUT TOOO AND YOU'LL PROBABLY KILL MY FAMILY TOO YOU FUKKEN MONKEY BARBARIAN PEOPLE.

The punk kid (has a face which invites a brick) who blocked Chai's escape route deserved it.

If I was in Chai's situation, I'd probably mow them all down too. Yes, even a few bullets through the backs. Why? Well because,,,

Thank you for proving my point. So he deserved it because he looked a certain way? And so what if he chest-puffed and tried to block Chai on his way out? Someone come on my property that I loaned $140,000 to buy my house and pay $950 monthly mortgage, I'll make sure to let you know it's the last time you come on my property unannounced and without permission. Oh, if that was you on my house, you want to shoot me, yeejkoob, don't you? You people as well as the dumb white people doesn't get shit done.

Dumb fukken white people: "Get the fukk of my property, [insert racial slur]. You don't deserve to be in my country."

Dumb fukken Hmong people: "Good Chai Vang killed them. I would do the same. Fukk these white people."

It's a fukken perfect circle. You people are perfect for each other!

Lastly, didn't realize there were this many White apologists/Hmong-self-haters around. Maybe the argument against certain posters have polarized their stances, but sheesh, still the tone is cringe worthy.

So a Hmong guy shoots people in the back, shoots people multiple times, while he himself has ZERO fukken damage, not even a scratch, I'm supposed to take his side and if I don't, I'm a sellout? Wait for it...

                

YeejKoob13 is my 1/12 jurors.  You fall with the other 11 jurors, and that is fine.   You may convince 92% of the people to agree with you.  I only  need one to win the debate.

No. A juror is fair and impartial. This fool would never be selected for jury and the prosecutors and the judge would read through his mind like a child's book. He wouldn't get to sit in the final 14 bench. Read above. This guy states that he would kill all of them and shoot them in the back. Does this sound like fair and impartial? Does this sound like a decent person? All you did was found a yelping moronic dog to follow you around. You two now have a combined IQ of 2. If I found a homeless bum with sandals on one feet and a ripped sock on the other, does that make us a basketball team?   

If you guys are too retarded, a pool of about 30 potential jurors are selected for interview and then only 14 are selected and then 12 for deliberation). I've been a juror in a criminal case (2nd degree murder while committing aggravated robbery) and believe me when I say before you even go the the courthouse, they already looked up your social security number, criminal/offense history, work history, education, etc. And the judge and the state attorneys can take out any juror for ANY reason without explanation. Oh, and the interviews happen in the presence of everyone so good lucky trying to lie in front of 40-50 people including the defendant, judge, and state attorneys. Hope you are a good liar.

[HUNG TU LO]

A mixed race jury may have came out with a different decision. And even if found guilty, may have opted for a lesser sentence.

My point exactly. You guys don't even know anything about the system. A jury doesn't decide the punishment. In fact, the judge decides the punishment at a later date, usually months later.

      

LOL this is the 1/12 juror that bulbasaur wants LOL looks like both of you have 1/12 the capacity of a human brain.

[bulbasaur]

You  just mad that I got my one.   

Thank you for proving my point. So he deserved it because he looked a certain way? And so what if he chest-puffed and tried to block Chai on his way out? Someone come on my property that I loaned $140,000 to buy my house and pay $950 monthly mortgage, I'll make sure to let you know it's the last time you come on my property unannounced and without permission. Oh, if that was you on my house, you want to shoot me, yeejkoob, don't you? You people as well as the dumb white people doesn't get shit done.

Dumb fukken white people: "Get the fukk of my property, [insert racial slur]. You don't deserve to be in my country."

Dumb fukken Hmong people: "Good Chai Vang killed them. I would do the same. Fukk these white people."

It's a fukken perfect circle. You people are perfect for each other!


So a Hmong guy shoots people in the back, shoots people multiple times, while he himself has ZERO fukken damage, not even a scratch, I'm supposed to take his side and if I don't, I'm a sellout? Wait for it...

                


No. A juror is fair and impartial. This fool would never be selected for jury and the prosecutors and the judge would read through his mind like a child's book. He wouldn't get to sit in the final 14 bench. Read above. This guy states that he would kill all of them and shoot them in the back. Does this sound like fair and impartial? Does this sound like a decent person? All you did was found a yelping moronic dog to follow you around. You two now have a combined IQ of 2. If I found a homeless bum with sandals on one feet and a ripped sock on the other, does that make us a basketball team?   

If you guys are too retarded, a pool of about 30 potential jurors are selected for interview and then only 14 are selected and then 12 for deliberation). I've been a juror in a criminal case (2nd degree murder while committing aggravated robbery) and believe me when I say before you even go the the courthouse, they already looked up your social security number, criminal/offense history, work history, education, etc. And the judge and the state attorneys can take out any juror for ANY reason without explanation. Oh, and the interviews happen in the presence of everyone so good lucky trying to lie in front of 40-50 people including the defendant, judge, and state attorneys. Hope you are a good liar.

[HUNG TU LO]

You found another buffoon who likes to play with dogshit. Congrats! Meanwhile, the rest of the world has this thing called common sense. 

Like I said, your one guy you found isn't too bright. I'm not sure what you're proud off.

[YeejKoob13]

Thank you for proving my point. So he deserved it because he looked a certain way? And so what if he chest-puffed and tried to block Chai on his way out? Someone come on my property that I loaned $140,000 to buy my house and pay $950 monthly mortgage, I'll make sure to let you know it's the last time you come on my property unannounced and without permission. Oh, if that was you on my house, you want to shoot me, yeejkoob, don't you? You people as well as the dumb white people doesn't get shit done.

If you were acting like a menacing rabid dog intending to attack me, even after I apologize numerous times, then sure, I might just do you and all of us a favor and put you out of your misery. I'm in the wrong for trespassing, though it was unintentional. But still, this doesn't give you the right to threaten me with harm and shoot at me while I'm leaving. In your mind you may just intend to scare me a bit with a parting shot, but to me I'd interpret it as an attack.

That kid was not there to just chest puff. He purposefully went and blocked Chai's means of retreat/escape. He meant to cause harm... an ugly ntxim ntxub face alone wouldn't cause any reasonable person to pump lead into him.

It's easy for you to sit by your computer and be an apologist, but if confronted with such a situation whereby you're lost in the woods, surrounded by hostile strangers, getting verbally abused, threatened with harm, and even shot at, you may just defend yourself in any possible way you can, like what Chai did.

[YeejKoob13]

I'm not one to praise Chai Vang a hero or anything like that. It's a tragic incident, for all involved. But still, I can't seem to let the point go that Chai could have had a better lawyer representing him. And a better lawyer would've been more articulate, passionate, hammered certain strong points over and over, and sought to CHANGE JURISDICTION to where a more diverse jury would sit on the bench. I don't think a mixed race jury would always universally find Chai guilty.

[YeejKoob13]

You found another buffoon who likes to play with dogshit. Congrats! Meanwhile, the rest of the world has this thing called common sense. 

Like I said, your one guy you found isn't too bright. I'm not sure what you're proud off.

It's safe to say that if Mr Too Low is in the woods and threatened with bodily harm, he'd bend over and say "I have a Purdy mouth," squeal, and blow generously. People (or in this case, maybe Hmong?) who defend themselves are not decent humans according to him.