Four Chicago teens in custody after livestreaming kidnap and torture of disabled person
447 replies, posted
The sad part is this they most likely would not have been charged with a hate crime had the poor victim not been disabled.
[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;51631293]If they feel it was a good thing to do, it's not hard.
With all this anti trump, anti white anti meritocracy nonsense going around, is it really any surprise?
[url]http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/sep/14/michael-steven-sandford-would-be-trump-assassin-en/[/url]
I mean look what happened with this guy. From what i understand, totally normal if isolated guy who never lifted a finger against anyone. He then moves in with a super duper radical feminist, surrounded by "Trump is literally hitler" talk, and that climate was enough to make him think trying to shoot the guy was a good idea.
People don't do bad things for no reason. To these people, all the "Trump is a racist so and so and so and so" talk is true, and whitey is the oppressor. They were punishing this person for what they felt was the crime of representing trump and the great racist menace of america.
Now that doesn't make it true, and they should be put in jail until they rot, but this is what all this ridiculous dishonest rhetoric is doing to people. And this is not ok.
This is why truth is the highest value. Because when you abandon it, your beliefs, morale structures and map of operation in the world no longer reflects reality. And that's how evil acts like this happen.[/QUOTE]
Does she have a lot of anti-Trump shit in her social media profiles?
In news that I find personally vindicated, the 4 are now denied bail.
[url]http://abc7chicago.com/news/judge-denies-bail-for-4-facebook-live-torture-suspects/1689291/[/url]
Video in link with some court footage that is kind of interesting.
[QUOTE=Tudd;51634287]In news that I find personally vindicated, the 4 are now denied bail.
[url]http://abc7chicago.com/news/judge-denies-bail-for-4-facebook-live-torture-suspects/1689291/[/url]
Video in link with some court footage that is kind of interesting.[/QUOTE]
Good, what they did was heinous, trump supporting against or whatever. Torturing a man for almost any reason is despicable on all measures, I hope their sentence is terrible for them because they are terrible people
[QUOTE=Dookas;51635108]Good, what they did was heinous, trump supporting against or whatever. Torturing a man for almost any reason is despicable on all measures, I hope their sentence is terrible for them because they are terrible people[/QUOTE]
Honestly if you willing to kidnap a mentally challenged person (who was apparently a friend), cut a put of their skull off, pour ashes into, force them to drink toilet water, and have the unbelievable stupidity to livestream it on facebook..... They stay in prison for life for all I care.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51632466]Does she have a lot of anti-Trump shit in her social media profiles?[/QUOTE]
Well if you mean the folks in the video, i'd say torturing someone white while shouting "FUCK DONALD TRUMP" is a pretty convincing correlation. But presuming that's somehow not true, i do know but that's the culture.
[video=youtube;xE_ZFVUuL-o]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE_ZFVUuL-o[/video]
You want to solve the race relations in america? Solve the image they have of white people as an oppressor. Shit like this is just a symptom of the huge culture problem that these folks have.
Statistically, there's like a .6-.7 correlation between a fatherless upbringing and crime. And with 70% of black families lacking a permanent father, that doesn't paint a very healthy picture. And just as a reference, the correlation between IQ and academic success is somewhere around .7. I was also watching a ted talk with the baltimore police chief who was talking about this stuff, and how any kid who's trying to do well in school or do something productive is told he's "acting white" and is relentlessly harangued to stop. It's a self destructive pattern that no amount of earnest social action from outside can help. If you try to solve homelessness by building houses that they then burn down, you can't do anything until the people you give the houses to stop burning them down. It's a cultural problem, and the fix to that can only come from within.
This is why i really hate stuff like BLM and the anti racism crusade people are on these days. It does nothing but distract from and obfuscate the actual issues. As well as reinforcing the whitey is the villain narrative which is the justification for most if not all of this.
There's also a huge study that was done over 50 years that pretty convincingly showed that affirmative action is actually prone to [I]cause[/I] non conscientious behavior like crime, rather than solve it. Although immidiately it produces no observable effect, if you trace the people over their lifetimes they found around a 50% higher likelihood of criminal/anti-social behavior than the control group. I'm trying to find it but i've completely forgotten the name.
[QUOTE=OvB;51629750]Apparently the white kid knew one of the black kids as an acquaintance and the two were going to have a overnight get together. The black kids brought the white kid in a stolen van to his friends and a "play fight" escalated to a racially and politically fuel torture fest that was only broken up after a neighbor complained about the noise.
It's great violent racists are dumb enough to broadcast damning evidence to all the world, though. Makes it easier to lock them up.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=-nesto-;51629909]It didn't end there. Enraged at the downstairs neighbor, the girls went down, kicked the door in, and stole shit. The commotion then allowed the kid to escape and get spotted by a LEO.[/QUOTE]
Holy shit, are they really sure it was the victim who was mentally disabled and not the suspects?
Wew I knew some users are too much of a pussy to call out something so obvious but I never expected it to take 11 pages
More like we called it out since page one, but a few leftists (for a lack of a better term) were having a moment trying to somehow disassociate these people from torturing a mentally handicapped person from some clearly politically and racist motives.
Most likely cause it shows that the there are ramifications to polarizing Donald Trump and white people into a extremity.
I bet if a cop attacked a disabled person you'd have defenders in here though.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;51641022]I bet if a cop attacked a disabled person you'd have defenders in here though.[/QUOTE]
And they would be equally as retarded if the circumstances were the same.
Can someone explain this murder quota thing for me please? Some people here have been saying that they would have done this anyway, Trump was just an excuse. That if it wasn't Trump winning, they would have found another excuse to torture someone.
How does that make sense? Would every soldier who had used a gun and killed someone be a serial killer if he didn't join the army? You think every person who had killed someone would have killed equal number of other people regardless of situation? A soldier is a too extreme example for you? Okay, how about this then. There's enough unrest to cause riots. Someone takes lead and persuades people to attack the police and few officers are killed. Would the perpetrators of that cop killing inevitably murder someone some other day if they didn't attend that riot?
What I'm saying is: just because someone is [I]capable[/I] of killing someone or torturing someone, it doesn't mean that god or fate gave them a quota of people they will inevitably kill or torture in their lives. You can have someone perfectly capable of killing another person and never do it. The decisive thing is: motivation.
Maybe Joe is capable of killing someone in say self defense, that doesn't mean he is going to be a murderer one day. All Joe needs is proper motivation for him. He has to subjectively feel he's justified to do it. Just like everyone else, who isn't insane. Just like cops, just like soldiers and just like people who kidnap and torture a white boy because they need to fight against neo-nazi alt-right president and his racist white supporters.
No Raidyr, the election of Donald Trump didn't magically make these people capable of torturing others. They were always capable of doing it if they thought they have enough reason to do it. And until now they didn't have proper motivation. The election of Hitler 2.0 was enough for them though.
[QUOTE=Trilby Harlow;51638721]Well if you mean the folks in the video, i'd say torturing someone white while shouting "FUCK DONALD TRUMP" is a pretty convincing correlation. But presuming that's somehow not true, i do know but that's the culture.
[/QUOTE]
I looked it up. The answer was no. I don't think the argument that they were empowered because of Donald Trump's victory is wrong or even incompatible with the point I was trying to make, that something is seriously wrong with these people. I would just be more easily convinced of it if there were proof of an underlying political motivation. Social media posts criticizing Trump would have made me more likely to believe it in that case, but again I'd still say it's possible.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641218]
No Raidyr, the election of Donald Trump didn't magically make these people capable of torturing others. They were always capable of doing it if they thought they have enough reason to do it. And until now they didn't have proper motivation. The election of Hitler 2.0 was enough for them though.[/QUOTE]
Maybe.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641280]Maybe.[/QUOTE]
What is your alternative then? That they would have killed someone even if Trump didn't win? That they always had a motivation to kidnap and torture people? How can you just assume this? You do realize this logic goes beyond these 4 right?
Following this logic, every cop and soldier who killed someone would be a murderer if hadn't they joined the police or military.
[editline]8th January 2017[/editline]
You want evidence in a form of say tweets (despite what they have said so far) to be convinced the attack was politically motivated but you will assume your hypothesis without any proof at all.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641328]What is your alternative then? That they would have killed someone even if Trump didn't win? That they always had a motivation to kidnap and torture people? How can you just assume this? You do realize this logic goes beyond these 4 right?
Following this logic, every cop and soldier who killed someone would be a murderer if hadn't they joined the police or military.[/QUOTE]
I have no idea where you are pulling that entire narrative from. I'm just saying it's possible that due to someones upbringing and nature they could be more predisposed to this sort of violence. You're argument is based on professions like cops and soldiers, mine isn't based on profession at all. I should also note that my theory isn't a distinct alternative; I'm totally open to the idea that the election of Trump was what drove them to kidnap and assault a disabled person. I just think their attitude outside of the assault was surprisingly apolitical and that their (her, specifically) actions mark someone who is incredibly damaged regardless of politics.
[editline]8th January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641328]
You want evidence in a form of say tweets (despite what they have said so far) to be convinced the attack was politically motivated but you will assume your hypothesis without any proof at all.[/QUOTE]
The lack of tweets (I don't think she has a Twitter, just a FB page) doesn't make me discount your hypothesis, but it would unarguably make a stronger case.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641347]I have no idea where you are pulling that entire narrative from. I'm just saying it's possible that due to someones upbringing and nature they could be more predisposed to this sort of violence. You're argument is based on professions like cops and soldiers, mine isn't based on profession at all. I should also note that my theory isn't a distinct alternative; I'm totally open to the idea that the election of Trump was what drove them to kidnap and assault a disabled person. I just think their attitude outside of the assault was surprisingly apolitical and that their (her, specifically) actions mark someone who is incredibly damaged regardless of politics.[/QUOTE]
I'm not basing anything on profession. I'm basing my "narrative" on the fact that one person killed another person and on the fact that you seem to believe people have murder quotas that they will fulfill regardless of situation or motivation.
I am open to your hypothesis, that they were violent and wanted to hurt someone and this was an excuse. But you have to find more evidence for this than their lack of political tweets. As of now, there's more reason to believe their actions were racially and politically motivated.
They don't need to be avid Hillary supporters for this to be politically motivated. Trump has been presented as a white supremacist, alt-right, neo-nazi and racist. Racists like them can feel that Trump's election is a move being made by whites against black people and they need to push against it with force. You don't need them to be political activists for them to feel that Trump's election is enough motivation to do what they did.
[editline]8th January 2017[/editline]
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641347]The lack of tweets (I don't think she has a Twitter, just a FB page) doesn't make me discount your hypothesis, but it would unarguably make a stronger case.[/QUOTE]
Stronger opposed to what, 0? Because that's what you have to support they were going to do this regardless of Trump's election.
[QUOTE=thelurker1234;51630455]Compelling evidence.
And I dunno the sanders for president subreddit reopened and is consistently hitting the front page. He still has plenty of clout if we measure this shit by reddit terms.
Also:
[thumb]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/b5/2a/b0/b52ab0022badfc6f34541fb5b69b6340.png[/thumb]
He's doing just fine if we're talking from a social democrat perspective, which is what he and most of his supporters are. Someone with that wealth is hardly the problem in their eyes, and someone like that would still be in a high tax bracket under their systems.
And from a socialist perspective, having money isn't the problem in their eyes either. The problem they have is the exploitation that wealth usually comes from that is caused by extracting surplus value from employees and paying them the least you can get away with as an employer. There's forms of socialism such as market socialism that allow and even intend for people to become wealthier than others, because that's not actually the core issue Marx had.[/QUOTE]
I had no idea Senators had such high networth.
It's absolutely disgusting yet unsurprising at the same time.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641383]I'm not basing anything on profession. I'm basing my "narrative" on the fact that one person killed another person and on the fact that you seem to believe people have murder quotas that they will fulfill regardless of situation or motivation.[/QUOTE]
I have no idea what you are on about, who killed who, or how I'm saying murder quotas exist, or where I'm making the case that these people definitely would have done this regardless of Trump's victory.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641383]I am open to your hypothesis, that they were violent and wanted to hurt someone and this was an excuse. But you have to find more evidence for this than their lack of political tweets. As of now, there's more reason to believe their actions were racially and politically motivated.
They don't need to be avid Hillary supporters for this to be politically motivated. Trump has been presented as a white supremacist, alt-right, neo-nazi and racist. Racists like them can feel that Trump's election is a move being made by whites against black people and they need to push against it with force. You don't need them to be political activists for them to feel that Trump's election is enough motivation to do what they did.[/QUOTE]
The case just seems incredibly bizarre to me. The unnamed victim goes out to meet up with a friend who showed at the meeting place with a stolen van, they bomb around Chicago for awhile before dropping in on the other suspects. Apparently the unnamed victim and his "friend" get into a "play fight" and one of the Covington sisters doesn't like that and it escalates from there. I just feel like there is more to the story than them picking up some kid because they don't like that Trump won and feel like they have to work out their political disagreements on a white boys scalp. And again, that could totally be the motivating factor it or it could be.
I'm just saying that when someone acts like what I quoted originally, where they are in lockup for committing kidnapping and torture and bragging about it on Facebook, that there has to be someone wrong for them at a more fundamental level than being exposed to 24/7 news footage of Trump being a white supremacist alt-right neo-nazi racist, [I]something which we can't even quantify or verify. [/I]
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641383]Stronger opposed to what, 0? Because that's what you have to support they were going to do this regardless of Trump's election.[/QUOTE]
They aren't mutually exclusive ideas. And I never argued that they were going to do it regardless.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641458]I have no idea what you are on about, who killed who, or how I'm saying murder quotas exist, or where I'm making the case that these people definitely would have done this regardless of Trump's victory.
They aren't mutually exclusive ideas. And I never argued that they were going to do it regardless.[/QUOTE]
It was someone else, my apologies.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641458]The case just seems incredibly bizarre to me. The unnamed victim goes out to meet up with a friend who showed at the meeting place with a stolen van, they bomb around Chicago for awhile before dropping in on the other suspects. Apparently the unnamed victim and his "friend" get into a "play fight" and one of the Covington sisters doesn't like that and it escalates from there. I just feel like there is more to the story than them picking up some kid because they don't like that Trump won and feel like they have to work out their political disagreements on a white boys scalp. And again, that could totally be the motivating factor it or it could be.
I'm just saying that when someone acts like what I quoted originally, where they are in lockup for committing kidnapping and torture and bragging about it on Facebook, that there has to be someone wrong for them at a more fundamental level than being exposed to 24/7 news footage of Trump being a white supremacist alt-right neo-nazi racist, [I]something which we can't even quantify or verify. [/I][/QUOTE]
I agree they had to be prone to violence before. No question about it. I said it in the first post I made in this thread.
The question is: would they do it if Trump didn't win? Would their racism be enough? I don't think so. I think they felt the election of Trump is a move against black people done by white people and they are justified to "fight back" now. What they were doing to him supports this.
Are you finding it hard to believe they would somehow think that the kid shares some responsibility and fault because he's white? Is that why you're looking for an alternative?
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641597]
I agree they had to be prone to violence before. No question about it. I said it in the first post I made in this thread.
The question is: would they do it if Trump didn't win? Would their racism be enough? I don't think so. I think they felt the election of Trump is a move against black people done by white people and they are justified to "fight back" now. What they were doing to him supports this.
[B]Are you finding it hard to believe they would somehow think that the kid shares some responsibility and fault because he's white?[/B] Is that why you're looking for an alternative?[/QUOTE]
I actually agree with this, particularly bolded.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641610]I actually agree with this, particularly bolded.[/QUOTE]
Really? That's what's weird for you?
You have shit like this [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=263zZ3HrmjE[/URL]
And this, particularly the first question [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_J0Ng5cUGg"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_J0Ng5cUGg
[/URL]Or this, which I've found by typing in google "top racist 2016" [url]http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2016/12/the-top-10-racists-of-2016-not-named-trump/[/url]
And you find it unimaginable that a giant racist would think that all white people share blame and responsibility for a super-racist white president?
I mean if even if you shrug those videos off for some reason, you must be aware of how some people will blame all muslims for terrorist attacks. And some will even attack a muslim or trash his shop because they hate muslims after a recent terrorist attack. This isn't that different.
I think you just didn't consider those same mechanisms by which bigots judge all black people or all muslims can work against white people as well.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641693]Really? That's what's weird for you?
You have shit like this [URL]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=263zZ3HrmjE[/URL]
And this, particularly the first question [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_J0Ng5cUGg"]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u_J0Ng5cUGg
[/URL]Or this, which I've found by typing in google "top racist 2016" [url]http://www.theroot.com/articles/culture/2016/12/the-top-10-racists-of-2016-not-named-trump/[/url]
And you find it unimaginable that a giant racist would think that all white people share blame and responsibility for a super-racist white president?
I mean if even if you shrug those videos off for some reason, you must be aware of how some people will blame all muslims for terrorist attacks. And some will even attack a muslim or trash his shop because they hate muslims after a recent terrorist attack. This isn't that different.
I think you just didn't consider those same mechanisms by which bigots judge all black people or all muslims can work against white people as well.[/QUOTE]
When I said "I actually agree with this" I'm not saying "I agree it's hard to believe" I'm saying "I agree that they could somehow think the kid shares some responsibility".
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641708]When I said "I actually agree with this" I'm not saying "I agree it's hard to believe" I'm saying "I agree that they could somehow think the kid shares some responsibility".[/QUOTE]
Well that was a confusing way to put it. If it wasn't and it's my fault then I'm sorry, English is my second language.
Anyway what's the problem then? You think it's a possibility, you can understand their hypothetical mindset. We have reasons to believe Trump was part of their motivation, we don't have evidence that it was just a random joke they threw out and they didn't really mean it. Why do you think the latter is more probable?
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641778]Why do you think the latter is more probable?[/QUOTE]
[quote]More like we called it out since page one, but a few leftists (for a lack of a better term) were having a moment trying to somehow disassociate these people from torturing a mentally handicapped person from some clearly politically and racist motives.
Most likely cause it shows that the there are ramifications to polarizing Donald Trump and white people into a extremity.[/quote]
I really can't think of any other reason. If the situation was flipped with the victim being black and the torturers white, shouting "Fuck Hillary" and "Fuck Black people", we just simply wouldn't have this debate.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641778]Well that was a confusing way to put it. If it wasn't and it's my fault then I'm sorry, English is my second language.
Anyway what's the problem then? You think it's a possibility, you can understand their hypothetical mindset. We have reasons to believe Trump was part of their motivation, we don't have evidence that it was just a random joke they threw out and they didn't really mean it. Why do you think the latter is more probable?[/QUOTE]
I don't think it's more probably. I think it's equally probable.
[QUOTE=Tudd;51641809]I really can't think of any other reason. If the situation was flipped with the victim being black and the torturers white, shouting "Fuck Hillary" and "Fuck Black people", we just simply wouldn't have this debate.[/QUOTE]
You are pretty clearly talking about me and I pretty clearly laid out previously that I'd be making the same points.
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641868]
You are pretty clearly talking about me and I pretty clearly laid out previously that I'd be making the same points.[/QUOTE]
I still address to the others in this thread, but they probably all gave up the argument a long time ago because of how wrong they were and how hopeless their argument is now after the hate crime verdict.
And I looked for your previous posts that you say exist, but all I got were these lame replies.
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547577&p=51624519&viewfull=1#post51624519[/url]
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547577&p=51624633&viewfull=1#post51624633[/url]
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547577&p=51625550&viewfull=1#post51625550[/url]
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547577&p=51625657&viewfull=1#post51625657[/url]
And I looked at page two and still found no direct response to this besides "I would react the same way." Which you must admit seems highly doubtful and a pretty unconvincing response.
[QUOTE=Tudd;51641925]I still address to the others in this thread, but they probably all gave up the argument a long time ago because of how wrong they were and how hopeless their argument is now after the hate crime verdict.
And I looked for your previous posts that you say exist, but all I got were these lame replies.
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547577&p=51624519&viewfull=1#post51624519[/url]
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547577&p=51624633&viewfull=1#post51624633[/url]
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547577&p=51625550&viewfull=1#post51625550[/url]
[url]https://facepunch.com/showthread.php?t=1547577&p=51625657&viewfull=1#post51625657[/url]
And I looked at page two and still found no direct response to this besides "I would react the same way." Which you must admit seems highly doubtful and a pretty unconvincing response.[/QUOTE]
What kind of reply do you expect?
[QUOTE=Raidyr;51641868]I don't think it's more probably. I think it's equally probable.[/QUOTE]
I think I know what you're trying to do but I think you are a bit in denial.
Considering these 2 possibilities.
They are racists so they went after a white kid they knew was vulnerable. Trump's election has nothing to do with it.
They are racists and Trumps election was the final straw because they feel like with giant racist Trump getting elected white people are making a push and they are justified to fight back so they went after a white kid they knew was vulnerable.
For this attack to be void of political motivation they would have to not hear how Trump is bad news for black people. They would have to be completely apolitical and don't know a thing about Trump. In every other scenario Trump's election strengthens their racist motivation because he's on theirs enemy side which just got stronger. I think it's a highly unlikely scenario.
[QUOTE=Silly Sil;51641990]I think I know what you're trying to do but I think you are a bit in denial.
Considering these 2 possibilities.
They are racists so they went after a white kid they knew was vulnerable. Trump's election has nothing to do with it.
They are racists and Trumps election was the final straw because they feel like with giant racist Trump getting elected white people are making a push and they are justified to fight back so they went after a white kid they knew was vulnerable.
For this attack to be void of political motivation they would have to not hear how Trump is bad news for black people. They would have to be completely apolitical and don't know a thing about Trump. In every other scenario Trump's election strengthens their racist motivation because he's on theirs enemy side which just got stronger. I think it's a highly unlikely scenario.[/QUOTE]
I think the leadup to the kidnapping was too convoluted to immediately jump to "They were racist and went for a white kid because he was vulnerable". He knew one of the attackers, even called him a friend. Apparently they traveled around Chicago for at least a couple of days before meeting up with the rest of the attackers which is where things got ugly after the victim and his "friend" started to play fight and one of the Covington sisters didn't like that. There are so many moving parts to this story that I'm not even sure what to think at this point. Without knowing what exactly they were exposed to it's hard to say how likely or unlikely specific scenarios are, which is why I'm saying they are probable. If they only got their news from mainstream sources, I don't think any ever talked about how Trump is "bad news for black people" other than a few running stories about how his fathers company treated black tenants in New York decades ago. Again though, it's perfectly possible that they got all their news, views, and opinions from decidedly radical standpoints that painted Trump as a racist oppressor put in power by the white oppressor and that this drove them to take their aggression out on a white person.
[editline]8th January 2017[/editline]
This will be my last post in this thread. You and I agree that it's a probability, we only seem to disagree wherein you assume it's assuredly the motivation while I'm open to the idea but not quite sure. Tudd is just putting words in my mouth to paint me as a hypocrite and there isn't much else to say.
UPDATE
The teens have pleaded Not guilty in court. This will be an interesting legal case now.
[url]http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/ct-facebook-live-attack-court-met-0211-20170210-story.html[/url]
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.