1 edit
@no1marauder saidOk. Now, the radio program I got that on is a right winger for sure and I may
(Shrug) There are many such quotes all over the right wing blogosphere. Not a single one has been verified.
not heard that on the news but on the show and I conflated the two.
One thing we suspected already was verified, though, the culprit is white.
That was hard to tell in the original video.
Back to wait-and-see.
1 edit
There's a video here of the stabbing; Duncomb comes up behind the person, grabs him around the neck and says "Hey, buddy why are you following us?" (apparently he was following Duncomb from in front) and Hampe immediately stabs him.
https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2020/07/man-knifed-in-back-at-portland-protest-i-was-stabbed-for-being-a-conservative-journalist.html
Hampe claims self-defense: "He told police that Duncomb had “set up” on him and tried to choke him, according to a probable cause affidavit."
It was 2:30 in the morning and someone grabs you around the neck (Duncomb also admits he was armed with a knife). Is this an arguable case of self-defense? Maybe, maybe not, but it seems to be a bit more complicated than the "politically motivated stabbing" Duncomb claimed.
@no1marauder saidThe stabber has a criminal history that includes crimes against children and is loyal to a political extremist movement; the political extremist movement does not like cooperating with police and probably does not mind lying to them, either.
There's a video here of the stabbing; Duncomb comes up behind the person, grabs him around the neck and says "Hey, buddy why are you following us?" (apparently he was following Duncomb from in front) and Hampe immediately stabs him.
https://www.oregonlive.com/crime/2020/07/man-knifed-in-back-at-portland-protest-i-was-stabbed-for-being-a-conservative-journalist.htm ...[text shortened]... but it seems to be a bit more complicated than the "politically motivated stabbing" Duncomb claimed.
But if you want to believe someone who violated the purity of children but not two lawyers in Missourri, that's your prerogative.
1 edit
@philokalia saidActually, neither of those claims have been confirmed by police.
The stabber has a criminal history that includes crimes against children and is loyal to a political extremist movement; the political extremist movement does not like cooperating with police and probably does not mind lying to them, either.
But if you want to believe someone who violated the purity of children but not two lawyers in Missourri, that's your prerogative.
There's a video in the link I provided (filmed by people with Duncomb); if you don't want to believe your own eyes, that's your business.
@no1marauder
I see. Tensions were high, so no doubt, the man can claim self defense.
But I caution you, the McCloskeys can make the same claim, high tensions, self defense.
@earl-of-trumps saidThey weren't grabbed around the neck, were they?
@no1marauder
I see. Tensions were high, so no doubt, the man can claim self defense.
But I caution you, the McCloskeys can make the same claim, high tensions, self defense.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidNo but the mob were trespassing and they clearly outnumbered the McCloskeys
They weren't grabbed around the neck, were they?
Different circumstances but please don't dictate that the McCloskeys were not
scared for their well being. they were. You act like they come running out of
the house brandishing weapons as a matter of course.
@no1marauder saidHow does the video speak to motive?
Actually, neither of those claims have been confirmed by police.
There's a video in the link I provided (filmed by people with Duncomb); if you don't want to believe your own eyes, that's your business.
1 edit
@philokalia saidThe video speaks to Duncomb initiating the incident by physically grabbing Hampe. Perhaps Hampe's use of lethal force may be found to be not reasonable under the law, but where is any evidence of "political motivation" by anyone BUT Duncomb?
How does the video speak to motive?
1 edit
@earl-of-trumps saidThe McCloskeys don't act "scared" and I've told you numerous times that trespassers can't be met with lethal force under these type of circumstances. IF the fact finders really believe the McCloskey's story that people in the group threatened them and their home, they'd be cleared but, unlike the Portland case, the video does not support self-defense.
No but the mob were trespassing and they clearly outnumbered the McCloskeys
Different circumstances but please don't dictate that the McCloskeys were not
scared for their well being. they were. You act like they come running out of
the house brandishing weapons as a matter of course.
@no1marauder
So you are saying that two lawyers having dinner decided to get their guns and
go threaten people. Right?
Forget it, No1. You're wrong.
@earl-of-trumps saidExcept for the fact that they did exactly that and it’s on camera. The crowd were walking lateral to their home not towards it.
@no1marauder
So you are saying that two lawyers having dinner decided to get their guns and
go threaten people. Right?
Forget it, No1. You're wrong.
@no1marauder saidHis political motivation to talk to Hempe?
The video speaks to Duncomb initiating the incident by physically grabbing Hampe. Perhaps Hampe's use of lethal force may be found to be not reasonable under the law, but where is any evidence of "political motivation" by anyone BUT Duncomb?
Where was the attack?
The attack was when Hempe decided it was legitimate to stab the guy who came up to him and presumably began speaking to him.
The police seem to agree based on the arrest.
Would you normally feel ready to stab someone for appraoching you like that?
@earl-of-trumps saidYou've seen the video; as I've already said if you don't want to believe your own eyes, that's up to you.
@no1marauder
So you are saying that two lawyers having dinner decided to get their guns and
go threaten people. Right?
Forget it, No1. You're wrong.
@philokalia saidDid you even watch the video? Duncomb didn't just "speak" to Hampe; he came up behind him and put his arm around his neck at 2:30 AM. He wasn't interested in a chat; him and his buddies were looking for trouble.
His political motivation to talk to Hempe?
Where was the attack?
The attack was when Hempe decided it was legitimate to stab the guy who came up to him and presumably began speaking to him.
The police seem to agree based on the arrest.
Would you normally feel ready to stab someone for appraoching you like that?
IF someone had done the same thing to me, I'd have hit them. Politics would have nothing to do with it; if you put your hands on a stranger, you are declaring an intention to fight and they have a right to defend themselves.
Whether Hampe was justified to use the degree of force he did, is a jury question. But he clearly would have been legally justified to use some force under the circumstances. And Hampe is a physically slight man; his arrest report gives his weight as 140 pounds (https://heavy.com/news/2020/07/blake-hampe/), which is less than 90% of adult males in the US (https://dqydj.com/weight-percentile-calculator-men-women/). A larger man putting his arm around his neck from behind might well have been a situation where he felt a reasonable fear of serious physical injury.
And there simply is no evidence that what he did was "politically motivated".