How can you claim it as Piekarsky having a tantrum, when the school is the one that is not living up to its obligation based on its own agreement that it made. Your disdain for this boy, is sickening. What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'? Seems you have already deemed guilt and have become the prosecution, judge and jury.
Seems as though he is only trying to get the school district to provide him with the home schooling to which they had agreed.
He has not been tried and convicted yet and has the right to continue his education. Heck, we are forced to provide educations for those in our country illegally and so a citizen should have the right to an education also, even if they are awaiting trial.
Liquid, You have so much empathy for the drunken jock who all the witnesses, including his football drinking buddy, said delivered the last kick to the head of the poor young father. I never heard you say one word in empathy for the poor young murdered father or his children. Why is that Liquid?? We ALL want to know. Now Piekarsky wants a Private School at his beck and call. I suppose you think that is ok. What else does he want, a maid and butler? This criminal, when finally found guilty for his crimes, should be penalized to the fullest extent of the law! The fullest! We taxpayers should not be providing him milk and cookies and maid service in a plush Private School as he requested!
Shame on you Liquid for always taking the "white guys" side and not reserving any feelings of empathy for the poor murdered Latino Father.
You know, while I did create the title, I quoted the article verbatim. I did not add a word.
What I find interesting is that I have read Piekarsky had a myspace page. All of his friends are on myspace. They ALL have and know how to obtain internet access. We are in 2008. Who doesnt have internet access.
All most school websites require is an login id and password. This is not the 1980s. This is 2008. My grandbabies know how to access the internet and log in to school sites. Come on. What a cop out.
Plus, I would venture to say the school provided him the base curriculum and, for home studies, he and his parents have to put in a certain degree of effort to READ the pages, understand and complete the homework. Homestudy usually does require parent involvement.
It is clear this spoiled young man who kicked this poor young father in the head (and he is now dead), want someone to spoon feed him the curriculum or be allowed to go to a posh private school.
I agree with the Judge. He denied the request. Now the school will probably have to spoon feed this spoiled accused murderer until his next tantrum!
Where is your empathy, Dee, for all of the American citizens who have been murdered by those who shouldn't be in this country in the first place? What about them and their families, Dee? I don't see you getting as worked up over all of the Americans killed at the hands of illegals the way you do when something bad happens to an illegal. WHY IS THAT?
Of course, I don't want to see anyone meet a violent end even if they were here illegally. Nobody deserves that.
Still, it doesn't mean that the school district is not supposed to uphold the agreement they made with this kid. Even hardened criminals convicted of murder have access to education in prison. This guy hasn't even had a trial yet or been convicted. That was my point.
And you're a good one, Dee, for accusing Liquid of always taking the "white guy's" side when all you do is take the Latino's side. You wouldn't even care about this illegal issue if 80% of the illegals were Chinese or Middle Eastern. The words, "glass houses" comes to mind.
You are missing the entire Arielle Garcia statement:
"ARIELLE GARCIA: He was at our house all day that afternoon. And it was around maybe 11:00, he asked us to take him uptown to drop him off, whatever, he was going to go home. So, we leave him at the Vine Street Park, and we drive away, Victor and I, and about two minutes later he called us and told us to come back, that people were beating him up. So we get back as fast as we could. And when we get there, he was—like the fight was over, like the boys were walking away, but they were still screaming like racial slurs, like “Go back to Mexico!”
And so, Victor and I ran up to Luis, and we said, “What happened?” But he was so mad, he wasn’t really talking to us. And those kids kept yelling stuff, and he went back, and the kids turned around, and the fight started again. So Victor, my husband, tried to like stop the fight. He tried to get the kids off of Luis, but kids were trying to fight my husband. So my husband got the kids off of him, and we couldn’t stop the fight between Luis and the—but next thing we know, Luis was on the floor. And so, me and Victor, we ran up to his side, and we were at his side. We were trying to wake him up, and the kids are still like kicking him and kicking him. And somebody—I don’t know who, but they kicked him like in the left side of his head so hard that that’s what killed him."
You missed this very important part: "But he was so mad, he wasn’t really talking to us. And those kids kept yelling stuff, and he (Ramirez) went back, and the kids turned around, and the fight started again.
Add in Garcia's statements to get a clearer picture.
August 22, 2008 6:51 PM Anonymous Liquidmicro said...
You are also forgetting this very important witness testimony: "They also repeatedly pointed out that Ramirez had several chances to leave the park -- witnesses testified Dillman's half-sister loudly told him to do so -- and that he was an aggressor in the fight."
August 22, 2008 6:56 PM
The testimony from court and Mrs. Garcias statements will be what uphold justice in this case. Please take note of Mr. Ramirez's chance to leave and the fact that he went back and became the aggressor after the first fight. These boys will be held liable for their crimes, but for 3rd degree homicide, I'm not to sure. As usual Dee, your ignorance stands out for all to see.
Empathy for Ramirez, for what, being an adult and fighting with kids? He should have known better, he should have walked away in the beginning or when he had the second chance to when Mrs. Garcia arrived. My empathy is for his children, due to his own stupidity he has now left his children fatherless.
As for what killed Ramirez, it still has not been proven that it was the kick, it could have been from the first fight when he fell and hit his head on the macadam. So until the court hearing and the information comes out from their, nobody knows the full extent of what caused the death other than stemming from the fight.
Someone has to show empathy for these boys since you have already deemed them guilty to the fullest extent. Your biasness to your own ethnicity is what I find most disturbing. Your failure to extend the rule of law to these boys and their Constitutional Rights is very telling as well.
Alie, So you admit you have no empathy for the murdered father and only want to give milk and cookies and a private schooling to the kick in the head charged murderer?
Liquid, Here is the part you missed. Still no empathy. And all you want to do is give Piekarsky milk and cookies and Private Schooling. You really believe a guy who is on myspace does not have internet access?? come on!
Liquidmicro said... And somebody (Piekarsky)—I don’t know who, but they kicked him like in the left side of his head so hard that that’s what killed him."
Liquid, You prove my point. Still no empathy for the dead father who died from a kick in the head by Piekarsky. Piekarsky, with his myspace page, pretends he cannot access the internet. And insists on Private Schooling. And YOU feel sorry for him! VERY TELLING!!
Liquidmicro said... Empathy for Ramirez, for what, being an adult and fighting with kids? He should have known better, he should have walked away in the beginning or when he had the second chance to when Mrs. Garcia arrived. My empathy is for his children, due to his own stupidity he has now left his children fatherless.
Liquidmicro said... And somebody (Piekarsky)—I don’t know who, but they kicked him like in the left side of his head so hard that that’s what killed him."
Are you that pathetic where you have to take a quote by Mrs. Garcia and make it appear as I said it? Are you also so ignorant to think that a 19 year old girl can determine the cause of death to Ramirez? Either you are totally oblivious to your own ignorance or you are just witless.
Liquid, Havent you noticed? You always take the white guy´s side. Gosh! It obviously seems like Racial Bias! Can it be so?
I enjoy when you display your total stupidity out in the open. Learn to read what is posted so your ignorance isn't blowing in the wind for all to see.
My exact statement, which shows your comprehension skill: The testimony from court and Mrs. Garcias statements will be what uphold justice in this case. Please take note of Mr. Ramirez's chance to leave and the fact that he went back and became the aggressor after the first fight. These boys will be held liable for their crimes, but for 3rd degree homicide, I'm not to sure. As usual Dee, your ignorance stands out for all to see.
October 17, 2008 7:24 PM
Please take note of this sentence above: These boys will be held liable for their crimes, but for 3rd degree homicide, I'm not to sure. As usual Dee, your ignorance stands out for all to see.
Liquid, Here is the part you missed. Still no empathy.
Empathy for a BAC level 2 times that of the legal limit, Ramirez was twice the legal limit for being drunk along with having benzo in his system. As I said I have empathy for his children now fatherless by a man who could not control himself. Great 'family values' he showed.
"Of course, I don't want to see anyone meet a violent end even if they were here illegally. Nobody deserves that."
But...I noticed that you did not address the point I made that you always get worked up over injustices or violence against Latinos or illegals, but do not mention all the Americans who have been killed and taken away from their families by illegals who should not even be here in the country.
Liquid, The Medical Examiner said it was the blows to the head that killed him, remember? Additionally, you cannot have it both ways. You provided her quotes to support your argument. I used these same quotes to refute and WIN the argument. Point, Set, Match!!
Liquidmicro said... Liquidmicro said... And somebody (Piekarsky)—I don’t know who, but they kicked him like in the left side of his head so hard that that’s what killed him."
Are you that pathetic where you have to take a quote by Mrs. Garcia and make it appear as I said it? Are you also so ignorant to think that a 19 year old girl can determine the cause of death to Ramirez? Either you are totally oblivious to your own ignorance or you are just witless.
To all my readers, You can see how agitated the ANTIs become when I merely report a verbatim article about the hard drinking jock that delivered the final kick in the head to the young father, Ramirez. They dont worry about the dead young father. They seem somehow more concerned for the spoiled delinquent. This delinquent has been arrested and is charged with 3rd degree homicide in this death. This delinquent went to the courts asking for Private School. He used a bogus argument that he did not have internet access. How silly since he does have a myspace page. Obviously there is internet access in his house. We do live in 2008 and even if he didnt, netzero costs less than $10 month. Anyone on a computer knows how easy it is to obtain internet access. Anyone who homeschools their children knows some parental involvement is usually needed. No one said it would be easy. Such is the penalty when there is enough evidence to charge you for a life that is wrongfully taken. It is obvious he wants to be back in school and with kids his own age. However, he should have thought of that before he became drunk, involved in that fight and delivered that final kick to the young fathers head. If he is found guilty, he is sure to spend years in prison. Then he will be wishing he was back in home school.
Just a thought I wonder how much sympathy would be given to the suspect if he was a 16 or 17 y/o undocumented latino immigrant. Even though the laws would require the school provide an education for the minor, I'm sure some of you would be changing your tune.
Liquid, The Medical Examiner said it was the blows to the head that killed him, remember?
Blows to the head, lets see, a kick, many hits from fists and at one time one fist possibly held a piece of metal, and when he fell and hit his head on the macadam. I know of many hits to the head he took. You win?? Pathetic as usual on your behalf.
Now if what Mrs. Garcia says is true and that he went back the second time. that makes him the aggressor and the boys then have self defense.
The alcohol on both sides (Ramirez and the oys) and the drugs in Rameriz's system probably didn't help matters either.
You still look at this from a biased cross eyed view. Instead of printing the actual facts, you leave out a good portion because it doesn't agree with you. For you its about winning, you are pathetic.
"This delinquent went to the courts asking for Private School. He used a bogus argument that he did not have internet access. How silly since he does have a myspace page. Obviously there is internet access in his house."
This boy went to the court to get the school to uphold its agreement and provide him with his education. Internet access he may not have at home, he may have had it at school, your generalization in thinking everybody has access to the internet is, again, pointing out your ignorance.
Just a thought I wonder how much sympathy would be given to the suspect if he was a 16 or 17 y/o undocumented latino immigrant.
To your point, I'm sure at that the young Latino, 16/17, wouldn't be drunk or on drugs, he probably would have had a clear mind and been smart enough to walk away, thus having this situation never happen.
Now, look at this case without the race. Ramirez is an adult, drunk and on drugs, he should have walked away, especially when the girl, his girlfriends little sister that he had been partying with all day, told him lets go, pulled on him to not fight, yet he did anyway.
Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless. How can someone have empathy for stupidity? Especially a drunk and drugged up adult?
Dee's problem, and I guess yours now too, is that you are interjecting race into the equation, neither of you can look at this case without it. All you see is the brown skin got beat up by a bunch of white skin, and due to the beating the brown skin died, racism was the cause!! Like I said look at it from an open mind, it was an adult, drunk and on drugs and boys/young men, 16+, who should have had the clearer head? Who should have walked away? Who should have known better?
No, just a thought. Just for the sake of arguement, a 16 or 17 y/o latino undocumented immigrant is a suspect, what would you be saying? Hypothetically. Would you be saying, "That high school needs to provide an education as they'd promise", and "innocent until proven guilty?" Yes, I'm injecting race into this conversation, but it's not for me to comment on what will be in the trial. That's what the trial is for. Objectively, I feel that the school did not meet what was promised to the boy, so in a sense I don't agree with Dee. Personally I feel they do have an obligation to him, just as well if he were an undocumented immigrant. In my mind, though, I'm not sure the suspect would even be out on bail if he was latino. Yes, I do feel for the victim, but it now up to the court and the trial to see justice served.
If it were a 16 or 17 y/o Latino undocumented immigrant he would probably be held in juvenile detention where he would be receiving an education, 6 hours 5 days a week. After the trial and sentencing he probably would be deported.
About injecting race into this, it's just a fact that we would look at race. Cmon. As far as the thought, the hypothectical situation I posed, it's really meant to just get you thinking about how we ALL look at race. I'm not requiring a response, I'm not going to attack anyone here. I'm saying that If he were accused of murder, how would we treat him (a 16 yo undocumented immigrant) If he were demanding an education, what would we think of that?
Liquid, You have lost a signficant amount of credibility lately. Ignorance? Look in the mirror buddy. Your arguments do not hold water. You act like it is rocket science to have internet access.
I showed your response to a few friends with me and they laughed at you out loud! My gosh. You are sitting at a computer. You know how easy it is to get internet access. That is what he said he was lacking in court. If you like this kid so much, why dont you email him 10 bucks so he can get net zero. Problem Solved!
Liquidmicro said... "This delinquent went to the courts asking for Private School. He used a bogus argument that he did not have internet access. How silly since he does have a myspace page. Obviously there is internet access in his house."
This boy went to the court to get the school to uphold its agreement and provide him with his education. Internet access he may not have at home, he may have had it at school, your generalization in thinking everybody has access to the internet is, again, pointing out your ignorance.
Liquid, Fine. Put Piekarsky back in prison where he would be receiving an education, 6 hours 5 days a week. After the trial and sentencing he probably would be put in prison with the Big Boys.
Sounds like equal treatment to me.
Liquidmicro said... If it were a 16 or 17 y/o Latino undocumented immigrant he would probably be held in juvenile detention where he would be receiving an education, 6 hours 5 days a week. After the trial and sentencing he probably would be deported.
Dee said... Liquid, You really are pathetic. You are demonizing the victim. You dont know this. You were not there. You twist and turn and use gossip. The young father is dead. His children will not have their father this Christmas. YOU DO NOT KNOW what happened that day, especially during the day. You put your evil twist and turns on the case and then demonize the poor dead father. Shame on you!! My picture illustrates court documents. This is much more accurate that your slanted gossip. If you want to use medical terms that is one thing, but where in the documents did it say the dead father was "drunk". Where in the court documents did it say he was partying with whoever all day? Where did it say the dead man was just as much to blame for his own death? I will tell you where.. NOWHERE!!
Stop showing your bias. It is too obvious.
Send the accused the ten bucks for net zero and be done with it!
Liquidmicro said... Ramirez is an adult, drunk and on drugs, he should have walked away, especially when the girl, his girlfriends little sister that he had been partying with all day, told him lets go, pulled on him to not fight, yet he did anyway.
Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless. How can someone have empathy for stupidity? Especially a drunk and drugged up adult?
I've heard alternate stories about this, saying that it was the mother that wanted the school to pay, in that they failed on thier promise to give several hours of instruction and a computer. On one hand, I agree. As much as I don't agree that he should get an education, the law requires it, and the school did promise this. On the other hand, to want private school instruction is overboard. He shouldn't get a better education due to this. Besides all this, I'm surprised/disgusted that the mother is stepping in only about her son's education. Where was she when Piekarsky was out partying with his buddies that night? I don't wish to have a lengthy discussion on specualtion about what happened that night, but the bottom line is, at some point, Ramirez was on the ground unconscious, and a group of high school football players were continuing to beat him, and one kicked him in the head. Also, people are quick to assume he was on benzodiazepine, which is also used as an anti-seizure by medics. Rather than assume that this was something that was already in his system as a recreational drug, it's possible that since he was alive for a few days before he dies, this may have been given when he started to convulse after being kicked, and while he was hospitalized. Yet, people are quick to point that out, yet they don't know that he was on this. Regardless of this again, bottom line, he was already unconscious, and he was kicked in the head, and he started to foam at the mouth and convulse. And it's sad that there are Antis in their Anti sites saying that he was to blame for his own death. That's shameful.
I'm demonizing the victim?? You had better do some research, it has been shown already that Ramirez was twice the legal limit intoxicated and he was on drugs (benzo). There is no demonizing. Why don't you look up the Autopsy report that was used, not just in the court but also used in articles written by many reporters. Is that to hard for you to do?? Or must I do your homework for you and make you look foolish even more than you already do??
Robles, many citizens do not like having to provide education (taxpayer money again) for foreign nations in the country illegally. If this foreign national had also committed a serious crime, it would be a double insult. So to answer your question: we would probably look at it differently. But it wouldn't be about him being Latino. It's about him being illegal and here committing a crime and then the taxpayers having to spend money to educate him.
I think you can admit that it is different than providing a citizen or legal resident with an education, even if he has committed a crime. Like I said, even convicted criminals in prison further their educations.
The man was 25 years old, he should have walked away, or is it that Latino's are 'muey macho' and must allow their testosterone to influence their lack of brain waves?
Liquidmicro, It's not a crime to have alcoholic drinks on the weekend when you are an adult. It doesn't surprise me that he had alcohol in his system. As far as the autopsy report again showing benzo in his system, some people are quick to speculate that he was on this as a recreational drug, when in fact, this is a common anti-seizure drug, and it's more conceivable that this was for the seizures and convulsions that he experienced after the fight, and that the medics and hospital staff gave him the benzo. Besides, some Antis also point out that this would have made him violent, but the reality is that it more likely would have made him more out of it and less likely to defend himself. Again, bottom line, he was already unconscious, and the highschoolers continued to beat him, and someone kicked him at which point he started to convulse and foam at the mouth.
Alie, I'm good with So to answer your question: we would probably look at it differently. That's all I wanted. To get us to think about how we think of the situations, and who we are quick to defend.
The man was 25 years old, he should have walked away, or is it that Latino's are 'muey macho' and must allow their testosterone to influence their lack of brain waves?
Again, the bottom line is glaringly obvious that he was kicked in the head while unconscious. We also weren't there. Hopefully that's what the trial is for. What was the reality of what happened. Moment of rage on his part? He looked like a slight man, and football players in highschool are typically big guys. Three to six of them or more? Kicked in the head when he was already down. Even if he used bad judgment to come back to fight them, they can't claim self defense.
No its not a crime as an adult to drink, my point is that it probably effected his thought and his 'machoism'. As I have stated from the beginning, the boys will be found guilty of their crimes, and they will be punished for them. I just do not think they will be found guilty of 3rd degree homicide.
I just do not think they will be found guilty of 3rd degree homicide.
Well, we'll just have to wait and see. But I think to say he was drunk and high on drugs and partying all day is an exaggeration. And I think to somehow blame the victim is gross and sad here.
You are confusing what I am saying, I am not laying all the blame on Ramirez, my exact statement was: Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless.
...he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices...
If they fought amongst themselves, the highschoolers, and one of them was beaten up by three football player types (arguably six or more football player types) and was lying on the ground unconscious, and one of them kicked the side of his head in, after which he starts foaming at the mouth and convulsing, and he is rushed to the hospital and never comes to, but dies there a few days later, would you be saying he is as much to blame as the guys who beat him? Because of his choices, he is dead?
You are still confused, you still call Ramirez the victim, why? because he died? Again, as you have stated none of us where there, none of us really know, we have to wait until the courts rule and allow justice to prevail.
Are the boys not 'innocent until proven guilty'? And if they are, then we do not yet know if Ramirez was a victim or not. If you would like to continue with semantics, I mean.
In all actuality what we know is that Ramirez got into a fight which lead to more than one against one by the time all was said and done and that Ramirez was lying on the ground foaming at the mouth.
As I said earlier, any rational person/adult would have just walked away, especially when you have a group against one and a girl trying to pull at you to ignore it. To me that's not good odds.
Yes, he's the victim. Yes, we don't know everything about what happened. What we do know again, is the bottom line, which makes him the clear victim here: He was beaten up until lying unconscious, at least three to one. While lying unconscious, kicked in the head, and then started foaming at mouth and convulsing. That much we do know. That much is not debatable. How can that be self defense? He is the victim. To blame the victim is sad and gross.
Mrs Garcia: "So we get back as fast as we could. And when we get there, he was—like the fight was over, like the boys were walking away, but they were still screaming like racial slurs, like “Go back to Mexico!”
And so, Victor and I ran up to Luis, and we said, “What happened?” But he was so mad, he wasn’t really talking to us."
'"He was so mad", he wasn't really talking to us.' You yourself state: "point out that this would have made him violent, but the reality is that it more likely would have made him more out of it and less likely to defend himself."
I'm not defending the boys, but I'm also not buying that Ramirez is the victim. He was the adult, who should have been able to control himself, but couldn't.
People live by the choices they make, hopefully they are smart enough to make the right choices. One wrong choice can effect your life. Look to the wrong of the boys, they are all affected by their decisions that night. Look at Ramirez, he too is affected by his decision, only he should have been thinking about his children vs his macheeeeeesemo.
"To get us to think about how we think of the situations, and who we are quick to defend."
I agree. Who are you quick to defend? Do you also jump to the defense of the thousands upon thousands of American citizens and legal residents who have suffered and died at the hands of those who have no right to be here? Or are you quicker to defend illegals, especially if they are of the Latino variety? We know that Dee is. How about you? You see that question runs both ways, doesn't it?
I've been pondering Liquid's comments and I think now that I know what he is trying to say.
Not that this man "deserved" in any way to have this happen. And not even so much a feeling of "he brought it on himself." But that certain actions we take, certain behaviors we might engage in can lead to disastrous consequences.
This is actually something we discussed in one of my classes. The topic was about a woman who had met with a untimely death after a night of partying and engaging in other risy behavior.
Some of my classmates were making the point that nobody deserves such an end, no matter what behavior they engage in.
But I felt they were missing the point. The point is not that the woman deserved this (she didn't), or even that she "brought it on herself" (insinuating that someone this was some kind of "punishment" for her behavior). The point is just common sense: when we place ourselves in risky situations, or do not take proper precautions, we increase our chances of a negative outcome. That's really it. So we have to be responsible. Do not drink to excess when out partying because that often leads to people getting out of control and doing things that they would not normally do if their judgement was not impaired by alcohol.
The ultimate blame rests with the person who committed the violent act, but the victim made themselves vulnerable by engaging in some risky behavior (or behavior which hampered their ability to think clearly).
Excuse my typos. My mind flies faster than my fingers and I do not spend a lot of time (if any) proofreading. It is my hope that you will all be able to know what I am getting at.
Liquid, You make yourself look foolish, bias and pathetic. The big jocks, as herioc jock team member stated at the hearing, were drinking and drugging. They outnumbered this poor dead father by 5 to 1. They kicked him in the head when he was on the ground unconscious. And you are not man enough to admit the truth. Pitiful! Robles did a very good job at dispelling YOUR silly benzo theory. Hah! Now, all you want to do is coddle this kicker into private school. Send him $10 for netzero and be done with it!
Liquidmicro said... I'm demonizing the victim?? You had better do some research, it has been shown already that Ramirez was twice the legal limit intoxicated and he was on drugs (benzo). There is no demonizing. Why don't you look up the Autopsy report that was used, not just in the court but also used in articles written by many reporters. Is that to hard for you to do?? Or must I do your homework for you and make you look foolish even more than you already do??
Liquid, More silliness to your argument. The courts found enough evidence to charge him and his counterparts for their crimes. His own jock buddy admitted the drinking, drugging and kicking. Shame on you for your trying to minimize this young fathers death! Send your charged criminal kicker ten bucks for netzero and end this!
Liquidmicro said... confused..
Are the boys not 'innocent until proven guilty'? And if they are, then we do not yet know if Ramirez was a victim or not. If you would like to continue with semantics, I mean.
Alie, Actually your statement agrees more with my perspective than Liquids. The kickers have been charged and when found guilty will serve their time in prison, not some fancy private school.
The victim here should not be demonized as Liquid is doing.
I remember the case of the woman who partied, I think it was in NY. Her friends went home and left her in the bar. She was murdered by some crazy killer. I also read about murderers who kill women who go shopping by themselves. I also read about murderers who pick up and kill children who slip away from their moms while shopping at a park. While I agree we should not go out looking for trouble, we do not have to stay locked up at home and never go anywhere. We should not surrender ourselves to all the murderers and rapists out there and only go anywhere in pairs or with guns. Every man for himself. Shoot em up!
I choose to think we have the right to go to public places and be safe. We can go to a park or a mall and we have the right to be safe. The murderers or the kickers or the beaters or the rapists or racial slurring terrorizers are wrong. They deserve to serve their fullest penalty in prison. WE cannot live in a bubble.
Alie said... The ultimate blame rests with the person who committed the violent act, but the victim made themselves vulnerable by engaging in some risky behavior (or behavior which hampered their ability to think clearly).
I guess I need to 'dumb things down' for you, Dee, since you are completely unable to comprehend anything I have said.
1) These boys will be held liable for their crimes.
2) My empathy is for his children.
3) I have empathy for his children now fatherless by a man who could not control himself.
4) Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless.
5) As I have stated from the beginning, the boys will be found guilty of their crimes, and they will be punished for them.
6) I'm not defending the boys, but I'm also not buying that Ramirez is the victim. He was the adult, who should have been able to control himself, but couldn't.
7) Shame on you Dee for trying to exploit this mans death. Shame on you for being the judge, jury, and executioner. Thanks for turning this into a racial argument, it clearly shows your agenda.
"The victim here should not be demonized as Liquid is doing."
Demonizing, how? by giving out all the information? The toxicology report came back and showed Ramirez to have a BAC of .15%, twice the legal limit and Xanax.
The Morning Call gave a two-page article detailing the deceased man’s toxicology results. I'm only pointing out the facts that you don't want known so that you can continue to exploit this mans death and to scream racism.
I'm not defending the boys, but I'm also not buying that Ramirez is the victim. He was the adult, who should have been able to control himself, but couldn't
The boys are charged with murder. Ramirez is dead. Even if he were alive, he is not the one charged with a crime in this trial. HE IS THE VICTIM. By talking about Ramirez and how he should've been more responsible, that he's not the victim here, you ARE defending the boys.
alie said: Not that this man "deserved" in any way to have this happen. And not even so much a feeling of "he brought it on himself." But that certain actions we take, certain behaviors we might engage in can lead to disastrous consequences."
liquuidmicro said: Its sad that Ramirez died, but He IS JUST AS MUCH TO BLAME AS ANYBODY, his choices left his children fatherless. How can someone have empathy for stupidity? Especially a drunk and drugged up adult?
Sorry, but that sounds an awful lot like liquidmicro is saying he brought it on himself, which is blaming the victim. To say on one hand that he didn't deserve to die, then to say he is just as much to blame for his death, is to blame the victim.
Shame on you Dee for trying to exploit this mans death. Shame on you for being the judge, jury, and executioner. Thanks for turning this into a racial argument, it clearly shows your agenda.
"As they walked to Donchak's house, he testified, they came across Ramirez and Dillman's half-sister, Roxanne, 15, at the park. According to Lawson, another teen, Brian Scully, who has not been charged, said to the girl, ''Isn't it a little late for you to be out?''
The girl didn't answer, but Ramirez replied in Spanish, and Scully replied, ''This is Shenandoah, this is America, go back to Mexico,'' and used racial slurs. The two began fighting, Lawson said."
These paragraphs are from the link I posted above. I still do not believe Ramirez to be the victim. Ramirez should have kept walking. Ramirez is just as much to blame for the fighting. Keep in mind also that this is from actual court testimony.
Here's more: "Ramirez had several chances to leave the park -- witnesses testified Dillman's half-sister loudly told him to do so -- and that he was an aggressor in the fight.
''You may not have understood the words [he used], but you understood the tone,'' Fanelli said to Lawson on cross-examination. ''That tone was aggressive. And as this man, in his aggressive posture, approached Mr. Scully, you knew there was going to be trouble.'' ..... Testimony also showed that as many as four other Hispanics came to the scene during the brawl, and that it was Donchak who called police, saying someone had a gun.
"Ramirez is dead. Even if he were alive, he is not the one charged with a crime in this trial."
If he were alive, he may very well have been charged with a crime for this fight. He was an adult fighting with an under aged boy. In some states that makes the adult culpable and automatically at fault.
If he were alive, he may very well have been charged with a crime for this fight. He was an adult fighting with an under aged boy. In some states that makes the adult culpable and automatically at fault.
It is neither here nor there. If things happened differently, he very well could've been charged with a crime. Depends on the actions and what unfolded that night. But, as it stands now, the case is about ethnic intimidation and murder, and he is the clear victim. Stop the victim blaming, which you are clearly doing right now. It is neither here nor there. Alie brought up that we all have responsibilities for our actions. No debate there, but to bring up his shortcomings is blaming the victim.
Not that simple. It was six or more (football player) teenagers, but only three are charged. It was the teen who confessed that showed they got together the next day and tried to get everyone to agree that: he started the fight, he threw the first punch, they weren't drinking, and that nobody kicked him in the head when he was down. That implies that all those things did happen.
Could he have walked away, should he have walked away? Sure. Again, that is neither here nor there. At some point, he's unconscious on the ground, and he gets kicked in the head, and the next day everyone wants to deny it happened. Unfortunately for them, there were witnesses.
"Shame on you Liquid for always taking the "white guys" side"
examine your reactions. How would you feel if it were 6 drunk (football team) latino teens kicking a white 25 year old father of two in the head while he lay unconscious.
Liquidmicro, Your reactions to this, to blame the victim, or to say he should've been more responsible, would be the same thing as me saying the father of the Bologna family, who was gunned down while driving in SF with his two sons by the undocumented latino immigrant, should have driven more responsibly and should've given the undocumented latino gang member the right of way. Then I would say, I'm not excusing his behavior, nobody deserves to die this way, but I'm just pointing out that he played a role in his own death, and he should've just given him the right of way. He's as much to blame for his death as the latino gang member that gunned him down.
Liquid, What you call "dumbing things down" is you finally speaking in concise sentences instead of raving, unintelligible rants. Your writing is ok until you get angry, then you tend to run on and on. A writing class might help. Nevertheless, I do agree with 1, 2, half of 3, half of 4, 5, half of 6 and none of 7.
I became involved in this discussion because one of my viewers asked me to get involved and draw attention to this issue. At the time, the local authorities were not even investigating and said the perps were from "good" families. I promised my viewer I would stay involved until the perps were brought to justice. When they do, I will have fulfilled my commitment.
Liquidmicro said... I guess I need to 'dumb things down' for you, Dee, since you are completely unable to comprehend anything I have said.
1) These boys will be held liable for their crimes.
2) My empathy is for his children.
3) I have empathy for his children now fatherless by a man who could not control himself.
4) Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless.
5) As I have stated from the beginning, the boys will be found guilty of their crimes, and they will be punished for them.
6) I'm not defending the boys, but I'm also not buying that Ramirez is the victim. He was the adult, who should have been able to control himself, but couldn't.
7) Shame on you Dee for trying to exploit this mans death. Shame on you for being the judge, jury, and executioner. Thanks for turning this into a racial argument, it clearly shows your agenda.
But the bottom line is, we should not be discussing the case. This whole blog is about the accused requesting a Private School because the school did not proactively provide him Internet Access.
The point is, Internet Access is EASILY attainable. This issue could be solved by $10 a month on netzero.
The judge rightfully denied his private school request.
This was a costly, bogus request. He has myspace at home. Internet Access is cheap and easy.
Alie said: Or are you quicker to defend illegals, especially if they are of the Latino variety? We know that Dee is. How about you? You see that question runs both ways, doesn't it?
I feel I need to respond to this. I am not quicker to defend undocumented immigrants, latino or otherwise. If anyone has committed a crime, I hold them responsible for their actions and the repercussions. I will add that some popular media (think Lou Dobbs, O'Reilly, Beck, etc.) love to portray and highlight stories of undocumented immigrants committing crimes, even though the reality is that undocumented immigrants are much much less likely to commit crimes than US citizens and legal residents, because this supports the Antis agenda that undocumented immigrants are all criminals first by being here, but that they are also more likely to commit more crimes while they are here, and therefore should all be deported.
In your SF argument, the Bologna's didn't have any opportunity to leave as Ramirez had multiple chances along with friends tugging at him. Sorry, your comparison doesn't work.
Getting to the topic as you want Dee, Piekarsky didn't throw a "TANTRUM" as you suggest, he merely wanted the school to live up to its agreement, that so far they have failed to do. If you want to blame someone blame the school.
As for my writing skill, Dee, I write reports for courts, my writing skills are just fine. You just fail to read and understand what I am saying. Alie understood it, she even explained it, yet you still didn't quite get it?
As for demonizing Ramirez, I'm not stating anything that isn't a fact. It can all be found in articles and court testimony. "But he was so mad, he wasn’t really talking to us. And those kids kept yelling stuff, and he went back". He went back!!!! when he should have left, he no longer is a victim but a participant in the fight. As for getting his but kicked, like I said 6 to 1 odds is not favorable, had Ramirez been smart, a father, an adult, a better person, listened to his friends, he might just still be able to be a father, fiance, friend, and neighbor.
Liquidmicro: he merely wanted the school to live up to its agreement, that so far they have failed to do. If you want to blame someone blame the school.
The school is to blame for not upholding their promise to him. But he wanted something more. Private School. Why should he get more? Because they didn't follow through with a tutor and internet access (which he already has), he believed/his mother believed he needs to be paid to go to a private school.
He requested that if the school didn't want to live up to its agreement then they should send him to a private school since it was the school in the first place that denied him the return to school.
"Shame on you Liquid for always taking the "white guys" side"
examine your reactions. How would you feel if it were 6 drunk (football team) latino teens kicking a white 25 year old father of two in the head while he lay unconscious."
My reactions would be pretty much the same as they have been. 6 to 1 odds is pretty poor judgment for the 'white' father. He should have walked away. His actions/reactions are what put him into his position. If one of the boys were not getting what they were entitled to, as the school is not living up to its agreement since it was the school who denied him to return class to begin with.
Liquid, Your argument would be legitimate except for one thing Liquid. The world is NOT Stupid. We ALL know Internet Access is EASY to attain!
Go back to the 80s. Your argument (and the hoodlum Piekarsky) MIGHT have worked then!
Liquidmicro said... Getting to the topic as you want Dee, Piekarsky didn't throw a "TANTRUM" as you suggest, he merely wanted the school to live up to its agreement, that so far they have failed to do. If you want to blame someone blame the school.
Not everybody can afford the internet, Dee, even if it is NetZero and only $10. My sister is one of them, Husband and 3 boys, they can't afford much more than food, My mother buys that half the time for them, they can't even keep cell phones on long enough to use. Not all people are as lucky as you or I to have the internet, and in a small po-dunk town in Penn. where the rate of unemployment is rising, I would think even fewer are lucky enough to have the internet. Some have other priorities and live on a fixed budget.
Liquid, He did have a myspace page as did most of the jocks charged. You can refute he did not have a pc at home, but we did know he was computer savvy. Additionally, the school sent him a computer. Acknowledging he is computer savvy, he told the courts he lacked internet access. As I said, internet access is $10 a month. So now the schools can set him up with $10 a month. That simple. NO NEED for some expensive Private School. Case Closed.
That's all he is asking, for the school to live up to its agreement, and if they do not want to then to have the school, since the school doesn't want to accept him, pay for his schooling at a private school. Its really not that hard to understand the logistics of what he is asking the school to do.
Sorry Liquid. You are wrong. Go back and read the article. He did not ask for internet access. He asked that the school district pay to send him to a private school.
Had he just asked for internet access, there would not have been an issue (and I would not have written this blog). He wanted special treatment. My guess he wanted to get this case behind him and get back to school with kids his own age. However, the judge rightly rule that the school should ensure he gets internet access and he stay at home for schooling as was decided.
He asked the school to live up to its agreement, period. The school was not living up to its agreement (Piekarsky's school agreed to provide him with 12.5 hours a week of home-based instruction and a computer with internet access.), so he asked that the school pay for his education at a private school (he's been getting only a few hours of tutoring a week and his computer was delivered weeks late and lacks internet access.), period.
You are making something that is very simple into an unsolvable math problem.
How can you claim it as Piekarsky having a tantrum, when the school is the one that is not living up to its obligation based on its own agreement that it made. Your disdain for this boy, is sickening. What happened to 'innocent until proven guilty'? Seems you have already deemed guilt and have become the prosecution, judge and jury.
ReplyDeleteThat's the American way Dee. Keep it up.
Seems as though he is only trying to get the school district to provide him with the home schooling to which they had agreed.
ReplyDeleteHe has not been tried and convicted yet and has the right to continue his education. Heck, we are forced to provide educations for those in our country illegally and so a citizen should have the right to an education also, even if they are awaiting trial.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteYou have so much empathy for the drunken jock who all the witnesses, including his football drinking buddy, said delivered the last kick to the head of the poor young father.
I never heard you say one word in empathy for the poor young murdered father or his children. Why is that Liquid?? We ALL want to know.
Now Piekarsky wants a Private School at his beck and call. I suppose you think that is ok.
What else does he want, a maid and butler?
This criminal, when finally found guilty for his crimes, should be penalized to the fullest extent of the law!
The fullest!
We taxpayers should not be providing him milk and cookies and maid service in a plush Private School as he requested!
Shame on you Liquid for always taking the "white guys" side and not reserving any feelings of empathy for the poor murdered Latino Father.
Alie,
ReplyDeleteWhere is your empathy for the murdered young father and his children. I have not seen one word of empathy for them from you.
WHY IS THAT?
You know, while I did create the title, I quoted the article verbatim. I did not add a word.
ReplyDeleteWhat I find interesting is that I have read Piekarsky had a myspace page. All of his friends are on myspace. They ALL have and know how to obtain internet access. We are in 2008. Who doesnt have internet access.
All most school websites require is an login id and password. This is not the 1980s. This is 2008. My grandbabies know how to access the internet and log in to school sites. Come on. What a cop out.
Plus, I would venture to say the school provided him the base curriculum and, for home studies, he and his parents have to put in a certain degree of effort to READ the pages, understand and complete the homework. Homestudy usually does require parent involvement.
It is clear this spoiled young man who kicked this poor young father in the head (and he is now dead), want someone to spoon feed him the curriculum or be allowed to go to a posh private school.
I agree with the Judge. He denied the request. Now the school will probably have to spoon feed this spoiled accused murderer until his next tantrum!
Feelings of empathy for Ramirez by Liquidmicro, Aug. 24th, 2008.
ReplyDelete"We all agree this was a crime, we all agree these boys should be punished, we all agree it was tragic what happened to Ramirez."
Where is your empathy, Dee, for all of the American citizens who have been murdered by those who shouldn't be in this country in the first place? What about them and their families, Dee? I don't see you getting as worked up over all of the Americans killed at the hands of illegals the way you do when something bad happens to an illegal. WHY IS THAT?
ReplyDeleteOf course, I don't want to see anyone meet a violent end even if they were here illegally. Nobody deserves that.
Still, it doesn't mean that the school district is not supposed to uphold the agreement they made with this kid. Even hardened criminals convicted of murder have access to education in prison. This guy hasn't even had a trial yet or been convicted. That was my point.
And you're a good one, Dee, for accusing Liquid of always taking the "white guy's" side when all you do is take the Latino's side. You wouldn't even care about this illegal issue if 80% of the illegals were Chinese or Middle Eastern. The words, "glass houses" comes to mind.
ReplyDeleteYou are missing the entire Arielle Garcia statement:
ReplyDelete"ARIELLE GARCIA: He was at our house all day that afternoon. And it was around maybe 11:00, he asked us to take him uptown to drop him off, whatever, he was going to go home. So, we leave him at the Vine Street Park, and we drive away, Victor and I, and about two minutes later he called us and told us to come back, that people were beating him up. So we get back as fast as we could. And when we get there, he was—like the fight was over, like the boys were walking away, but they were still screaming like racial slurs, like “Go back to Mexico!”
And so, Victor and I ran up to Luis, and we said, “What happened?” But he was so mad, he wasn’t really talking to us. And those kids kept yelling stuff, and he went back, and the kids turned around, and the fight started again. So Victor, my husband, tried to like stop the fight. He tried to get the kids off of Luis, but kids were trying to fight my husband. So my husband got the kids off of him, and we couldn’t stop the fight between Luis and the—but next thing we know, Luis was on the floor. And so, me and Victor, we ran up to his side, and we were at his side. We were trying to wake him up, and the kids are still like kicking him and kicking him. And somebody—I don’t know who, but they kicked him like in the left side of his head so hard that that’s what killed him."
You missed this very important part:
"But he was so mad, he wasn’t really talking to us. And those kids kept yelling stuff, and he (Ramirez) went back, and the kids turned around, and the fight started again.
Add in Garcia's statements to get a clearer picture.
August 22, 2008 6:51 PM
Anonymous Liquidmicro said...
You are also forgetting this very important witness testimony:
"They also repeatedly pointed out that Ramirez had several chances to leave the park -- witnesses testified Dillman's half-sister loudly told him to do so -- and that he was an aggressor in the fight."
August 22, 2008 6:56 PM
The testimony from court and Mrs. Garcias statements will be what uphold justice in this case. Please take note of Mr. Ramirez's chance to leave and the fact that he went back and became the aggressor after the first fight. These boys will be held liable for their crimes, but for 3rd degree homicide, I'm not to sure. As usual Dee, your ignorance stands out for all to see.
Empathy for Ramirez, for what, being an adult and fighting with kids? He should have known better, he should have walked away in the beginning or when he had the second chance to when Mrs. Garcia arrived. My empathy is for his children, due to his own stupidity he has now left his children fatherless.
ReplyDeleteAs for what killed Ramirez, it still has not been proven that it was the kick, it could have been from the first fight when he fell and hit his head on the macadam. So until the court hearing and the information comes out from their, nobody knows the full extent of what caused the death other than stemming from the fight.
Someone has to show empathy for these boys since you have already deemed them guilty to the fullest extent. Your biasness to your own ethnicity is what I find most disturbing. Your failure to extend the rule of law to these boys and their Constitutional Rights is very telling as well.
ReplyDeleteAlie,
ReplyDeleteSo you admit you have no empathy for the murdered father and only want to give milk and cookies and a private schooling to the kick in the head charged murderer?
I thought better of you Alie! Shame!
Alie,
ReplyDeleteLiquid cannot help himself.
A leopard cannot change his spots!
Alie said...
And you're a good one, Dee, for accusing Liquid of always taking the "white guy's" side
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteHere is the part you missed.
Still no empathy.
And all you want to do is give Piekarsky milk and cookies and Private Schooling.
You really believe a guy who is on myspace does not have internet access?? come on!
Liquidmicro said...
And somebody (Piekarsky)—I don’t know who, but they kicked him like in the left side of his head so hard that that’s what killed him."
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteYou prove my point.
Still no empathy for the dead father who died from a kick in the head by Piekarsky.
Piekarsky, with his myspace page, pretends he cannot access the internet. And insists on Private Schooling. And YOU feel sorry for him! VERY TELLING!!
Liquidmicro said...
Empathy for Ramirez, for what, being an adult and fighting with kids? He should have known better, he should have walked away in the beginning or when he had the second chance to when Mrs. Garcia arrived. My empathy is for his children, due to his own stupidity he has now left his children fatherless.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteHavent you noticed? You always take the white guy´s side.
Gosh!
It obviously seems like Racial Bias!
Can it be so?
Liquidmicro said...
Someone has to show empathy for these boys since you have already deemed them guilty to the fullest extent.
Liquidmicro said...
ReplyDeleteAnd somebody (Piekarsky)—I don’t know who, but they kicked him like in the left side of his head so hard that that’s what killed him."
Are you that pathetic where you have to take a quote by Mrs. Garcia and make it appear as I said it? Are you also so ignorant to think that a 19 year old girl can determine the cause of death to Ramirez? Either you are totally oblivious to your own ignorance or you are just witless.
Dee said...
ReplyDeleteLiquid,
Havent you noticed? You always take the white guy´s side.
Gosh!
It obviously seems like Racial Bias!
Can it be so?
I enjoy when you display your total stupidity out in the open. Learn to read what is posted so your ignorance isn't blowing in the wind for all to see.
My exact statement, which shows your comprehension skill:
The testimony from court and Mrs. Garcias statements will be what uphold justice in this case. Please take note of Mr. Ramirez's chance to leave and the fact that he went back and became the aggressor after the first fight. These boys will be held liable for their crimes, but for 3rd degree homicide, I'm not to sure. As usual Dee, your ignorance stands out for all to see.
October 17, 2008 7:24 PM
Please take note of this sentence above: These boys will be held liable for their crimes, but for 3rd degree homicide, I'm not to sure. As usual Dee, your ignorance stands out for all to see.
Dee said...
ReplyDeleteLiquid,
Here is the part you missed.
Still no empathy.
Empathy for a BAC level 2 times that of the legal limit, Ramirez was twice the legal limit for being drunk along with having benzo in his system. As I said I have empathy for his children now fatherless by a man who could not control himself. Great 'family values' he showed.
Dee, you must have missed my previous comment:
ReplyDelete"Of course, I don't want to see anyone meet a violent end even if they were here illegally. Nobody deserves that."
But...I noticed that you did not address the point I made that you always get worked up over injustices or violence against Latinos or illegals, but do not mention all the Americans who have been killed and taken away from their families by illegals who should not even be here in the country.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteThe Medical Examiner said it was the blows to the head that killed him, remember?
Additionally, you cannot have it both ways. You provided her quotes to support your argument. I used these same quotes to refute and WIN the argument.
Point, Set, Match!!
Liquidmicro said...
Liquidmicro said...
And somebody (Piekarsky)—I don’t know who, but they kicked him like in the left side of his head so hard that that’s what killed him."
Are you that pathetic where you have to take a quote by Mrs. Garcia and make it appear as I said it? Are you also so ignorant to think that a 19 year old girl can determine the cause of death to Ramirez? Either you are totally oblivious to your own ignorance or you are just witless.
To all my readers,
ReplyDeleteYou can see how agitated the ANTIs become when I merely report a verbatim article about the hard drinking jock that delivered the final kick in the head to the young father, Ramirez. They dont worry about the dead young father. They seem somehow more concerned for the spoiled delinquent.
This delinquent has been arrested and is charged with 3rd degree homicide in this death.
This delinquent went to the courts asking for Private School. He used a bogus argument that he did not have internet access. How silly since he does have a myspace page. Obviously there is internet access in his house. We do live in 2008 and even if he didnt, netzero costs less than $10 month. Anyone on a computer knows how easy it is to obtain internet access. Anyone who homeschools their children knows some parental involvement is usually needed.
No one said it would be easy. Such is the penalty when there is enough evidence to charge you for a life that is wrongfully taken.
It is obvious he wants to be back in school and with kids his own age. However, he should have thought of that before he became drunk, involved in that fight and delivered that final kick to the young fathers head.
If he is found guilty, he is sure to spend years in prison. Then he will be wishing he was back in home school.
Just a thought
ReplyDeleteI wonder how much sympathy would be given to the suspect if he was a 16 or 17 y/o undocumented latino immigrant. Even though the laws would require the school provide an education for the minor, I'm sure some of you would be changing your tune.
Dee said...
ReplyDeleteLiquid,
The Medical Examiner said it was the blows to the head that killed him, remember?
Blows to the head, lets see, a kick, many hits from fists and at one time one fist possibly held a piece of metal, and when he fell and hit his head on the macadam. I know of many hits to the head he took. You win?? Pathetic as usual on your behalf.
Now if what Mrs. Garcia says is true and that he went back the second time. that makes him the aggressor and the boys then have self defense.
The alcohol on both sides (Ramirez and the oys) and the drugs in Rameriz's system probably didn't help matters either.
You still look at this from a biased cross eyed view. Instead of printing the actual facts, you leave out a good portion because it doesn't agree with you. For you its about winning, you are pathetic.
"This delinquent went to the courts asking for Private School. He used a bogus argument that he did not have internet access. How silly since he does have a myspace page. Obviously there is internet access in his house."
ReplyDeleteThis boy went to the court to get the school to uphold its agreement and provide him with his education. Internet access he may not have at home, he may have had it at school, your generalization in thinking everybody has access to the internet is, again, pointing out your ignorance.
robles said...
ReplyDeleteJust a thought
I wonder how much sympathy would be given to the suspect if he was a 16 or 17 y/o undocumented latino immigrant.
To your point, I'm sure at that the young Latino, 16/17, wouldn't be drunk or on drugs, he probably would have had a clear mind and been smart enough to walk away, thus having this situation never happen.
Now, look at this case without the race. Ramirez is an adult, drunk and on drugs, he should have walked away, especially when the girl, his girlfriends little sister that he had been partying with all day, told him lets go, pulled on him to not fight, yet he did anyway.
Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless. How can someone have empathy for stupidity? Especially a drunk and drugged up adult?
Dee's problem, and I guess yours now too, is that you are interjecting race into the equation, neither of you can look at this case without it. All you see is the brown skin got beat up by a bunch of white skin, and due to the beating the brown skin died, racism was the cause!! Like I said look at it from an open mind, it was an adult, drunk and on drugs and boys/young men, 16+, who should have had the clearer head? Who should have walked away? Who should have known better?
ReplyDeleteThe answer to the questions is - THE ADULT!!
No, just a thought. Just for the sake of arguement, a 16 or 17 y/o latino undocumented immigrant is a suspect, what would you be saying? Hypothetically. Would you be saying, "That high school needs to provide an education as they'd promise", and "innocent until proven guilty?" Yes, I'm injecting race into this conversation, but it's not for me to comment on what will be in the trial. That's what the trial is for. Objectively, I feel that the school did not meet what was promised to the boy, so in a sense I don't agree with Dee. Personally I feel they do have an obligation to him, just as well if he were an undocumented immigrant. In my mind, though, I'm not sure the suspect would even be out on bail if he was latino. Yes, I do feel for the victim, but it now up to the court and the trial to see justice served.
ReplyDeleteIf it were a 16 or 17 y/o Latino undocumented immigrant he would probably be held in juvenile detention where he would be receiving an education, 6 hours 5 days a week. After the trial and sentencing he probably would be deported.
ReplyDeleteAbout injecting race into this, it's just a fact that we would look at race. Cmon. As far as the thought, the hypothectical situation I posed, it's really meant to just get you thinking about how we ALL look at race. I'm not requiring a response, I'm not going to attack anyone here. I'm saying that If he were accused of murder, how would we treat him (a 16 yo undocumented immigrant) If he were demanding an education, what would we think of that?
ReplyDeleteLiquid,
ReplyDeleteYou have lost a signficant amount of credibility lately.
Ignorance? Look in the mirror buddy. Your arguments do not hold water. You act like it is rocket science to have internet access.
I showed your response to a few friends with me and they laughed at you out loud! My gosh. You are sitting at a computer. You know how easy it is to get internet access. That is what he said he was lacking in court.
If you like this kid so much, why dont you email him 10 bucks so he can get net zero.
Problem Solved!
Liquidmicro said...
"This delinquent went to the courts asking for Private School. He used a bogus argument that he did not have internet access. How silly since he does have a myspace page. Obviously there is internet access in his house."
This boy went to the court to get the school to uphold its agreement and provide him with his education. Internet access he may not have at home, he may have had it at school, your generalization in thinking everybody has access to the internet is, again, pointing out your ignorance.
October 18, 2008 9:01 PM
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteFine. Put Piekarsky back in prison where he would be receiving an education, 6 hours 5 days a week. After the trial and sentencing he probably would be put in prison with the Big Boys.
Sounds like equal treatment to me.
Liquidmicro said...
If it were a 16 or 17 y/o Latino undocumented immigrant he would probably be held in juvenile detention where he would be receiving an education, 6 hours 5 days a week. After the trial and sentencing he probably would be deported.
October 18, 2008 9:51 PM
Dee said...
ReplyDeleteLiquid,
You really are pathetic.
You are demonizing the victim.
You dont know this. You were not there.
You twist and turn and use gossip. The young father is dead. His children will not have their father this Christmas.
YOU DO NOT KNOW what happened that day, especially during the day. You put your evil twist and turns on the case and then demonize the poor dead father.
Shame on you!!
My picture illustrates court documents. This is much more accurate that your slanted gossip.
If you want to use medical terms that is one thing, but where in the documents did it say the dead father was "drunk". Where in the court documents did it say he was partying with whoever all day? Where did it say the dead man was just as much to blame for his own death? I will tell you where.. NOWHERE!!
Stop showing your bias. It is too obvious.
Send the accused the ten bucks for net zero and be done with it!
Liquidmicro said...
Ramirez is an adult, drunk and on drugs, he should have walked away, especially when the girl, his girlfriends little sister that he had been partying with all day, told him lets go, pulled on him to not fight, yet he did anyway.
Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless. How can someone have empathy for stupidity? Especially a drunk and drugged up adult?
I've heard alternate stories about this, saying that it was the mother that wanted the school to pay, in that they failed on thier promise to give several hours of instruction and a computer. On one hand, I agree. As much as I don't agree that he should get an education, the law requires it, and the school did promise this. On the other hand, to want private school instruction is overboard. He shouldn't get a better education due to this. Besides all this, I'm surprised/disgusted that the mother is stepping in only about her son's education. Where was she when Piekarsky was out partying with his buddies that night? I don't wish to have a lengthy discussion on specualtion about what happened that night, but the bottom line is, at some point, Ramirez was on the ground unconscious, and a group of high school football players were continuing to beat him, and one kicked him in the head. Also, people are quick to assume he was on benzodiazepine, which is also used as an anti-seizure by medics. Rather than assume that this was something that was already in his system as a recreational drug, it's possible that since he was alive for a few days before he dies, this may have been given when he started to convulse after being kicked, and while he was hospitalized. Yet, people are quick to point that out, yet they don't know that he was on this. Regardless of this again, bottom line, he was already unconscious, and he was kicked in the head, and he started to foam at the mouth and convulse. And it's sad that there are Antis in their Anti sites saying that he was to blame for his own death. That's shameful.
ReplyDeleteI'm demonizing the victim?? You had better do some research, it has been shown already that Ramirez was twice the legal limit intoxicated and he was on drugs (benzo). There is no demonizing. Why don't you look up the Autopsy report that was used, not just in the court but also used in articles written by many reporters. Is that to hard for you to do?? Or must I do your homework for you and make you look foolish even more than you already do??
ReplyDeleteRobles, many citizens do not like having to provide education (taxpayer money again) for foreign nations in the country illegally. If this foreign national had also committed a serious crime, it would be a double insult. So to answer your question: we would probably look at it differently. But it wouldn't be about him being Latino. It's about him being illegal and here committing a crime and then the taxpayers having to spend money to educate him.
ReplyDeleteI think you can admit that it is different than providing a citizen or legal resident with an education, even if he has committed a crime. Like I said, even convicted criminals in prison further their educations.
The man was 25 years old, he should have walked away, or is it that Latino's are 'muey macho' and must allow their testosterone to influence their lack of brain waves?
ReplyDeleteLiquidmicro,
ReplyDeleteIt's not a crime to have alcoholic drinks on the weekend when you are an adult. It doesn't surprise me that he had alcohol in his system. As far as the autopsy report again showing benzo in his system, some people are quick to speculate that he was on this as a recreational drug, when in fact, this is a common anti-seizure drug, and it's more conceivable that this was for the seizures and convulsions that he experienced after the fight, and that the medics and hospital staff gave him the benzo.
Besides, some Antis also point out that this would have made him violent, but the reality is that it more likely would have made him more out of it and less likely to defend himself. Again, bottom line, he was already unconscious, and the highschoolers continued to beat him, and someone kicked him at which point he started to convulse and foam at the mouth.
Alie, I'm good with So to answer your question: we would probably look at it differently. That's all I wanted. To get us to think about how we think of the situations, and who we are quick to defend.
The man was 25 years old, he should have walked away, or is it that Latino's are 'muey macho' and must allow their testosterone to influence their lack of brain waves?
ReplyDeleteAgain, the bottom line is glaringly obvious that he was kicked in the head while unconscious. We also weren't there. Hopefully that's what the trial is for. What was the reality of what happened. Moment of rage on his part? He looked like a slight man, and football players in highschool are typically big guys. Three to six of them or more? Kicked in the head when he was already down. Even if he used bad judgment to come back to fight them, they can't claim self defense.
Gawd, I'm doing what I said I wouldn't do...
No its not a crime as an adult to drink, my point is that it probably effected his thought and his 'machoism'. As I have stated from the beginning, the boys will be found guilty of their crimes, and they will be punished for them. I just do not think they will be found guilty of 3rd degree homicide.
ReplyDeleteI just do not think they will be found guilty of 3rd degree homicide.
ReplyDeleteWell, we'll just have to wait and see. But I think to say he was drunk and high on drugs and partying all day is an exaggeration. And I think to somehow blame the victim is gross and sad here.
You are confusing what I am saying, I am not laying all the blame on Ramirez, my exact statement was: Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless.
ReplyDelete...he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices...
ReplyDeleteIf they fought amongst themselves, the highschoolers, and one of them was beaten up by three football player types (arguably six or more football player types) and was lying on the ground unconscious, and one of them kicked the side of his head in, after which he starts foaming at the mouth and convulsing, and he is rushed to the hospital and never comes to, but dies there a few days later, would you be saying he is as much to blame as the guys who beat him? Because of his choices, he is dead?
Again, it is sad and gross to blame the victim.
You are still confused, you still call Ramirez the victim, why? because he died? Again, as you have stated none of us where there, none of us really know, we have to wait until the courts rule and allow justice to prevail.
ReplyDeleteAre the boys not 'innocent until proven guilty'? And if they are, then we do not yet know if Ramirez was a victim or not. If you would like to continue with semantics, I mean.
In all actuality what we know is that Ramirez got into a fight which lead to more than one against one by the time all was said and done and that Ramirez was lying on the ground foaming at the mouth.
ReplyDeleteAs I said earlier, any rational person/adult would have just walked away, especially when you have a group against one and a girl trying to pull at you to ignore it. To me that's not good odds.
Yes, he's the victim. Yes, we don't know everything about what happened. What we do know again, is the bottom line, which makes him the clear victim here: He was beaten up until lying unconscious, at least three to one. While lying unconscious, kicked in the head, and then started foaming at mouth and convulsing. That much we do know. That much is not debatable. How can that be self defense? He is the victim. To blame the victim is sad and gross.
ReplyDeleteMrs Garcia:
ReplyDelete"So we get back as fast as we could. And when we get there, he was—like the fight was over, like the boys were walking away, but they were still screaming like racial slurs, like “Go back to Mexico!”
And so, Victor and I ran up to Luis, and we said, “What happened?” But he was so mad, he wasn’t really talking to us."
'"He was so mad", he wasn't really talking to us.' You yourself state: "point out that this would have made him violent, but the reality is that it more likely would have made him more out of it and less likely to defend himself."
I'm not defending the boys, but I'm also not buying that Ramirez is the victim. He was the adult, who should have been able to control himself, but couldn't.
People live by the choices they make, hopefully they are smart enough to make the right choices. One wrong choice can effect your life. Look to the wrong of the boys, they are all affected by their decisions that night. Look at Ramirez, he too is affected by his decision, only he should have been thinking about his children vs his macheeeeeesemo.
ReplyDelete"To get us to think about how we think of the situations, and who we are quick to defend."
ReplyDeleteI agree. Who are you quick to defend? Do you also jump to the defense of the thousands upon thousands of American citizens and legal residents who have suffered and died at the hands of those who have no right to be here? Or are you quicker to defend illegals, especially if they are of the Latino variety? We know that Dee is. How about you? You see that question runs both ways, doesn't it?
I've been pondering Liquid's comments and I think now that I know what he is trying to say.
ReplyDeleteNot that this man "deserved" in any way to have this happen. And not even so much a feeling of "he brought it on himself." But that certain actions we take, certain behaviors we might engage in can lead to disastrous consequences.
This is actually something we discussed in one of my classes. The topic was about a woman who had met with a untimely death after a night of partying and engaging in other risy behavior.
Some of my classmates were making the point that nobody deserves such an end, no matter what behavior they engage in.
But I felt they were missing the point. The point is not that the woman deserved this (she didn't), or even that she "brought it on herself" (insinuating that someone this was some kind of "punishment" for her behavior). The point is just common sense: when we place ourselves in risky situations, or do not take proper precautions, we increase our chances of a negative outcome. That's really it. So we have to be responsible. Do not drink to excess when out partying because that often leads to people getting out of control and doing things that they would not normally do if their judgement was not impaired by alcohol.
The ultimate blame rests with the person who committed the violent act, but the victim made themselves vulnerable by engaging in some risky behavior (or behavior which hampered their ability to think clearly).
Excuse my typos. My mind flies faster than my fingers and I do not spend a lot of time (if any) proofreading. It is my hope that you will all be able to know what I am getting at.
ReplyDeleteYou put it pretty well Alie, I strongly believe in cause/effect ideology.
ReplyDeleteLiquid,
ReplyDeleteYou make yourself look foolish, bias and pathetic.
The big jocks, as herioc jock team member stated at the hearing, were drinking and drugging.
They outnumbered this poor dead father by 5 to 1. They kicked him in the head when he was on the ground unconscious.
And you are not man enough to admit the truth.
Pitiful!
Robles did a very good job at dispelling YOUR silly benzo theory.
Hah!
Now, all you want to do is coddle this kicker into private school. Send him $10 for netzero and be done with it!
Liquidmicro said...
I'm demonizing the victim?? You had better do some research, it has been shown already that Ramirez was twice the legal limit intoxicated and he was on drugs (benzo). There is no demonizing. Why don't you look up the Autopsy report that was used, not just in the court but also used in articles written by many reporters. Is that to hard for you to do?? Or must I do your homework for you and make you look foolish even more than you already do??
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteMore silliness to your argument.
The courts found enough evidence to charge him and his counterparts for their crimes. His own jock buddy admitted the drinking, drugging and kicking. Shame on you for your trying to minimize this young fathers death!
Send your charged criminal kicker ten bucks for netzero and end this!
Liquidmicro said...
confused..
Are the boys not 'innocent until proven guilty'? And if they are, then we do not yet know if Ramirez was a victim or not. If you would like to continue with semantics, I mean.
Alie,
ReplyDeleteActually your statement agrees more with my perspective than Liquids. The kickers have been charged and when found guilty will serve their time in prison, not some fancy private school.
The victim here should not be demonized as Liquid is doing.
I remember the case of the woman who partied, I think it was in NY. Her friends went home and left her in the bar. She was murdered by some crazy killer.
I also read about murderers who kill women who go shopping by themselves.
I also read about murderers who pick up and kill children who slip away from their moms while shopping at a park.
While I agree we should not go out looking for trouble, we do not have to stay locked up at home and never go anywhere.
We should not surrender ourselves to all the murderers and rapists out there and only go anywhere in pairs or with guns. Every man for himself. Shoot em up!
I choose to think we have the right to go to public places and be safe.
We can go to a park or a mall and we have the right to be safe.
The murderers or the kickers or the beaters or the rapists or racial slurring terrorizers are wrong. They deserve to serve their fullest penalty in prison.
WE cannot live in a bubble.
Alie said...
The ultimate blame rests with the person who committed the violent act, but the victim made themselves vulnerable by engaging in some risky behavior (or behavior which hampered their ability to think clearly).
I guess I need to 'dumb things down' for you, Dee, since you are completely unable to comprehend anything I have said.
ReplyDelete1) These boys will be held liable for their crimes.
2) My empathy is for his children.
3) I have empathy for his children now fatherless by a man who could not control himself.
4) Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless.
5) As I have stated from the beginning, the boys will be found guilty of their crimes, and they will be punished for them.
6) I'm not defending the boys, but I'm also not buying that Ramirez is the victim. He was the adult, who should have been able to control himself, but couldn't.
7) Shame on you Dee for trying to exploit this mans death. Shame on you for being the judge, jury, and executioner. Thanks for turning this into a racial argument, it clearly shows your agenda.
"The victim here should not be demonized as Liquid is doing."
ReplyDeleteDemonizing, how? by giving out all the information? The toxicology report came back and showed Ramirez to have a BAC of .15%, twice the legal limit and Xanax.
The Morning Call gave a two-page article detailing the deceased man’s toxicology results. I'm only pointing out the facts that you don't want known so that you can continue to exploit this mans death and to scream racism.
1st-, 2nd-degree murder charges tossed in death of Ramirez
ReplyDeleteDee even points to this article here:
Ramirez HATE Crime: Court Testimony Illustrated for the "Kick in the Head" Case!
So as you can see, I'm only pointing out your own links with my information.
I'm not defending the boys, but I'm also not buying that Ramirez is the victim. He was the adult, who should have been able to control himself, but couldn't
ReplyDeleteThe boys are charged with murder. Ramirez is dead. Even if he were alive, he is not the one charged with a crime in this trial. HE IS THE VICTIM. By talking about Ramirez and how he should've been more responsible, that he's not the victim here, you ARE defending the boys.
alie said: Not that this man "deserved" in any way to have this happen. And not even so much a feeling of "he brought it on himself." But that certain actions we take, certain behaviors we might engage in can lead to disastrous consequences."
liquuidmicro said: Its sad that Ramirez died, but He IS JUST AS MUCH TO BLAME AS ANYBODY, his choices left his children fatherless. How can someone have empathy for stupidity? Especially a drunk and drugged up adult?
Sorry, but that sounds an awful lot like liquidmicro is saying he brought it on himself, which is blaming the victim. To say on one hand that he didn't deserve to die, then to say he is just as much to blame for his death, is to blame the victim.
Shame on you Dee for trying to exploit this mans death. Shame on you for being the judge, jury, and executioner. Thanks for turning this into a racial argument, it clearly shows your agenda.
ReplyDeleteThat is just so silly, so untrue, and so unfair.
"As they walked to Donchak's house, he testified, they came across Ramirez and Dillman's half-sister, Roxanne, 15, at the park. According to Lawson, another teen, Brian Scully, who has not been charged, said to the girl, ''Isn't it a little late for you to be out?''
ReplyDeleteThe girl didn't answer, but Ramirez replied in Spanish, and Scully replied, ''This is Shenandoah, this is America, go back to Mexico,'' and used racial slurs. The two began fighting, Lawson said."
These paragraphs are from the link I posted above. I still do not believe Ramirez to be the victim. Ramirez should have kept walking. Ramirez is just as much to blame for the fighting. Keep in mind also that this is from actual court testimony.
Here's more:
"Ramirez had several chances to leave the park -- witnesses testified Dillman's half-sister loudly told him to do so -- and that he was an aggressor in the fight.
''You may not have understood the words [he used], but you understood the tone,'' Fanelli said to Lawson on cross-examination. ''That tone was aggressive. And as this man, in his aggressive posture, approached Mr. Scully, you knew there was going to be trouble.''
.....
Testimony also showed that as many as four other Hispanics came to the scene during the brawl, and that it was Donchak who called police, saying someone had a gun.
"that sounds an awful lot like liquidmicro is saying he brought it on himself"
ReplyDeleteI am not saying he brought it on himself, what I am saying is he had ample opportunity to walk away. He chose to take part in the fight.
"That is just so silly, so untrue, and so unfair."
ReplyDeleteKind of like this right?
Dee says:
"Shame on you Liquid for always taking the "white guys" side"
"Ramirez is dead. Even if he were alive, he is not the one charged with a crime in this trial."
ReplyDeleteIf he were alive, he may very well have been charged with a crime for this fight. He was an adult fighting with an under aged boy. In some states that makes the adult culpable and automatically at fault.
If he were alive, he may very well have been charged with a crime for this fight. He was an adult fighting with an under aged boy. In some states that makes the adult culpable and automatically at fault.
ReplyDeleteIt is neither here nor there. If things happened differently, he very well could've been charged with a crime. Depends on the actions and what unfolded that night. But, as it stands now, the case is about ethnic intimidation and murder, and he is the clear victim. Stop the victim blaming, which you are clearly doing right now. It is neither here nor there.
Alie brought up that we all have responsibilities for our actions. No debate there, but to bring up his shortcomings is blaming the victim.
He was an adult fighting with an under aged boy.
ReplyDeleteNot that simple. It was six or more (football player) teenagers, but only three are charged. It was the teen who confessed that showed they got together the next day and tried to get everyone to agree that: he started the fight, he threw the first punch, they weren't drinking, and that nobody kicked him in the head when he was down. That implies that all those things did happen.
Could he have walked away, should he have walked away? Sure. Again, that is neither here nor there. At some point, he's unconscious on the ground, and he gets kicked in the head, and the next day everyone wants to deny it happened. Unfortunately for them, there were witnesses.
"Shame on you Liquid for always taking the "white guys" side"
ReplyDeleteexamine your reactions. How would you feel if it were 6 drunk (football team) latino teens kicking a white 25 year old father of two in the head while he lay unconscious.
Liquidmicro,
ReplyDeleteYour reactions to this, to blame the victim, or to say he should've been more responsible, would be the same thing as me saying the father of the Bologna family, who was gunned down while driving in SF with his two sons by the undocumented latino immigrant, should have driven more responsibly and should've given the undocumented latino gang member the right of way. Then I would say, I'm not excusing his behavior, nobody deserves to die this way, but I'm just pointing out that he played a role in his own death, and he should've just given him the right of way. He's as much to blame for his death as the latino gang member that gunned him down.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteWhat you call "dumbing things down" is you finally speaking in concise sentences instead of raving, unintelligible rants. Your writing is ok until you get angry, then you tend to run on and on. A writing class might help.
Nevertheless, I do agree with 1, 2, half of 3, half of 4, 5, half of 6 and none of 7.
I became involved in this discussion because one of my viewers asked me to get involved and draw attention to this issue. At the time, the local authorities were not even investigating and said the perps were from "good" families. I promised my viewer I would stay involved until the perps were brought to justice. When they do, I will have fulfilled my commitment.
Liquidmicro said...
I guess I need to 'dumb things down' for you, Dee, since you are completely unable to comprehend anything I have said.
1) These boys will be held liable for their crimes.
2) My empathy is for his children.
3) I have empathy for his children now fatherless by a man who could not control himself.
4) Its sad that Ramirez died, but he is just as much to blame as anybody, his choices left his children fatherless.
5) As I have stated from the beginning, the boys will be found guilty of their crimes, and they will be punished for them.
6) I'm not defending the boys, but I'm also not buying that Ramirez is the victim. He was the adult, who should have been able to control himself, but couldn't.
7) Shame on you Dee for trying to exploit this mans death. Shame on you for being the judge, jury, and executioner. Thanks for turning this into a racial argument, it clearly shows your agenda.
But the bottom line is, we should not be discussing the case.
ReplyDeleteThis whole blog is about the accused requesting a Private School because the school did not proactively provide him Internet Access.
The point is, Internet Access is EASILY attainable. This issue could be solved by $10 a month on netzero.
The judge rightfully denied his private school request.
This was a costly, bogus request. He has myspace at home. Internet Access is cheap and easy.
REQUEST DENIED!
Alie said: Or are you quicker to defend illegals, especially if they are of the Latino variety? We know that Dee is. How about you? You see that question runs both ways, doesn't it?
ReplyDeleteI feel I need to respond to this. I am not quicker to defend undocumented immigrants, latino or otherwise. If anyone has committed a crime, I hold them responsible for their actions and the repercussions. I will add that some popular media (think Lou Dobbs, O'Reilly, Beck, etc.) love to portray and highlight stories of undocumented immigrants committing crimes, even though the reality is that undocumented immigrants are much much less likely to commit crimes than US citizens and legal residents, because this supports the Antis agenda that undocumented immigrants are all criminals first by being here, but that they are also more likely to commit more crimes while they are here, and therefore should all be deported.
In your SF argument, the Bologna's didn't have any opportunity to leave as Ramirez had multiple chances along with friends tugging at him. Sorry, your comparison doesn't work.
ReplyDeleteGetting to the topic as you want Dee, Piekarsky didn't throw a "TANTRUM" as you suggest, he merely wanted the school to live up to its agreement, that so far they have failed to do. If you want to blame someone blame the school.
As for my writing skill, Dee, I write reports for courts, my writing skills are just fine. You just fail to read and understand what I am saying. Alie understood it, she even explained it, yet you still didn't quite get it?
As for demonizing Ramirez, I'm not stating anything that isn't a fact. It can all be found in articles and court testimony. "But he was so mad, he wasn’t really talking to us. And those kids kept yelling stuff, and he went back". He went back!!!! when he should have left, he no longer is a victim but a participant in the fight. As for getting his but kicked, like I said 6 to 1 odds is not favorable, had Ramirez been smart, a father, an adult, a better person, listened to his friends, he might just still be able to be a father, fiance, friend, and neighbor.
Liquidmicro: he merely wanted the school to live up to its agreement, that so far they have failed to do. If you want to blame someone blame the school.
ReplyDeleteThe school is to blame for not upholding their promise to him. But he wanted something more. Private School. Why should he get more? Because they didn't follow through with a tutor and internet access (which he already has), he believed/his mother believed he needs to be paid to go to a private school.
"But he wanted something more. Private School."
ReplyDeleteHe requested that if the school didn't want to live up to its agreement then they should send him to a private school since it was the school in the first place that denied him the return to school.
I missed this the other night.
ReplyDelete"robles said...
"Shame on you Liquid for always taking the "white guys" side"
examine your reactions. How would you feel if it were 6 drunk (football team) latino teens kicking a white 25 year old father of two in the head while he lay unconscious."
My reactions would be pretty much the same as they have been. 6 to 1 odds is pretty poor judgment for the 'white' father. He should have walked away. His actions/reactions are what put him into his position. If one of the boys were not getting what they were entitled to, as the school is not living up to its agreement since it was the school who denied him to return class to begin with.
Liquid,
ReplyDeleteYour argument would be legitimate except for one thing Liquid. The world is NOT Stupid. We ALL know Internet Access is EASY to attain!
Go back to the 80s. Your argument (and the hoodlum Piekarsky) MIGHT have worked then!
Liquidmicro said...
Getting to the topic as you want Dee, Piekarsky didn't throw a "TANTRUM" as you suggest, he merely wanted the school to live up to its agreement, that so far they have failed to do. If you want to blame someone blame the school.
Not everybody can afford the internet, Dee, even if it is NetZero and only $10. My sister is one of them, Husband and 3 boys, they can't afford much more than food, My mother buys that half the time for them, they can't even keep cell phones on long enough to use. Not all people are as lucky as you or I to have the internet, and in a small po-dunk town in Penn. where the rate of unemployment is rising, I would think even fewer are lucky enough to have the internet. Some have other priorities and live on a fixed budget.
ReplyDeleteLiquid,
ReplyDeleteHe did have a myspace page as did most of the jocks charged.
You can refute he did not have a pc at home, but we did know he was computer savvy.
Additionally, the school sent him a computer. Acknowledging he is computer savvy, he told the courts he lacked internet access.
As I said, internet access is $10 a month. So now the schools can set him up with $10 a month. That simple.
NO NEED for some expensive Private School.
Case Closed.
That's all he is asking, for the school to live up to its agreement, and if they do not want to then to have the school, since the school doesn't want to accept him, pay for his schooling at a private school. Its really not that hard to understand the logistics of what he is asking the school to do.
ReplyDeleteSorry Liquid. You are wrong.
ReplyDeleteGo back and read the article. He did not ask for internet access. He asked that the school district pay to send him to a private school.
Had he just asked for internet access, there would not have been an issue (and I would not have written this blog). He wanted special treatment. My guess he wanted to get this case behind him and get back to school with kids his own age. However, the judge rightly rule that the school should ensure he gets internet access and he stay at home for schooling as was decided.
He asked the school to live up to its agreement, period. The school was not living up to its agreement (Piekarsky's school agreed to provide him with 12.5 hours a week of home-based instruction and a computer with internet access.), so he asked that the school pay for his education at a private school (he's been getting only a few hours of tutoring a week and his computer was delivered weeks late and lacks internet access.), period.
ReplyDeleteYou are making something that is very simple into an unsolvable math problem.