The whole premise of ATS is "deny ignorance" and on this incident here that ideal is blown straight to hades by alot of the respondents here due to
their dislike to hatred of trump.
Lets look at FACTS (as presented from video , several credible sources and THE LAW)
Ok this young lady went to a trump rally to protest.
Per the video she was very passionate about her views.
Some people challenged her views equally passionate (as is BOTH THEIR RIGHTS).
This was a large crowd so to expect that no one would accidentally make contact is an UNREASONABLE and NOT LEGAL expectation.
The video CLEARLY SHOWS she was not "grabbed" in any sexual way or classified as "sexual assault"
The fact neither the police OR HER filed charges of sexual assault is proof that it didnt happen and its an EXCUSE she is using after the fact for bad
and illegal behavior.
Both were in a heated exchange of views.
It is ONLY SPECULATION but it is reasonable (but at this time not PROVEN) to presume that some aggressive words were exchanged BY BOTH SIDES with
NEITHER could claim moral high ground on the other.
It is CLEARLY SEEN the young lady STRUCK the man.
By the law that is ASSAULT .
The force of the strike is NOT KNOWN nor is it RELEVANT to how hard she struck other than she CLEARLY STRUCK THUS ILLEGAL and MAKES HER THE
It also shows she did not back down but stayed close after the physical assault.
Thus in reasonable legal terms still possessed a threat with a REASONABLE expectation (given the previous heated discussion and physical ATTACK) that
she could do it again.
As clearly posted the WI law permits a third party to respond in defense of another where REASONABLE expectation of continued physical violence (as
shown by the video).
the person IRREGARDLESS of the "look on his face" fired one burst and the young lady retreated.
He did not continue to use pepper spray or follow.
Now yes he didn't stick around (and I will get to that in a min).
The police HAVE NOT filled charges at this time and from reporting just want to question him.
Now here is where HATRED OF TRUMP has trashed "deny ignorance"
Her age IS NOT A FACTOR OR EXCUSE for her to assault the man or face DEFENSIVE measures ALLOWED under the letter of the law.
Something alot of posters here seems to think it does.
Now IF it were say a very young child holding a sign peacefully and got sprayed then you have a case.
The law does not say ANYONE can be physically aggressive at ANY CANDIDATES RALLY.
But here by the responses its OK if a trump by an anti trump and if the trump supporter responds in any way THEY ARE HATE
Now as to date there have been 5 (at best may have missed one but doubt it given all the press and responces here to every incident) times...
this lady (latest), a guy early in the campaign, and two reporters. One the video also not clear and there is charges filled (but no trial yet or
conviction) , and one where the reporter went over approved line , ignored the SECRET SERVICE LEGAL ORDER , mouthed off aggressively, got restrained
and later didnt file charges.
Notice in all 5 cases IT WAS ANTI TRUMP PEOPLE CAUSING PROBLEMS with the left CLAIMING IT WAS ON TRUMPS DIRECT ORDERS or this is TYPICAL TRUMP
Notice you not only dont see trump supporters doing this same thing at other peoples rallies and when someone does question another candidate
(especially hillory) they are escorted out.
Now back to why the guy who pepper sprayed the young lady didnt stick around.
Look at the comments here on all IRRELEVANT ISSUES TO THE LAW being used against him
How he looked, his facial expressions, the ladies age (again AFTER THE FACT) , and he is a trump supporter.
Would any of you against him realistically stick around to be lambasted and your head demanded by the public.
We have seen to others what the "mob" mentality does to the justice system.
Like or hate trump is your right.
But to use that to justify other bad and ILLEGAL behavior is WRONG.
Worse than that to crucify trump/supporters but not hold your candidate/supporters to same standards make a joke of "deny ignorance"