Kentucky Police Consider Charging More Paul Supporters In Stomping Case

[JohnWxy]

http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/10/kentucky-police-consider-charging-more-paul-supporters-in-stomping-case.php?ref=fpb



The identification of the Kentucky Stomper -- former Rand Paul volunteer Tim Profitt -- allowed Lexington police to issue a criminal summons in the case. He'll soon appear in district court and possibly face charges. But Lexington police say the investigation is still ongoing, and they may pursue the other Paul-supporters who participated in the assault.

"At this point, the investigation is still ongoing," public information officer Sherelle Roberts told ABC News. "We're looking into other individuals who may have been involved in the assault and could get charged."

A quick review of the video shows that multiple men dragged the victim -- Lauren Valle -- to the ground and one, ironically clad in a "don't tread on me" button, held her there while Profitt emphatically pressed her head into the ground (pavement__JW) with his foot.

A number of blogs have suggested that the pin-clad culprit is Mike Pezzano -- a Paul supporter and open-carry law advocate. But police have thus far made no official determination.

[kcks]

1. Does

anyone know who shot the video and is there more than one version?

[kas125]

6. The first video was a Fox affiliate and I've read that there are

new videos from another angle but haven't seen them.

[kcks]

7. Thank you

I hope more video comes out I think there are several unanswered questions.

[kas125]

8. Unanswered questions? Personally, I think the video speaks

volumes and answers just about any question, but I'd be interested to know what you mean by unanswered questions.

[kcks]

9. This will

raise some hackles here but hear me out, there is a test at the end, I have seen two videos from this event. I have tried to watch the videos without prejudice from any comments I have heard or read.
In the first video the MoveOn person is approaching Rand Paul's car as in comes into the lot she moves forward and shoves the placard she is carrying through an open window. A man in a suit and tie (security?)moves into the scene she is moved back and the car proceeds. The next video is the one so many have seen over and over. She apparently pushes her way through Rand Paul supporters, she is forced to the ground and a bystander puts, places, stomps his foot on her shoulder/back. It does moves around and may have moved to her head. During this process her wig is ripped, falls off. You can hear people calling off the guy with foot and others calling for cops.
I would like to see more of both videos lead in and trailer with time stamps to be sure there is no editing.
Now you asked what questions I could possibly have I am trying to evaluate this as if I was a member of the jury judging these events.

1 In the first video who was the person in the suit that moved in and blocked her, private security, undercover police, secret service?
2 If private security did they try to involve the police, if not why not?
3 Did they take her sign away again, if not why not?
4 in the second video who were the people that took her to the ground?
5 Why the wig is it part of her normal wardrobe, if not why was she wearing it? Could it have been because security/police had been given a picture of her and told to be on the watch for her?
6 Who is this group?
7 The hard one to determine is just what was her intent, was she trying to make scene?
8 Did the man who put his foot on her know that someone was going to try and make a scene and was his action preplanned or just in the heat on the moment?

Test question.
You are at an event for your candidate the setting is same setup someone pushes through the crowd you have concerns for the safety for your candidate e …what do you do. Remember you have no advantage of hind sight, you have no idea what the persons real intent is.

[janewin]

10. Hmm

I have never thought of it that way and also how do u know that the 1st video showing someone shoving something into Rand's car was from moveon? the person in the 1st video was brunette and i doubt she could put on the blond wig that fast for a 2nd attempt. Another thing I had problems with was the position of the foot, I have always thought the foot was on the head but after viewing it again am not sure the foot ever touched her head. Not that stomping someone on the shoulder is acceptable.

[kcks]

12. Interesting

I had not picked up on the different color hair, that adds more to the whole deal. I agree as do most people on both sides of the debate want someone stomped on. If this goes to trial it will be most interesting as I think we both agree there is a lot to hear and see. Lets face it both sides have their out of control people, people on both sides are being mistreated it is wrong no matter who does it. Have a good day.

[janewin]

14. I will take that back

The lady rushing Rands window also had a blond hair. So am guessing its the same woman they tackled to the ground. Heres the video of the event from EDs show

the 1st rush is @ 2:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TvRXs8uUSlM

[time_has_come]

15. WTF?

Are you making a distinction between her jaw and her head, or what?

Anyone can see, clearly, that the foot (with quite a bit of weight) came down on her face/jaw/head/whatever.

Stop carrying water for that cowardly goon.

[janewin]

18. just show me the video on youtube

and please tell me the time to stop to see the foot directly hitting her head. I say this because I have tried watching the stomping video and cannot see his foot ever touching her head. Just pull one of the videos up and show me, you can examine it and see that the heel of his foot came very close to the head when he pressed down on her shoulder but it never touched the head

[time_has_come]

19. So, when it slips off her shoulder and comes down, what do you say it came down on?

Her neck? Nothing? Just...what, caught air?

You're the one making bullshit observations in an attempt to defend this cowardly fuckwad. You post the video that you have spent so long watching, and try as you might cannot see his foot coming down on her head.

[time_has_come]

20. it's even provided in this thread, post 14

early on. His foot clearly comes down on her head/neck/jaw...all three.

And that goon wants the apology? He should be stoned. Tim Proffit is a coward of the worst kind - a dishonest partisan coward. You know the kind?

When you do wrong, apologize. Don't hide behind BS and lies and cry about how you thought some slight young woman with a sign was a "threat" in your mind to your candidate. Admit that you made a mistake, a BIG mistake, and the world respects that and MOVES ON. Moving on can be healthy.
Even if you REALLY DID think she was a treat, admit THAT was a mistake. In hindsight, admit you were stupid to think a young woman with a sign was a threat. She just wanted your candidate to see the sign...no threat there.

Instead Tim Proffitt decided to hide his face and deny that he did anything wrong and ask for an apology from the girl he stomped on.

He excuses his stomp with a "bad back." He couldn't use his hands on her because he couldn't bend down, so he used his foot. And then he couldn't stop his foot, with all of his overweight 6 foot 1 inch frame above it, from coming down on her...presumably, again, because of his bad back.

He is a coward and a liar and deserves harsh treatment by the justice system. And if I ever see him I'll be asking him if he'd like to try that shit with someone not quite his size but more than willing to give him the opportunity for a second round. I'm not a woman though, and weigh more than 150 pounds, so he might be a bit reluctant.

Tim Proffitt is a coward. Let me say it again a few times...
Tim Proffitt is a coward
Tim Proffitt is a coward
Tim Proffitt is a coward
Tim Proffitt is a coward
Tim Proffitt is a coward
Tim Proffitt is a coward
Tim Proffitt is a coward
Tim Proffitt is a coward
Tim Proffitt is a coward

And you're not firing all your honesty pistons hanging around here and defending a coward like that.

[janewin]

22. Get a hold of yourself

You go from calling for a stoning of Tim Profitt to saying that my post #14 showed the head stomping to finally saying that am defending Tim Proffitt. Lemme ask you something, would u speak up if after watching the video u hear people every where from Keith' show to TYT to EDs show say that she was kicked 6x on the head? Its just the same thing for me with the head stomping meme. All I see is shoulder stomping which I don't condone and I will ask again, just point to me the time in the video where his feet was on her head.

I hope he gets some jail time (nothing more than 1yr) and a fine for the attack. As for you, stop posting baseless accusations about who am defending. Also no need replying if you cannot provide the evidence am asking for.

Peace

[time_has_come]

23. get a hold of myself? oh, sorry, am I being "emotional"?

Go ahead, label me that. It's the common rightwing accusation. It's all fools have against reason and truth, attack individuals.

You're dishonesty is clearly on display when you ask me to give you a time in the video when she was head stomped. It is a dumb game, like most dishonest rightwing games.

You are defending this coward, this largest of all scumbags. And you are wasting my time with your dishonesty....we both know what we're talking about, so why do you ask me for a "time"? Is there any other "time" that the mighty coward Proffitt put his foot on that girl? Is there??? No, of course not.

Black = white now, eh son?

Do you realize how pathetic you look hanging around this board, pretending to be something you're not?

It's SO funny to watch though. I hope they let you stay playing the goof a long, long time!

[time_has_come]

16. Here's your answer

I would not have laid my hands on what was clearly a non-threatening woman.

They handled her because they didn't like her sign, period. That cowardly, gimpy, goon is purely trying to cover his ass by claiming he thought she was a threat. Hell, he's embarrassed and deep down realizes he is a coward and attacked a woman for purely political reasons. He's too embarrassed by his pathetic actions he can't even show his face on TV.

so your "test question" is bullshit. You fail.

And I love your preamble..the cowards foot "may have moved to her head." you and your other pal are both blind, perhaps willfully so. The foot DID move, DOWN and HARD onto what was very obviously her head. Unless you're going to play some hair-splitting game here and make the claim that her jaw isn't her head, or some such stupidity. Hair splitting is usually required if you're going to defend the pathetic actions of a coward, so better have at 'er.

[Politicalboi]

17. Those assholes knew her intent

She's been at other rallies. And it wasn't a rally only for Paul only. They had NO right to do what they did to her. Teabaggers are a bunch of low life cowards.

[Bluenorthwest]

25. Aside from all the other crap,

Security is the job of those whose job it is. That is, attending a public debate (not a rally) it is not only not my job, but not my place to attempt to serve as a security detail. To do so endangers everybody, including the actual security detail.
Those who have 'concerns' for the safety of a candidate should allow the security detail for that candidate to provide that safety. Jumping in can get someone hurt. And that is just what happened. A non threat turned into an attack on a woman, injuring her badly. For no reason.
There were cops present. The end.

[time_has_come]

26. No answer off you yet. I guess...

..it's in keeping with your low profile MO.

I'll answer your questions, some with more questions I'd appreciate it if you could answer when you're trolling through here again.

1. What difference does it make if the person preventing the girl from showing her sign was private security, police, or secret service. Secret Service? Do senate candidates get secret service, seriously? Anyway, I just don't see the significance of this question. I don't have an answer, but it seems moot.

2. Again, don't know if the person, if private security, who blocked this girl initially tried to involve the police. Or if not, why not. No answer on all counts. Seems like another question designed to imply something. Why would anyone try to involve police to interfere with a protester showing a sign? Do you think she should have been arrested for approaching the vehicle with a sign?

3. Probably safe to assume her sign was gone as the cowardly Tim Profitt was stomping on her. But you ask if they didn't take her sign away, why not? Is it your belief that protesters that don't match your opinions should have their signs taken away, and if they aren't taken away there's a problem?

4. Who took her to the ground? Not sure, but apparently police are interested in them as well. You can't legally go around deciding that young ladies with signs are a "treat" and start getting physical with them. That's not America, my lad.

5. I don't know why she wore a wig. Maybe because she's dealt with these goons before and wanted to get close enough so the candidate could see her sign and/or it would get seen on TV. There's no law against wearing a wig.

6. Who is what group?

7. She was certainly trying to get her sign seen. If the goon squad and the cowardly Tim Profitt hadn't reacted like morons there would have been no scene.

8. Ah, in your last question you asked if she was trying to make a scene. Now you assert that she was in framing this question. Did Tim Profitt know that someone was going to try and make a scene, and was his cowardly, unnecessary act preplanned? How would an idiot like that know anything would be a better question, and how would an idiot like that preplan anything? Why is he hiding his face now as he whines about his bad back and asks for an apology from his victim? Best question yet.

And your test question, as I've said elsewhere, makes the assumption that I or others on this board would be as stupid and moronic as Tim Profitt as to think a young girl with a protest sign is a "threat" to a candidate, that we would have "concerns" for the candidate's safety. It's hard to believe that Profitt actually thought that, that he was doing anything more than just stomping on what he saw as political opposition. This "concerned for candidate's safety" BS is just the lie this coward is hiding behind, imo. Don't you think? That would make the most sense, no?

[yourout]

2. I want to know why they were not booked and bailed.

What do you suppose would have happened if the assaulters were black?

They would have been in jail before she got off the ground.

[Bitwit1234]

3. As well as Democrats they wouldn't have stood a chance

people are complaining already that the FBI is doing they job in stopping a lot of this stuff. HAVE THEY EVER FOUND THE GUY WHO TRIED TO BLOW UP THE VIRGINIA REPRESENTATIVES HOUSE, BUT GOT HIS BIL INSTEAD. I bet they are not even investigating.

[cheapdate]

5. I know that's right! n/t

[janewin]

11. lol

what if the person from moveon was black? we could dealing with a murder case right now

[femrap]

4. Hell yes....

there were 2 or 3 others involved in this. Profitt certainly wasn't the only one. I hope they make a big fat example of him.

I don't think Lexington will let this go without some real Justice. Big dudes don't slam young women onto the ground and stomp on them.

[The Wizard]

13. Looks like the Republicans

have taken the brown shirts out of moth balls and polished the jack boots. What's next, warming up the ovens?

[time_has_come]

21. Multiple troll bump. n/t

[era veteran]

24. Why didn't the cop standing 5' away stop and arrest

these pricks? Lexington PD could not answer me that question. We will see.