Ohio man, 81, fatally shoots Uber driver, 61, after scammers target both of them, officials say

Perhaps Uber did not send their best.

Spoiler

This is the consequence of

• demonizing "the other" and
• promoting an endless barrage of political messaging that "violence is out of control" and
• ****wits like tinman et al who celebrate vigilante justice + 2A solutions.

 

Don't know the law in Ohio, but in some states if you contribute to the death of a person while you're committing another crime, you can be charged for murder even if you didn't pull the trigger. Could be applicable here.

 

pickup and drop off pkg is a feature of Uber

who would use Uber to carry out a crime? Isn’t it easily traced back?

 

Fear doesn't justify killing another person. Old man Rittenhouse needs to die in prison.

 

Maybe he was just ... standing his ground ... which appears to be code for shooting black people and getting away with it.

 

Is it not straightforward? It's a serious question. Seems like the man murdered the woman.

 

This x10000

 

In Texas, you can shoot an unarmed fleeing thief in the back under a limited set of circumstances, and its 100% legal.

Pretty sure if this happened in Texas, he be getting a medal right now from the Governor right now.

 

I just saw a longer version of this video with sound and it’s awful. She’s begging for help as he shoots her again.

To emphasize THIS IS NOT SELF-DEFENSE!

This is MURDER.

Celebrating and fetishizing “vigilantes” is going to get innocent people killed and people who might think they are acting righteously put in jail.

 

Never ceases to amaze me that the majority of people who own guns, are the least mentally equipped to make rational decisions when to use them.

What a sad life you must lead to live in such fear that you need to “stand your ground” against an elderly woman.

 

the pranksters should get the exact same sentence as the murderer.

 

I seriously doubt they will catch the Scammer
Unless they already have

We will see

Rocket River

 

He shot her in the leg. She retreated begging him to stop and asking for help. So, he shot her two more times.

I know this was a scam, but did he have to finish her off like that?

 

That shows IMO a Depraved indifference
I ruthlessness that needs to be off the street forever

Rocket River

 

This is entitlement.

This old dude grew up in an era where as a white man, he could take things into his own hands and no one questioned his actions.

Mix in possibly a little senility and a hand gun and this is what you have.

I guarantee that this idiot still thinks it isn't his fault.

That poor ashy old woman could barely walk, and still out there working to pay her bills and Jack Pardee shows up pointing a gun at her and shooting her because "he will get to the bottom of it".

 

I do - first degree murder is the right verdict.

This guy walked outside and despite protests shot an innocent uber driver in the leg and then shot her two more times and killed her.

This is really clear cut - just because he is old or a supposed "upstanding citizen" doesn't mean he can do what he did.

That old woman was out there in her 60's driving an uber to make ends meet - **** that guy.

 

Ohio - Kentucky - Pennsylvania - West Virginia - Mississippi - Alabama and Arkansas are all the same....... be it from poverty, isolation, control from a few wealthy families or just bad luck..... these are the worst states I have been to BY FAR.

 

Nice to visit but would never live there: Arky, Kentucky, West Virginia. If you like nature and such.

 

23 July 2024
https://www.courttv.com/title/william-brocks-attorney-blames-loletha-hall-for-breaking-into-home/
William Brock's attorney said victim, Loletha Hall, was at fault for breaking into Brock's home in the Uber Driver Murder Case.


Oct 18, 2024
https://www.nbc4i.com/news/local-ne...ecords-in-trial-over-ohio-uber-drivers-death/
The sheriff’s office previously said that Hall was unaware of the calls Brock received before she drove to his home. But in the defense team’s request for the court order, Brock’s attorneys implied that they were investigating the possibility of a connection between Hall and the scammers beyond an Uber request.

“The basis for the belief originates from a discrepancy in the facts as known by the defendant and the information provided by Uber,” defense attorney John Paul Rion wrote in his motion. “Mr. Brock was informed of the gender of the person and a description of the vehicle associated with the attempted theft over one hour prior to Uber stating that … the driver and the leader of the theft ring made contact.”

Brock’s lawyers previously received permission to subpoena Uber for all “non-content” records from Hall’s account, as well as her billing transaction history in the six weeks before March 25. Presiding Judge Douglas Rastatter also approved a separate motion from the defense, where they asked for access to Hall’s phone, her phone’s SIM card, and the same dashcam from her car that recorded the armed confrontation. However, he set conditions for them to receive what they asked for, including that they file a document with several details like who would test the devices for the defense, and how.