They admitted on the stand they assaulted Andy, and admitted on the stand that they pointed him out to others so he could be assaulted more. The jury acquitted them anyway, just as southern juries would acquit a Klan member for violence against blacks.
We really need to start doing that when we are jurors, too. Our guys should walk, whether they did it or not. Their guys are guilty, whether they did it or not. This is the standard they apply to us, and it is long past time to reciprocate.
According to Ngo's lawsuit, on May 7, 2019, John Hacker splashed an unknown liquid onto Ngo at a local gym, and then forcibly took Andy's phone. When Hacker refused to release the phone, gym employees allegedly interfered and returned the phone to Ngo. According to plaintiff Ngo, management later terminated Hacker's gym membership. Hacker testified that these allegations were true.
On May 28, 2021, Hacker allegedly took part in actions that led to Ngo being beaten by an Antifa mob. On that day, Ngo was monitoring Antifa attacks on the Portland Justice Center and the Portland police central precinct when Hacker allegedly approached him. The Antifa mob then yelled, "That's Andy! Get him! Get him!" Hacker testified that he approached Ngo and identified him to another journalist.
the facts not in dispute would be a motion for summary judgment, or at least a directed verdict. wouldn't even go to the jury. so either the facts as reported here are incorrect, or the judge is in on it too.
They admitted on the stand they assaulted Andy, and admitted on the stand that they pointed him out to others so he could be assaulted more. The jury acquitted them anyway, just as southern juries would acquit a Klan member for violence against blacks.
We really need to start doing that when we are jurors, too. Our guys should walk, whether they did it or not. Their guys are guilty, whether they did it or not. This is the standard they apply to us, and it is long past time to reciprocate.
where does it say they admitted they assaulted him?
something else is going on here then.
prosecutor refused to prosecute.
the facts not in dispute would be a motion for summary judgment, or at least a directed verdict. wouldn't even go to the jury. so either the facts as reported here are incorrect, or the judge is in on it too.