Chai Vang

[大汉奸柳传志]

look up the term Racist.

well I did, but it is you who label me a racist for saying the following and it‘s your responsibility to explain why

Not in America. where "whites" usually only refers to Anglo whites

 

[jhungary]

well I did, but it is you who label me a racist for saying the following and it‘s your responsibility to explain why

Dude, did you read my post before?

To be racist is being discriminate and prejudice against one's race.

You said, only anglo to be considered white, which is to discriminate and prejudice again other white people that is not anglo (which is in itself, a part of Nordic group) So, by saying white only applies to anglo, you disregarded other white people (Ayran, Med and Iberia) right, by saying they are not white.

My wife is a Nordic white woman, you by saying only anglo being considered as white, that is prejudice Nordic people right of calling themselves white. Hence, you are being racist

 

[大汉奸柳传志]

You said, only anglo to be considered white, which is to discriminate and prejudice again other white people that is not anglo (which is in itself, a part of Nordic group) So, by saying white only applies to anglo, you disregarded other white people (Ayran, Med and Iberia) right, by saying they are not white.

again you are putting words in my mouth.. I never said or implied any of that. I was merely pointing out a terminology use in America by Americans themselves, I may be right or wrong, but how the f*** I am the racist

My wife is a Nordic white woman, you by saying only anglo being considered as white, that is prejudice Nordic people right of calling themselves white. Hence, you are being racist

Wow no shit. you must be loaded or have done something right on the mattress otherwise I can’t begin to imagine what a tall european woman sees in a tiny Vietnamese fella..

 

[jhungary]

again you are putting words in my mouth.. I never said or implied any of that. I was merely pointing out a terminology use in America by Americans themselves, I may be right or wrong, but how the f*** I am the racist

Wow no shit. you must be loaded or have done something right on the mattress otherwise I can’t begin to imagine what a tall european woman sees in a tiny Vietnamese fella..

US never have any policy regarding how white people are defined, so the "American Terminology" is a non-starter, quote me one Government publication on white are defined as Anglo only, and I am gladly retract my statement and offer you an apologise, if you cannot, that mean that is YOUR PRECEPTION on either Anglo being White (which is racist to other non Anglo white person) or Your whoe American thing is wrong (Which mean you are racist to ALL White people in America)

So either way, you are a racist. Unless you can show proof that the Official definition in any Government department defined Only Anglo is white.

As for my wife, you can project your inferiority to yourself, you can think a tall woman will not go out to a short guy, maybe you are short yourself and feeling inadequate about it, or were rejected by a taller woman? I don't know. I love my wife and my wife love me, height is not an issue. By the way, in case you are wondering, I am taller than my wife.

 

[大汉奸柳传志]

that is YOUR PRECEPTION

well you got me. since you can get inside my head and read my mind

I am taller than my wife.

no offence but I really doubt it...I have seen your kind in Vietnam and I have seen many girls from Belgium and Holland(not exactly Nordic but close). they are freaking tallllll

Are you sure you are not making things up? hey I remember Peter has an imaginary Chinese wife maybe you two have a lot to talk about. I'm out for dinner @Hamartia Antidote

 

[jhungary]

well you got me. since you can get inside my head and read my mind

don't need to read your mind when you actually write that down

no offence but I really doubt it...I have seen your kind in Vietnam and I have seen many girls from Belgium and Holland(not exactly Nordic but close). they are freaking tallllll

Are you sure you are not making things up? hey I remember Peter has an imaginary Chinese wife maybe you two have a lot to talk about. I'm out for dinner @Hamartia Antidote

Don't really care what you believe, maybe you are short and you yourselves have some issue with tall woman? Maybe you have been rejected by any type of woman, hey, that's not my business, and I am not going to beat a dog when its already drowning in the pond.

You are free to believe what you want to believe, that have no co-relation with reality. My wife ain't gonna be any less European just because you believe she is not. There are people here who saw me in real life and saw a picture of me and my wife together. So whatever you believe does not actually matter.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Are you sure you are not making things up? hey I remember Peter has an imaginary Chinese wife maybe you two have a lot to talk about. I'm out for dinner @Hamartia Antidote

LOL! She's very real. I know it is very hard for you to comprehend there are a lot of Chinese women over here married to non-Chinese men but it is far more common than you can imagine. There are plenty of Chinese people with American flags on here who can back that up.

https://nextshark.com/asian-americans-now-likely-marry-outside-race-study-finds/
Asian Americans Now the Most Likely to Marry Outside of Race, Study Finds

https://www.diversityinc.com/news/interracial-marriage-becoming-norm-u-s-report

Asians were most likely to intermarry, with 29 percent of newlywed Asians married to someone of a different race or ethnicity, followed by Hispanics at 27 percent, Blacks at 18 percent and whites at 11 percent, according to the authors.

I can have her describe the inside of some of the military buildings she's been in. I don't think that can be found easily on the web. LOL!

 

[Gomig-21]

Probably lumped into “Mediterranean”. That’s what they use when they can’t figure out where you are from. But you are white here.

Interesting. Usually when the option of "other" is offered on a form of any kind, I usually put "Middle Eastern." Although if you really get into the standard, racial classification that limits humanity into 3 categories, Mongoloid, Caucasoid and Negroid, it gets a bit hazy since it's the extreme ends of 2 of those categories can apply. It seems there should be a lot more than just those 3 classifications of races.

(BTW nice pic)

Thanks bluebro. Boston Harbor 4th of July week a couple of years ago. Although I must say, the beard has "whitened" quite a bit since then LOL! The lovely Missus and myself took the boat from Salem all the way into the harbor, docked at the Constitution Wharf and walked the sites. Those were Norwegian frigates, IIRC that arrived for the festivities. I remember it took a good hour and a half to just to navigate the harbor and find a docking spot. We were stopped and boarded by the Coast Guard and a wicked zealous captain or whatever he was just a bit past the Logan runway. A real jerk who claimed I crossed his path (which is a violation) and was looking for booze and whatever to bust out chops and when he realized there was no such thing and that I had the entire thing taped on my GoPro, he tucked his tail and they let us go in shame. Loved it!

Here’s a crowd of Spanish football fans. I don’t think many people could pick out a typical person who calls themselves “Hispanic” in the US out of this crowd. They pretty much look like this. Spanish people are white people.

lol! Some of those reactions are hilarious.

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

lol! Some of those reactions are hilarious.

You aren’t hearing the “Blazing Saddles” line “why they are darker than us..” lol!

 

[Gomig-21]

On the other hand, I do believe the party have throw racist insult toward Vang and unnecessarily escalate the whole thing, they are dumb and most likely racist, but then again, they don't deserve to die because of being dumb and stupid,

Agreed, of course not. This is one of those classic cases where the victims didn't help themselves by being racist bullies. They didn't need to get on ATV's and chase him down and intimidate him, and of course he didn't have the right to blow them away UNLESS his life was genuinely threatened.

Vang himself said in court that some of them deserve to die because they insult him (Which I found very amusing...…you may as well shoot yourself in the foot while you are at it.)

Which is why I don't think he hired a lawyer. Any lawyer who would take on a big, defense case like this would've never allowed him to get on the stand like you said, let alone say the stupid things he said to incriminate himself.

I don't think his lawyer is a public defender, most of them don't like heavy workload and they will simply pled the case down,

Unless he insisted that it goes to trial. That could've very well been the case and the public defender didn't have a choice. He might've also insisted he gets on the stand. A lot of these cases where it doesn't do the public defender any good to defend someone who is clearly guilty will not put forth an effort to really defend them, knowing they will be chastised by the local community, especially in such a remote area of Wisconsin.

His lawyer could have done a lot of thing to Vang, but that was not the case, as for why? Nobody knows, perhaps they think it is enough to simply played the race card, or the prosecution didn't give any leeway Vang? Nobody knows as we weren't there in the trial. But one thing for certain, Vang himself is the bomb, he incriminate himself on the stance, and make stupid remark about the victim, which his lawyer was supposed to know it will happened because they should have by then the psych report citing Vang have a tendency to blame the victim for his action...

So much more the lawyer could've done for him, another reason why I think it was a public defender but I don't know for sure, do you? Had he hired a criminal lawyer, that retainer for a murder charge defense would've been somewhere in the vicinity of what, $50,000 - $75,000 at least? Probably a lot more when all is said and done and a defense for a criminal charge is most likely paid up front in its entirety.

This guy didn't even insist of a forensic report on who fired first. He could've argued so many of the points to make it look like Vang was really fearing for his life. Reloading the weapon could've been argued that he was fearing that after being fired at first as he kept hearing threats that they were going to kill him etc., he had no choice but to continue to defend himself. His attorneys never established any doubt that it was possible that Vang was not the one who fired first and then self defense would've been more plausible. Shooting them from behind, for example, could've been argued that he was fearing they were going to hide or retrieve another weapon and kill him, at least create reasonable doubt. Check out what I assume is his lawyer questioning him @ minute 45:37 - 46:23, that is the most ridiculous and non-passionate/persuasive defensive line of questioning you will ever hear! lol. Horrible. If that was the extent of the defense's questioning, can you imagine what the closing statement by that guy was? This was either a very bad lawyer or a PD who didn't want to be associated with getting this guy off the hook for murder in that town and community. There have been many examples of such purposeful, lackluster efforts for just that reason.

 

[jhungary]

Agreed, of course not. This is one of those classic cases where the victims didn't help themselves by being racist bullies. They didn't need to get on ATV's and chase him down and intimidate him, and of course he didn't have the right to blow them away UNLESS his life was genuinely threatened.

I would sincerely said the owner party have started a verbal altercation with Vang, and Vang started a physical altercation with the party. That is pretty oblivious.

This is the same situation as 2 group of people going to a pub, 1 group is Asian, another group is white, The group of white people hurl insult to the Asian group, the Asian group physically fight with the white group, and kill some of the people in that group. This would have been murder 2 to manslaughter 1...

Which is why I don't think he hired a lawyer. Any lawyer who would take on a big, defense case like this would've never allowed him to get on the stand like you said, let alone say the stupid things he said to incriminate himself.

My wife told me that if the defence is gunning for "Self-Defence" Vang have to be testify, if Vang did not testify and prosecution cannot cross-examine what Vang felt at that moment, the "Self-Defence" argument falls apart. Because there are no-one that know how Vang felt at that moment that can testify on court, except Vang himself.

It would be like "I felt I was threaten but I will not tell you how" Then basically it lost all credit to the juror.....

The lawyer should have coach him before hand tho.

Unless he insisted that it goes to trial. That could've very well been the case and the public defender didn't have a choice. He might've also insisted he gets on the stand. A lot of these cases where it doesn't do the public defender any good to defend someone who is clearly guilty will not put forth an effort to really defend them, knowing they will be chastised by the local community, especially in such a remote area of Wisconsin.

His lawyer may not be a Public Defender, he might pick up the case pro-bono. And any lawyer would know it is a clause for a mistrial if the defendant felt he/she is not adequately represent, so this joke of a trial would not happen at all. So I am pretty sure the reason why the trial is like this is because of Vang himself. Otherwise he would have file a motion for mistrial.

Also, I felt that the background of the case would meant quite a few of lawyer may want to get a piece of the action. A man accused of killing 6 people and the possibility of Racism is involved, that would make quite a few lawyer jump into the pro-bono band wagon.

So much more the lawyer could've done for him, another reason why I think it was a public defender but I don't know for sure, do you? Had he hired a criminal lawyer, that retainer for a murder charge defense would've been somewhere in the vicinity of what, $50,000 - $75,000 at least? Probably a lot more when all is said and done and a defense for a criminal charge is most likely paid up front in its entirety.

Actually, not much that lawyer can do, he can only take a plead deal, or go for an acquittal, and that decision is up for Vang to decide, the lawyer would have advise Vang what would be the best outcome. But that is totally up to Vang. And if he wanted to go for acquittal, the only way he can wiggle out of the charge is either by insanity, or self defence. The first one is denied because of the Prosecution Psych report. Which mean if he had to go for acquittal, he would have to do it via the Self-Defence route.

I don't know whether or not the Prosecution give Vang any deal to start, we will never know because that is privileged information, but if he was given one, my wife said if she was his lawyer, she would highly recommend he take the deal, given it is not a Murder 1, because his story is so far fetch, he will lose the case had it be in court.

Now, I don't know if that lawyer is a PD or a lawyer in pro-Bono or even a paid lawyer (it might), but PD tend to plead the client down. And if the client is insisting to go to court, most PD simply would file a motion to change lawyer.

This guy didn't even insist of a forensic report on who fired first. He could've argued so many of the points to make it look like Vang was really fearing for his life. Reloading the weapon could've been argued that he was fearing that after being fired at first as he kept hearing threats that they were going to kill him etc., he had no choice but to continue to defend himself. His attorneys never established any doubt that it was possible that Vang was not the one who fired first and then self defense would've been more plausible. Shooting them from behind, for example, could've been argued that he was fearing they were going to hide or retrieve another weapon and kill him, at least create reasonable doubt. Check out what I assume is his lawyer questioning him @ minute 45:37 - 46:23, that is the most ridiculous and non-passionate/persuasive defensive line of questioning you will ever hear! lol. Horrible. If that was the extent of the defense's questioning, can you imagine what the closing statement by that guy was? This was either a very bad lawyer or a PD who didn't want to be associated with getting this guy off the hook for murder in that town and community. There have been many examples of such purposeful, lackluster efforts for just that reason.

That is a bit tricky.

Self Defence law in Wisconsin (Where this crime happened) gear mostly toward a person defending his/her own dwelling, but not when he/she venture to someone else's properties. Also the privileges of Self Defence does not give the actor express purpose to kill or Malice (which basically what Vang himself admitted that these people deserve to die void the argument of self defence).

The reloading is an issue to the defender, because to defend one self, you are given the right to use force, but only until the threat ceased to exist, to reload a weapon you use in self-defence would mean the threat is continuous and more important imminent (where you are stuck and had to reload to continue on the self defence) However, what the defence painted the picture, if you had look at the video is that there are ample time Vang could have disengage and by testifying only Terry Willer have the sole firearms of the group, the immediate danger ceased to exist when Vang shot Terry Willer. Past that point, there are no threats on Vang term to warrant a deadly force self defence. Thus, reloading the weapon does not suit the general argument of self defence because by then the real threat to Vang, Terry Willer, would already been incapacitated, which make walking toward the other and shoot them when they were hiding unnecessary is the course of self defence, I mean if you can walk toward them and shoot them, you can walk out of there.

Finally, the forensic report on who fired first is not actually important. Prosecution did not need that to make the case, because to the Prosecution, the threat stopped once Vang shot the only armed person in that group. Who shot first would meant something to the attempted murder charge on Terry Willer, but would not affect the other 7 charges.

To the defence, it wouldn't matter either, because even if the forensic report did say Terry Willer fired first, Terry Willer can use the self defence clause himself and proven the shot is necessary at the same time voiding Vang's self defence claim, because in Wisconsin Statutes 939.48 2a stated that

A person who engage in unlawful conduct at a type likely to provoke others to attack him or her and thereby does provoke an attack is not entitled to claim the privilege of self-defense against such attack.

Vang had indeed trespassed into Terry Willer property and since Vang wasn't hit, and they cannot recover the projectile and casing, even if Terry Willer did fired first, Terry Willer can claim that shot is a warning shot, warning Vang that he has indeed trespassed into Terry Willer property. Which make Vang claim of self-defence void again.

-- I did not write that, this is the opinion of my wife.

 

[Gomig-21]

My wife told me that if the defence is gunning for "Self-Defence" Vang have to be testify, if Vang did not testify and prosecution cannot cross-examine what Vang felt at that moment, the "Self-Defence" argument falls apart. Because there are no-one that know how Vang felt at that moment that can testify on court, except Vang himself.

It would be like "I felt I was threaten but I will not tell you how" Then basically it lost all credit to the juror.....

The lawyer should have coach him before hand tho.

That does make sense.

-- I did not write that, this is the opinion of my wife.

You mean "the better half?"

Here’s a crowd of Spanish football fans.

lol, I just laughed again at this classic picture. That chick in the front is like "OH MY GOD", the guy to her right is like "ooooooh maaaaaaa Goooooooood" and the muscle-bound behind her is like "AAAaaaaaarrrrrggghhhhh!"

 

[jhungary]

That does make sense.



You mean "the better half?"

Lol, she is better alright, even more so when both of us were in the Military and I have to salute her....

Jack Nicholson had that very right, even now, both of us was discharged, I still need to salute her in the morning, and there are nothing sexier than that....lol...

 

[Hamartia Antidote]

Lol, she is better alright, even more so when both of us were in the Military and I have to salute her....

Jack Nicholson had that very right, even now, both of us was discharged, I still need to salute her in the morning, and there are nothing sexier than that....lol...

Gotta love women in uniform. I have my wife's military pic with her big cap in a frame. Too bad it's black and white. She's a stern looking Nazi/Commie.

 

[Gomig-21]

Lol, she is better alright, even more so when both of us were in the Military and I have to salute her....

Jack Nicholson had that very right, even now, both of us was discharged, I still need to salute her in the morning, and there are nothing sexier than that....lol...

Interesting tidbit about Jack Nicholson on a recent show I was watching "Billions," he wasn't in it but the star of the show (Damien Lewis) is a big-time trader on Wall Street and he was telling his people how his favorite Beatle was George Harrison who wasn't only a Beatle, he was a Traveling Wilbury and he and Tom Petty would sit around while writing songs and would name a famous person and depending on that person's accomplishments, they would classify him as a "Wilbury" or "not a Wilbury." First name that came up was Jack Nicholson and they looked at each other and said..."definitely a Wilbury!" Richard Dreyfuss? Great actor, but not a Wilbury!" lol.

She's a stern looking Nazi/Commie.

L-O-L!