• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Man Gets 120 Days for Shooting Cyclist in the Head

danarhea

Slayer of the DP Newsbot
DP Veteran
Joined
Aug 27, 2005
Messages
43,602
Reaction score
26,256
Location
Houston, TX
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
Police said Charles Diez, an Asheville firefighter since 1992, stopped his car to confront a couple riding bikes along heavily traveled Tunnel Road. Diez was apparently incensed by Alan Simons carrying his 3-year-old child on a seat mounted on the back of his bike. After an argument, Diez pulled a gun and shot at Simons, but the bullet passed through Simon's bicycle helmet, just missing his skull, police said.

What the hell? Only 4 months for attempted murder? The judge cited his honorable service in military, his position as a firefighter, and his all around good guy image, as mitigating factors. You know what? I don't give a damn. He shot a guy in the head. The guy is lucky his bicycle helmet took the bullet, sparing his brain.

I don't care if it is Jesus Christ who shoots someone in the head, in an act of attempted murder. He should do hard time. Someone please shoot the judge, then let's see if that judge would be just as lenient. LOL. Seriously, though......

1) The shooter belongs in prison.

2) That judge does not belong on the bench.

Discussion?

Article is here.
 
Last edited:
No, not reported was that the bicyclist was allergic to bee stings, and the fire fighter had shot a bee which was near the cyclist's head to save his life. You need to get all the facts first. :2razz:


But seriously, yes he needed to be tried for attempted murder and the judge's actions must be called into question here.
 
This is absurd! The firefighter shoots the guy because he thinks it's unsafe for him to have his son on a bike in busy street?

"I'm gonna have to kill you because what you are doing is unsafe"

He chose the right profession, I'll give him that. Can you imagine if he was a police officer?
 
This is absurd! The firefighter shoots the guy because he thinks it's unsafe for him to have his son on a bike in busy street?

"I'm gonna have to kill you because what you are doing is unsafe"

He chose the right profession, I'll give him that. Can you imagine if he was a police officer?

I wonder if he shoots people who are in burning buildings. That's pretty unsafe.

Pretty stupid though. I can't believe he got off so lightly.
 
What the hell? Only 4 months for attempted murder? The judge cited his honorable service in military, his position as a firefighter, and his all around good guy image, as mitigating factors. You know what? I don't give a damn. He shot a guy in the head. The guy is lucky his bicycle helmet took the bullet, sparing his brain.

I don't care if it is Jesus Christ who shoots someone in the head, in an act of attempted murder. He should do hard time. Someone please shoot the judge, then let's see if that judge would be just as lenient. LOL. Seriously, though......

1) The shooter belongs in prison.

2) That judge does not belong on the bench.

Discussion?

Article is here.


This is the type of garbage Law Enforcement deal with on a regular basis.
 
What the hell? Only 4 months for attempted murder? The judge cited his honorable service in military, his position as a firefighter, and his all around good guy image, as mitigating factors. You know what? I don't give a damn. He shot a guy in the head. The guy is lucky his bicycle helmet took the bullet, sparing his brain.

I don't care if it is Jesus Christ who shoots someone in the head, in an act of attempted murder. He should do hard time. Someone please shoot the judge, then let's see if that judge would be just as lenient. LOL. Seriously, though......

1) The shooter belongs in prison.

2) That judge does not belong on the bench.

Discussion?

Article is here.

Oh, I thought all soldiers were True American Heroes® incapable of doing things that are wrong!

I'm confused now. :rofl
 
Oh, I thought all soldiers were True American Heroes® incapable of doing things that are wrong!

I'm confused now. :rofl

troll-web.jpg
 
Oh, I thought all soldiers were True American Heroes® incapable of doing things that are wrong!

I'm confused now. :rofl

how would an Israeli, or Danish soldier be a true American hero? You're weird.


I wonder what the religion of this guy was, any info?

/sarcasm
 
how would an Israeli, or Danish soldier be a true American hero? You're weird.


I wonder what the religion of this guy was, any info?

/sarcasm

The guy is American.
I meant all American soldiers.
That's what all the TV propaganda says...

OUR SOLDIERS ARE HEROES!

Hahaaa:rofl
 
What the hell? Only 4 months for attempted murder? The judge cited his honorable service in military, his position as a firefighter, and his all around good guy image, as mitigating factors. You know what? I don't give a damn. He shot a guy in the head. The guy is lucky his bicycle helmet took the bullet, sparing his brain.

I don't care if it is Jesus Christ who shoots someone in the head, in an act of attempted murder. He should do hard time. Someone please shoot the judge, then let's see if that judge would be just as lenient. LOL. Seriously, though......

1) The shooter belongs in prison.

2) That judge does not belong on the bench.

Discussion?

Article is here.
I just realized this was Asheville, NC.

oh lord
 
Praise our veteran god-heroes they are all perfect.
 
The guy is American.
I meant all American soldiers.
That's what all the TV propaganda says...

OUR SOLDIERS ARE HEROES!

Hahaaa:rofl

Never listen to propaganda. It and the right-wing are always wrong :mrgreen:
 
Never listen to propaganda. It and the right-wing are always wrong :mrgreen:

Why do you hate our troops? :doh




I wonder why it is so taboo to recognize that soldiers are people like anyone else and that THEY ARE NOT HEROES unless they actually do something HEROIC.
 
I wonder why it is so taboo to recognize that soldiers are people like anyone else and that THEY ARE NOT HEROES unless they actually do something HEROIC.

Such blasphemy ..LOL :mrgreen:
 
cyclists annoy me as well. we have lots of them here in california. those idiots think they're saving the planet and are willing to let their own kids get run over by some SUV just so they can reduce their carbon footprint.

however just because somebody is naive and idealistic is not reason enough to kill them.

the man who shot him should have gotten about 10 years.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Next troll post gets an infraction and thread ban.
 
Why do you hate our troops? :doh




I wonder why it is so taboo to recognize that soldiers are people like anyone else and that THEY ARE NOT HEROES unless they actually do something HEROIC.

Actually, I think they did something pretty heroic when they enlisted.
 
I was wondering why the headline is so misleading.
I guess it is because the article is from biased source... treehugger.


What the hell? Only 4 months for attempted murder?
It wasn't an attempted murder charge that he was tried for.
...
While Diez was originally charged with attempted first-degree murder, a grand jury refused to press those charges, instead indicting him on the felony assault charge.
Convictions on such a charge result in an average 20-39 months in prison for the defendant. But in the sentencing, Superior Court Judge James Downs found that Diez’s military service, along with testimony from former colleagues about his good character, were mitigating factors, and chose to sentence him to 15-27 months instead. Downs suspended all but four months of that sentence unless Diez breaks the law again in the next 30 months. As part of his sentence, Diez is required to attend anger-management training and pay $1,200 to cover Simons’ medical costs for damage to his eardrum.
...

Link
So why did the Grand Jury refuse to indict him on attempted murder?
Do you think that it is quite possible that it wasn't an attempt to murder?
Don't you think intent matters?




The judge cited his honorable service in military, his position as a firefighter, and his all around good guy image, as mitigating factors.
Apparently the sentence he received was within the guidelines for such crime.
The Judge used these factors as he should... suspension in the amount of the sentence to be served. And if he commits another crime within the period of his lengthy probation, he has to serve that suspended time.

I have no problem with this sentence, as long as the individual is not allowed to own another firearm.



He shot a guy in the head. The guy is lucky his bicycle helmet took the bullet, sparing his brain.
No.
He did not shoot a guy in the head.
As you noted, the helmet took the bullet, and the helmet is not the head.
 

Don't you think intent matters?


....snip...

He did not shoot a guy in the head.
As you noted, the helmet took the bullet, and the helmet is not the head.


His intent was to protect the child, buy shooting the child's father, whom he thought was being unsafe in riding the bicycle. Ever been to bizarro world?

And, he shot at someone's head. What do you think was his intent of doing that? "Oh, let me just scare him a little. He's wearing a helmet, it won't kill him" :roll:
 
His intent was to protect the child, buy shooting the child's father, whom he thought was being unsafe in riding the bicycle. Ever been to bizarro world?
:doh
That is your interpretation.


And, he shot at someone's head.
Please provided the relevant testimony of his intent, that he actually aimed the weapon at his head, and that he purposely pulled the trigger.
If you can not, then all you have is an assumption on your part.
 
That is your interpretation.

And what is your interpretation? What do you think was the reason for him shooting the child's father?

Please provided the relevant testimony of his intent, that he actually aimed the weapon at his head, and that he purposely pulled the trigger.
If you can not, then all you have is an assumption on your part.

The bullet in the helmet is evidence of him shooting at the bicyclists head...
How else did that bullet get there? :doh You don't honestly think that the firefighter pulled out a gun, pointed at the helmet, and accidentally pulled the trigger, do you?
 
Last edited:
And what is your interpretation? What do you think was the reason for him shooting the child's father?
I prefer to refrain from making an interpretation until I have all the facts.



The bullet in the helmet is evidence of him shooting at the bicyclists head...
How else did that bullet get there?
No it is not.
It is only evidence that the bullet entered the helmet.
Not exactly of how it got there.
i.e.: The events and the intent behind it.




You don't honestly think that the firefighter pulled out a gun, pointed at the helmet, and accidentally pulled the trigger, do you?
Not at all.
Any number of things could have happened that lead up to the incident, including what you supplied above.

Lets see if I can find them.

...

testified during his sentencing hearing that he only fired a warning shot and didn't intend to hurt Alan Ray Simons.

“I was the one who felt truly, truly threatened,” Diez told the court. “It was not my intention to shoot him.”

Simons described being confronted by the 17-year Fire Department veteran on the morning of July 26 as he was riding his bike along Tunnel Road with his 4-year-old son in a seat on the back and his wife on another bike.

He said Diez yelled at him from his car, claiming he was putting the boy's life in danger by riding on the busy roadway.

“We were out for an enjoyable ride, minding our own business,” Simons said. “At any point, he could have left.

When I got to his door, the gun was pointing at my chest. I turned to walk away, (and) the gun went off. He chose to pull the trigger.”

...

Assistant District Attorney Chris Hess, who handled the prosecution, said he had no quarrel with the sentence handed to Diez.

“The outcome was fair,” he said. “We respect Judge Down's decision.


“The main thing is Mr. Simons and his family were not harmed. We're just happy that his family has him around.”

Diez had about 30 supporters in the courtroom, and two of his former Fire Department supervisors testified on his behalf. Capt. Keith Gillespie described him as a fair, honest and loyal firefighter who wasn't threatening or hostile.

“He's been a top-notch employee,” Gillespie said. “I couldn't ask for any better.”

Diez maintained that Simons reached into his car and grabbed him, a claim Simons denied.

“I wanted him to release my shirt and back away,” Diez told the judge. “It was a warning shot.”


Defense attorney Jack Stewart asked the judge for leniency.

“He's a hard-working, decent man who used terrible judgment,” Stewart said. “He accepts responsibility for his actions. I think he is sincerely remorseful.”

Simons and others who witnessed the incident took down Diez's license plate number and called police. Deputies found Diez at his home on Rowland Road in Swannanoa.

Police initially charged Diez with attempted first-degree murder after consulting District Attorney Ron Moore. But a grand jury declined to indict him on that charge, instead opting for the lesser assault charge. A first-degree attempted murder conviction requires a trial jury to find the elements of premeditation and deliberation.

This much is clear from the testimony.
A man pulled over and yelled at the bicyclist for putting his child in harms way.
While the man is still seated in his vehicle, the bicyclist gets off his bike to confront the driver and approached him.

The driver fired the weapon.
The driver intended to fire a warning shot, but not shoot the bicyclist.
The driver truly felt threatened and did not intend to harm the bicyclist.​

We also have two different set of testimony regarding what happened once the cyclist reached the driver to confront him.
Both are plausible and consistent with what I know of human behavior in such incidents where someone yells at another from a vehicle and then gets confronted for it.

The only thing I have left to make any judgment is the fact that the Judge gave the Fire Fighter a suspended sentence, which to me indicates that he believed the Fire Fighter's testimony.

And what the prosecutor says.

"... the prosecution, said he had no quarrel with the sentence handed to Diez.

“The outcome was fair,” he said. “We respect Judge Down's decision."
 
I prefer to refrain from making an interpretation until I have all the facts.

Okay, fair enough.


A man pulled over and yelled at the bicyclist for putting his child in harms way.
While the man is still seated in his vehicle, the bicyclist gets off his bike to confront the driver and approached him.

The driver fired the weapon.
The driver intended to fire a warning shot, but not shoot the bicyclist.
The driver truly felt threatened and did not intend to harm the bicyclist.​


Two things that are questionable. 1) Firing a "warning shot," inside the car, in the direction of the bicyclist, so close to the bicyclist that it hits his helmet. 2) You forgot to cite this paragraph (link):

Charles Alexander Diez, 42, pleaded guilty Thursday to assault with a deadly weapon with intent to kill, but testified during his sentencing hearing that he only fired a warning shot and didn't intend to hurt Alan Ray Simons.

I'm not sure what constitutes as a "warning shot" but I'm pretty positive it doesn't include the intent to kill. /sarcasm



And what the prosecutor says.
"... the prosecution, said he had no quarrel with the sentence handed to Diez.

“The outcome was fair,” he said. “We respect Judge Down's decision."

This just meant that the prosecution thinks that the process of the trial was fair (not that the sentencing was fair), that there wasn't anybody pulling strings or the jury was skewed. The prosecution also thought the sentencing was light.

We think the sentence is light, but we expected it coming in… because of his outstanding career as a fireman.
 
cyclists annoy me as well. we have lots of them here in california. those idiots think they're saving the planet and are willing to let their own kids get run over by some SUV just so they can reduce their carbon footprint.

however just because somebody is naive and idealistic is not reason enough to kill them.

the man who shot him should have gotten about 10 years.

As my avatar indicates, I am a cyclist, have been since 1988. I have seen all kinds on bikes, good and bad, and I for one would never ride with a kid on a bike seat or behind me with one of those baby buggies. Cycling is a dangerous enough sport as it is. You're out there, having fun, and something can happen in a split second, a dog, crazy motorist, and you never know.

Yeah, this fireman should have gotten at least 25 years for attempted murder. That's what you call the "good ol' boy" network, looking out for its own. I've had those same good ol' boys throw beer cans at me, but when you throw them back, that's no fair, according to them. Then they want to run over you, and feel it's justified.

Incidentally, I cycle, not to save the planet, but for fitness. I was once a competitive distance runner but after injuring my plantar fascitis tendon in my foot, switched to full time cycling.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom