• 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!

Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44:185]

Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not based on what we know?


  • Total voters
    25
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

FFS stop repeating that you have already proven the other guy wrong and re-prove it.

You can't both be wrong, so one of you will be proven wrong by that action.

And it will save the rest of us from this pointless back-and-forth.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

continuing to make this claim with ZERO facts to support it doesnt make it true, there has been nothing posted that proves this statement to be true, there are things posted that prove the statement factually 100% wrong though
And you are still wrong.


yes her exact words from here statement are as follows
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy "evidence showed McBride, of Detroit, knocked on the locked screen door of Wafer’s home and that there was no evidence of forced entry."
Still providing false information.
That is nothing more than a reporters words. Not hers.

So again.
So, as established and proven, these are the Prosecutors words ...

"It's alleged she was shot to death by the home owner after she knocked on his locked front screen door."
(Actual words stated in the Press Conference.)


Not what is falsely quoted in the following.
(A reporters interpretation of the above statement as reported coming from the Press Conference.)
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy "evidence showed McBride, of Detroit, knocked on the locked screen door of Wafer’s home and that there was no evidence of forced entry."
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

FFS stop repeating that you have already proven the other guy wrong and re-prove it.

You can't both be wrong, so one of you will be proven wrong by that action.

And it will save the rest of us from this pointless back-and-forth.

already done, no interest in recapping the whole thread, links, quotes and facts already prove what here statement says. Nothing else to prove, what more can be done.
 
Last edited:
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

And you are still wrong.


Still providing false information.
That is nothing more than a reporters words. Not hers.

So again.
So, as established and proven, these are the Prosecutors words ...

"It's alleged she was shot to death by the home owner after she knocked on his locked front screen door."
(Actual words stated in the Press Conference.)


Not what is falsely quoted in the following.
(A reporters interpretation of the above statement as reported coming from the Press Conference.)

please STAY ON TOPIC, am i not the topic and post any evidence factually proving her words are lies, come from the family or are not hers and they come from a reporter.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

already done, no interest in recapping the whole thread, links, quotes and facts already prove what here statement says. Nothing else to prove, what more can be done.
And was shown to be false.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

please STAY ON TOPIC, am i not the topic and post any evidence factually proving her words are lies, come from the family or are not hers and they come from a reporter.
The fact that the information you have provided is false, is on-topic, so stop baiting with this bs.

So, as established and proven, these are the Prosecutors words ...

"It's alleged she was shot to death by the home owner after she knocked on his locked front screen door."
(Actual words stated in the Press Conference.)


Not what is falsely quoted in the following.
(A reporters interpretation of the above statement as reported coming from the Press Conference.)
Wayne County Prosecutor Kym Worthy "evidence showed McBride, of Detroit, knocked on the locked screen door of Wafer’s home and that there was no evidence of forced entry."
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

The fact that the information you have provided is false, is on-topic, so stop baiting with this bs.

So, as established and proven, these are the Prosecutors words ...

"It's alleged she was shot to death by the home owner after she knocked on his locked front screen door."
(Actual words stated in the Press Conference.)


Not what is falsely quoted in the following.
(A reporters interpretation of the above statement as reported coming from the Press Conference.)

please STAY ON TOPIC, am i not the topic and post any evidence factually proving her words are lies, come from the family or are not hers and they come from a reporter interpretation.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

FFS stop repeating that you have already proven the other guy wrong and re-prove it.

You can't both be wrong, so one of you will be proven wrong by that action.

And it will save the rest of us from this pointless back-and-forth.

By all means, you be the judge.

All information has been provided in post #149.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls...-conviction-not-w-44-a-15.html#post1062585309
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

please STAY ON TOPIC, am i not the topic and post any evidence factually proving her words are lies, come from the family or are not hers and they come from a reporter interpretation.
It has already been done. You still haven't backed up what you assert.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

please STAY ON TOPIC, am i not the topic and post any evidence factually proving her words are lies, come from the family or are not hers and they come from a reporter.

And was shown to be false.

Moderator's Warning:
This is over. Move on.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

1.)It has already been done. You still haven't backed up what you assert.

This claim has been made but facts, links and quotes prove it wrong

These are direct quotes from the Wyane COunty prosocuter, NOT any reporters interpretations which is a false claim
all of these have come from links and quotes mentioned during this thread and others


"evidence showed McBride, of Detroit, knocked on the locked screen door of Wafer’s home and that there was no evidence of forced entry."

" Evidence suggests that Wafer opened the front (interior) door before he fired through the closed and locked screen door"

“Under Michigan law, there is no duty to retreat in your own home. However, someone who claims self-defense must honestly and reasonably believe that he is in imminent danger of either losing his life or suffering great bodily harm, and that the use of deadly force is necessary to prevent that harm,”

“This ‘reasonable belief,’ is not measured subjectively by the standards of the individual in question, but objectively, by the standards of a reasonable person.”

“we have examined everything and after examining everything these are the appropriate charges and he did not act in lawful self-defense,”

"We dont feel its relevant to our charges at all in this case" (talking about the driver being intoxicated)

"Race was not a factor in her decision to bring charges against Theodore Wafer for the death of Renisha McBride"

No matter what kind of pressure you receive to not charge a case or to charge it, you don’t go by that,”

“If the facts and evidence are leading you, then you can’t go wrong. If you are afraid to make those decisions, then you need not have this job. If you are afraid you will lose friends or lose influence or lose whatever — lose traction — then you don’t need to have this job, because you’ll make decisions based on the wrong things.”

"We make our decisions based on the facts and the evidence"
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

If this goes to court, unless she has an actual eyewitness to knocking, she only has evidence of her touching the door. Not how it was touched.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

By all means, you be the judge.

All information has been provided in post #149.
http://www.debatepolitics.com/polls...-conviction-not-w-44-a-15.html#post1062585309
In the video (which you linked here), she (The prosecutor, Worthy) makes several statements that seem relevant to the discussion at hand:

The first, which you quote, @~1:01 in the video: "It's alleged that she was shot to death by the homeowner after she knocked on his locked front screen door".
The second, @~ 1:08 in the video: "By all reports, she was unarmed, and there were no signs of forced entry to the home".
The third, @~1:59 in the video: "We obviously do not feel that the evidence in this case feels [shows?] that the defendant acted in lawful self-defense".


Edit: Agent J, if you would (and assuming I'm not asking you to violate some mod decision), point out the links showing your mentioned quotes?
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not? [W:44]

Edit: Agent J, if you would (and assuming I'm not asking you to violate some mod decision), point out the links showing your mentioned quotes?

don't believe i can but some of the links are in the OP, throughout the thread and the other thread. But per the mods warning i wont be pointing out the facts I already provided on this sub discussion anymore
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not?

The problem is that something that is not a violent situation is perceived as one. It is that misperception that takes a non-violent situation to a violent one. In both of these cases it was the perception or perceived threat that brought the violence into it. I think that if a person is given a green light to use their own judgement to determine if a threat is present they will be more inclined to do so when there is no real threat and behave accordingly.



I smell a rat.

I lived in Michigan for the overwhelming majority of my life. I've been to Detroit numerous times. Impromptu violence is a distinct possibility there. When there is an obviously intoxicated person (regardless of race) causing raucus on your front door, the element is there. As much as you don't want to believe this and I don't want to "go there", the fact that she is a minority does increase the potential - statistically speaking. In this scenario, it is in the spirit of self-interest that you assume the worst and hope to be pleasantly surprised. Thirty years before, every 12 year old had a cell phone. Now, the concept of an adult not having one that they can use in times of emergency borders on the ludicrous. Now, we can dismiss this as a string of coincidences - bad accident, no functioning cell, occurring in a "white neighborhood"...but you also cannot dismiss the potentially nefarious side of things.

Let's face it - she's going to lose in the court of public opinion, outside of a radical militant black sect.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not?

I lived in Michigan for the overwhelming majority of my life. I've been to Detroit numerous times. Impromptu violence is a distinct possibility there. When there is an obviously intoxicated person (regardless of race) causing raucus on your front door, the element is there. As much as you don't want to believe this and I don't want to "go there", the fact that she is a minority does increase the potential - statistically speaking. In this scenario, it is in the spirit of self-interest that you assume the worst and hope to be pleasantly surprised. Thirty years before, every 12 year old had a cell phone. Now, the concept of an adult not having one that they can use in times of emergency borders on the ludicrous. Now, we can dismiss this as a string of coincidences - bad accident, no functioning cell, occurring in a "white neighborhood"...but you also cannot dismiss the potentially nefarious side of things.

Let's face it - she's going to lose in the court of public opinion, outside of a radical militant black sect.

since the claim is the gun went off on accident none of that made up story matters without more factual evidence.

also what factual evidence is there that she was obviously intoxicated and causing a raucous on the front door?

Yes she was in fact drunk but im asking what facts do we have that says it played a role or that the homeowner knew and recognized this?
and what activity are you calling a raucous and what evidence do we have of that?

and no her accident and non-functioning cell phone cant be dismissed, those are facts

and as far as i can tell she is doing well in court of public opinion, heck look at the poll and threads here. Its a small group compared to the US but the majority seem to think the homeowner is guilty of something "CURRENTLY" and they are not radical militant blacks
 
Last edited:
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not?

a very good but long article that talks about laws and facts and the vast majoirty lines up with what i have been stating the whole time

Renisha McBride | Theodore Wafer | Weak Self-defense Claim

seems any claim of self defense is going to be very weak based on what we currently know and that the accident claim mostly renders self defense meaningless, it would have to be very rare circumstances.
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not?

a very good but long article that talks about laws and facts and the vast majoirty lines up with what i have been stating the whole time

Renisha McBride | Theodore Wafer | Weak Self-defense Claim

seems any claim of self defense is going to be very weak based on what we currently know and that the accident claim mostly renders self defense meaningless, it would have to be very rare circumstances.

just some more updates

this is definitely going to trail

and some testing of the gun deemed its in working order and it couldnt have had a misfire

Man who shot unarmed woman on porch will stand trial for murder - National | Globalnews.ca
Witness: Renisha McBride less than 2 feet from gun blast in Dearborn Heights | Detroit Free Press | freep.com
Renisha McBride's shooter to stand trial for second degree murder | MSNBC
http://thelede.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/12/18/renisha-mcbride-murder-hearing/
DEARBORN HEIGHTS: First witnesses called to stand in Renisha McBride shooting death (UPDATED) - News - Press and Guide
Preliminary hearing on Renisha McBride porch shooting

seems thighs are only getting worse for theodore
 
Re: Theodore Wafer, shooter of Renisha McBride, conviction or not?

I lived in Michigan for the overwhelming majority of my life. I've been to Detroit numerous times. Impromptu violence is a distinct possibility there. When there is an obviously intoxicated person (regardless of race) causing raucus on your front door, the element is there. As much as you don't want to believe this and I don't want to "go there", the fact that she is a minority does increase the potential - statistically speaking. In this scenario, it is in the spirit of self-interest that you assume the worst and hope to be pleasantly surprised. Thirty years before, every 12 year old had a cell phone. Now, the concept of an adult not having one that they can use in times of emergency borders on the ludicrous. Now, we can dismiss this as a string of coincidences - bad accident, no functioning cell, occurring in a "white neighborhood"...but you also cannot dismiss the potentially nefarious side of things.

Let's face it - she's going to lose in the court of public opinion, outside of a radical militant black sect.

Let's face it- none of your story holds a drop of water, outside the radical militant white sect.

You're making 'facts' up about the phone and any reaction to 'impromptu violence'. IF poor much downtrodden white folks were under such stress from minorities and someone 'obviously' intoxicated is causing a ruckus on your porch at OH dark 30 then why in THE hell would you open the wooden door and rely on a screen door to stop an assault??? :doh

You're also ignoring the defendant's statement the shotgun went off by accident. Firearms going off by accident are a completely separate circumstance from being 'statistically' in fear of bodily harm. Spin this as much as you can, but the real facts, not the massaged ones you try and use, are strong evidence against Mr. Wafer.
 
Back
Top Bottom