Skip to comments.Cops: Georgia Man Kills Motorcyclist Who Was Following Teen Daughters
Posted on 02/28/2008 9:08:44 PM PST by metmom
A Georgia man was arrested for murder after he allegedly shot and killed a motorcyclist who he said was following his teenage daughters home from a Target store, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported.
Richard Harold Gear's two daughters, ages 17 and 19, called their 45-year-old father from their cell phones to tell him they were being followed, the paper reported.
When they got home their father was at the end of their driveway with a pistol, police told the newspaper.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
Sounds like the motorbiker had a deathwish. Well, his wishes got fulfilled.
The teens said they made obscene gestures at Mough after he cut them off, adding at one point he ran into their car, the newspaper reported.
Police told the newspaper there is evidence of a collision between the vehicle and the motorcycle, but they haven't been to determine who initiated it.
Sounds like all the parties involved were idiots. And one of the idiots is dead.
He should have coaxed them into the house first. :-)
A lot of people out there still think Easy Rider had a happy ending.
Strangely there is no information about where this took place in Georgia.
“2 stupid over protected spoiled Princesses, hit a 21 year old Motorcycle Rider, with their Car, while on the cell phone chatting.
He followed them home to clarify and to get an explanation. And the princesses father more stupid as they are, killed him for no reason.
.....At least that is my explanation........”
You might be right. I find it hard to believe the girls’ version that the motorcyclist ran into their car after “they made obscene gestures”. More likely the girls hit him with their car. If that happened to me, I too would follow them home so I could report them to the police.
I think there is a whole lot more to this story, including the fact that the cycle rider cruised past their home twice and was shot by the dad on the second pass. Of course I’m still puzzled as to why he had to shoot.
While it is possible it seems pretty unlikely a guy on a motorcycle would be playing chicken with a car. If the girls hit the motorcycle and refused to pull over, which is hit and run, then it would make perfect sense for the guy on the motorcycle to follow them home to at least get insurance information and call the police if they refused. But the stupid sperm donor father shoots the man for driving by on a public road... Amazingly stupid.
Lots of folks called into Neil Boortz’ show today. (He’s out of Atlanta.) It’s not looking good for the trigger happy dad, who may have been investigated in the past for brandishing and firing “warning shots.”
There's little Justice left in America, unless you're the perp.
If that happened to me, I too would follow them home so I could report them to the police.Why would you have to follow them home to report them to the police?...
Are they not public roads?
Would have been simpler to memorize a six digit license plate and report that. By following the girls it make it harder for the police to piece together an argument that he was indeed the victim. Seems to me he could have well been in the right, but let his emotions rule. For that, he's now dead.
Just write down the license plate. What more do you really learn by following them. You don't know they are going home, and when did get there, you still wouldn't know it was their house.
Until you saw Papa with the gun, then you'd know.
The story is a bit weak on the events at that point. That's were the rubber will meet the road during the trial. If the father was merely on his own property with the pistol, or maybe with a concealed pistol,and the guy threatened him, that's one thing, but if when the guy just showed the father shot him, that's quite another.
The story says the guy made a second pass. Now if I saw Pop in the driveway with a visible semiautomatic handgun, I don't think I'd be making another pass at the house.
No good will come from this.
If that’s the case though isn’t the father still guilty of first degree murder?
This story just reeks of white trash stupidity all the way around.
Are they not public roads?Now that you mention it. I don't know, were they?...How is whether they're public roads or not relevant to why you would have to follow someone home before you reported them to the police?...How would you know where home is?
Lots of folks called into Neil Boortz show today.Did he say that if we had the Fairtax these things wouldn't happen?
I don’t know what really happened here, but my experience with the police dealing with minor accidents is that they don’t. It would be better for the motorcyclist to deal directly with their insurance company, and it might have been that information he was after.
I’d say so!! On the one hand, you want to say the father overreacted and should be charged and tried. On the other hand, the jerk (sic) motorcyclist had had some sort of verbal altercation with the girls at the shoppind center parking lot and had FOLLOWED THEM HOME! That’s tantamount to stalking, in fact it IS stalking! Then, instead of driving off into the res tof his life, he ended it by turning around and going back past the house in an act of defiance. Now, one can certainly argue that he “didn’t deserve to get shot and killed”. I would argue that he frightened the girls and that, now knowing where they lived, he could return anytime and kill them, rape them or who knows what.
So true, Heartland! So true!
It sounds like there was a hit and run. Police don’t deal with hit and run in Georgia?
If in fact the cyclist was harassing the teens, they could have called the cops and driven to the local police station . . . and if in fact the cyclist saw them talking on a cell phone he had awfully good reason to suspect the existence of a welcoming committee wherever it turned out that those girls were going.
On that basis alone, you'd have to consider this cyclist for a Darwin.
OTOH it certainly sounds suspicious to claim that a cyclist intentionally hit the girls' car - which, in itself, could have been nearly as dangerous to the cyclist as following their car into the lair of said welcoming committee.
Being very protective of my daughters and the guy circles back suggests he plans to endanger them - I intercede.
been riding since '75, it's called "brake-checking". They jabbed the brakes, he then followed them home to get address. No way to write it down on bike. The "girls" didn't call 911, go to a police station, go to bright lit parking lot of 7-11, nope they called dad, Dad then decided not to call Police, not to take girls to safety...he just shoots.
Giving the gun grabbers yet one more reason to whine about how dangerous guns are.
Sorry, the dad was waaaay in the wrong, as were the girls, and sad to say the biker. He'd been better off shaking his head and going to police himself.
IMO he wanted insurance details, to which he was entitled.
The Shooter should get life.
“Shot in the back”, end of story.
That's what happens when you give cell phones to the masses :)
This i what happens when people don’t trust law enforcement to do their job.
Its possible they lived on a dead end street and had to turn around to get back out passing the house twice.
Yup. It’s too bad that a kid lost his life for a poor judgment decision.
I noticed that. I had friends who lived in GA for awhile while he was going to college. They took a wrong turn going somewhere and ended up on some back country road. They made a hasty retreat when they heard gunshots and realized they were getting shot at.
He didn’t have to.
WE’ll find out, in the trial. What’s for sure is the guy was killed, shot in the back.
“Circles back” was more likely the action of someone not familiar with a subdivision, running into culdesacs, and leaving by the only route he knew——his route in.
Given what we think we know so far, that’s a perfectly reasonable working summary for me.
I think it’s murder.
There was no excuse to gun someone down who was passing by your house, unless they were shooting at you first. Then it wouldn’t be gunning someone down, it would be self-defense.
He can’t claim that here.
Shot in the back is not going to make it go well for dad in the trial.
Especially if the cops were already in the past called to his house over complaints of brandishing firearms and firing his weapons.
That will destroy him at trial, if it’s admitted.
ping for later
The one thing that I don’t like about our justice system is that past history can’t be taken into account. I understand the trial should just be about the particular crime and judgment of innocence and guilt based on the evidence for it, but when it comes to sentencing, if the guy has a history, he’s likely to do it again.
I hear of too many stories where the guys violent past or record are hidden from the jury and when they find out, they’re ticked because they weren’t sure and gave him the benefit of the doubt. They said later if they had known, they wouldn’t have. Then the guy goes out and kills someone later.
Likely his past will get out somehow or other. No doubt the people living in the area know of him if he’s been like that.
It’ll be interesting. Neil Boortz, who is a rider, was all over this story yesterday. At first he was on the father/shooter’s side, saying “he’d do ANYTHING to protect his callers. He changed his tune after many local callers reported more details. This will all come out.