Skip to comments.Wife hits husband with SUV after argument over Wisconsin recalls (It has come to this)
Posted on 05/09/2012 6:45:53 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
click here to read article
The story also "seems to suggest" that the incident occurred early in the afternoon. She then had hours to call the police and say someone was trying to prevent her from voting.
If you think striking someone with a vehicle, risking their death or permanent disability, is a reasonable or justifiable response here...if you think escalating a marital (and political) argument from verbal to physical assault is proper...if you think (as the story also "seems to suggest") that leaving someone unconscious after hitting them with a vehicle, which entails a further risk of their death or disability due to delay in medical treatment, is reasonable...I don't think I can convince you otherwise.
Carville, Cargil, doesn’t matter, he’s one fugly dude.
Even if we assume all of the facts are true as reported, she still was not "justified" in running him over. If the facts are not as reported, then my opinion might change. However, it makes no sense to "assume" another set of facts based on your mistrust of the media. I'll form my opinions based on the information I have, but always be willing to modify that opinion as new information becomes available.
And this wasn’t even the actual recall! It was the primary to see which Democrat would oppose Walker.
Maybe she can vote absentee.
In Maine and Vermont, incarcerated felons can vote.
That is a business arrangement. Kinda like the clintoons.
Looks like Picasso barfed on that wall behind them.
Hell hath no fury like a liberal scorned!
“Have we learned nothing from Husseins medias war on America?
Why are we believing everything written in this article?”
Well here’s MY 2 cents. The Dems here in Wisconsin are in total shock and disbelief after yesterday’s vote. They are LOSING the big MO and losing the fight against the original reason for the Walker Recall which was ACT 10 new laws. Walkers reforms ARE WORKING for every county in this state.
The lefties in Wisconsin are ANGRY, disappointed, ANGRY, in disaray, did I say typical Democrat ANGRY?,the unions are fighting amongst themselves here (who to support now that Kathleen Falk lost big time) and the lefty media has no good celebratory stories to write this morning, so they have blown this goofy story way out of proportion. Does it say perhaps alcohol was involved? The media wants to make any Walker supporter look stupid. This too shall backfire.
The wind has been taken out of their sails here in WI. We are so very proud of Gov. Scott Walker and now the gloves come off for the June 5 recall. Watch us NOW, I say.
Love is blind.
If she wasn’t actually chasing him down in the SUV, he’s STILL wrong.
I have to agree...
If she is telling the truth, she should have called the police to arrest him - not run him over. He was not threatening her life so she can not call it self defense. Liberals don't get to run over people.
The husband was the one acting like a Union thug. Have you ever had to cross a Union picket line?
That darn 3500 lb vehicle always wins these fights...hope he recovers strong.
I have never understood that pairing. I really liked her up until I heard they were a couple. From that moment I have not listened to a word she has said.
Ineterstingly enough...note that the article indicated that he remained in the hospital and ^unconscious^!
Meaning, they have only the driver’s side of the story.
Will they report it if he wakes up and says, “She had been drinking and I was trying to stop her from driiving to the liquor store. The political argument had nothing to do with it.”
“The problem with mankind is that men are lunatics and women are idiots.” - Rebbeca West
I've been playing with a big band (17 bandsmen and 2 singers) for five years now, and never once has the subject of politics arisen.
If anyone should be charged with a crime it should be the husband.
Dummy should've just yanked the distributer wire ahead of time.
Only if he attempted to restrain Martin, threatened him, or attacked him.
None of which seems to be the case.
Jeffrey Radle didn’t marry well, did he?
And Michael Savage would know all about mental illness.
You’re killing me here. You don’t have to convince me of anything...I simply didn’t address that side of the issue at all. YES what she did was criminal and I assume she’ll be punished accordingly.
I didn’t even read the entire story, ‘cuz I’m at work. The fact that he tried to stop her from voting just struck me as wrong too, and I chose to only comment on THAT part.
Its not the cops job to resolve this sort of crap.
It ended properly. With a little luck, the idiot husband learned an important life lesson.
We need to stop depending on cops for stuff like this. Do something abysmally stupid, get hurt, YOUR problem. Better yet, I’d like to see a judge laugh the civil suit out of court.
Personally, I’d like this option if strikers are blocking the entrance to my place of work.
Not that I’ve had to worry about that in a loooooong time.
Well at least you’re working! :o)
Yes, hit and run at least. And of course if the husband is unconscious in the hospital we’ve only heard the wife’s version of events. The fact that the paper published her version of events should be noted. Bottom line it is a hit-and-run and aggravated assault. We’ll see if the police and DA public-service-union members charge her.
Another fine reason why women shouldn’t vote!
Well, mostly I guess. Except I keep getting badgered to explain myself. :)
Sorry for the confusion, but it seemed you were attaching thoughts to me that I wasn’t really having. Also acknowledge that your original post was “To” several FReepers, not just me.
Get a clue:
346.67 Duty upon striking person or attended or occupied vehicle.
(1) The operator of any vehicle involved in an accident resulting in injury to or death of any person or in damage to a vehicle which is driven or attended by any person shall immediately stop such vehicle at the scene of the accident or as close thereto as possible but shall then forthwith return to and in every event shall remain at the scene of the accident until the operator has fulfilled the following requirements:
(a) The operator shall give his or her name, address and the registration number of the vehicle he or she is driving to the person struck or to the operator or occupant of or person attending any vehicle collided with; and
(b) The operator shall, upon request and if available, exhibit his or her operators license to the person struck or to the operator or occupant of or person attending any vehicle collided with; and
(c) The operator shall render to any person injured in such accident reasonable assistance, including the carrying, or the making of arrangements for the carrying, of such person to a physician, surgeon or hospital for medical or surgical treatment if it is apparent that such treatment is necessary or if such carrying is requested by the injured person.
(2) Any stop required under sub. (1) shall be made without obstructing traffic more than is necessary.
346.74 Penalty for violating sections 346.67 to 346.73.
(1) Any person violating s. 346.72 may be required to forfeit not less than $20 nor more than $40 for the first offense and may be required to forfeit not less than $50 nor more than $100 for the 2nd or subsequent conviction within a year.
(2) Any person violating s. 346.70 (1), (2) or (3), 346.71 or 346.73 may be required to forfeit not less than $40 nor more than $200 for the first offense and may be required to forfeit not less than $100 nor more than $500 for the 2nd or subsequent conviction within a year.
(3) Any person violating s. 346.68 or 346.69 may be required to forfeit not more than $200.
(4) Any person violating s. 346.70 (5) may be required to forfeit not less than $25 nor more than $50.
(5) Any person violating any provision of s. 346.67 (1): (a) Shall be fined not less than $300 nor more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more than 6 months or both if the accident did not involve death or injury to a person.
(b) May be fined not more than $10,000 or imprisoned for not more than 9 months or both if the accident involved injury to a person but the person did not suffer great bodily harm.
(c) Is guilty of a Class E felony if the accident involved injury to a person and the person suffered great bodily harm.
“However, it makes no sense to “assume” another set of facts based on your mistrust of the media.”
I assumed no other facts.
“She should be prosecuted to the max.”
The articles says he JUMPED in front of the car.
I am not saying he wasn’t wrong.
I am saying I don’t trust the media to report on any political issue. Perhaps the only thing it had to do about politics was it was election day, and the argument had nothing to do with politics? Who knows?
Reporters lie, especially about politics, and whenever possible.
THIS is what comes of giving women the right to (drive and) vote!
Are they color blind,look at the walls.
A la "he ran into my fist." Doesn't matter. If she hit him, she officially "lost control of the vehicle." (Which by the way she had nudged, prodded, or menaced him with, several times, before the final assault...according to the article.)
Then leaving him there injured, that's a whole other offense.
I'm astounded (maybe shouldn't be) by the comments here in her defense. She escalated to physical assault severe enough to put him in the hospital, and people are basically saying he asked for it and deserved it.
I married one masquerading as a reagan lover. He turned out to be a raging liberal.
Article here offers a photo of one Amanda Radle in Chippewa area, who may or may not be the woman referenced in the SUV story, but is identified as a “social services director” for the Salvation Army.
His good looks?
LOL! I was looking at the picture thinking "how does a man that ugly father such beautiful daughters?"
So did a number of my high school friends.
We still greet each other as fellow scabs.
Yeah, the husband was out of line getting in his wife's way. But she was more out of line hitting him.
He didn't try to key the car, pound on the hood with sticks, throw bricks at the windshield or any number of other tactics union goons use on picket lines.
By the way, the company where I got my first job was decent enough to lease spaces in a patrolled public parking area near the plant and send a shuttle van to pick us up. The goons moved over because they knew the van driver was armed and licensed to carry. We heard their shouting, bitching and insults, but there was no violence. The strike petered out in about three weeks because about half the strikers came back to work. The other half believed the union and became unemployed. My friends and I got our first jobs which paid decent wages and included benefits. Our costs and efficiencies were so much better that the company laid off more union employees in their Chicago plant and moved additional production to Fargo.
Yeah, it was really scary at first. But, all-in-all, not a bad return for leasing a satellite parking lot, paying security patrols and hiring a couple of shuttle van drivers for a month.
“Amanda Radle, who left the scene and went to the Chippewa Falls Police Department to report the incident, was arrested. She appeared Wednesday morning in Chippewa County court before a bond hearing on possible charges of domestic battery and second-degree recklessly endangering safety.”
Other searches indicate the woman has a BA in sociology. (Guilty!)
Yeah, we had a fenced in parking lot, police and security at the gate. But the union goons would jump in front of a moving car, or feint jumping in front. They were total jerks. I felt bad because I knew a lot of the union guys, they were my friends and co-workers and they were losing paychecks in order to feed the goons and unproductive union bosses. The strike did no good, they came back to work for the original offer.
“A la “he ran into my fist.” Doesn’t matter. If she hit him, she officially “lost control of the vehicle.””
I don’t see how you come to that conclusion. It says she was trying to drive around him and he leapt in front of the vehicle. How you can translate action on his part which led to his injuries into her responsibility is beyond me. If I leap in front of a train, the engineer has not “lost control” of the train.
The guys who came back to work at our plant told us that the most ardent union supporters were the chronic screw ups and goof offs.
Which probably explains why productivity soared after they left and the company moved additional production to our plant.
I always thought it was rather ironic how the thuggish behavior of union goons in Fargo ended up costing the jobs of their fellow union members in Chicago.
Needless to say, not long after additional production was moved from Chicago to our plant, petitions were circulated to decertify the union. There was no love lost since most of the union guys who crossed the picket line had been suspended from the union for doing so anyway. The final vote to decertify was nearly unanimous. We all joked that the handful of negative votes must have come from the nearby cemetary.
Let's say you're driving and the car in front of you slams on the brakes, because a puppy ran into the street. The driver didn't mean to get rear-ended by you, he meant to spare the puppy's life. And he didn't make it rain, but you hit the brakes and slide over a puddle and -- wham! You know what the cop will say? You get a ticket for having lost control of your vehicle.
I can assure you, it's all very black-or-white when the cop arrives. You either did it deliberately (which in Mrs. Radle's case would be a very serious assault) or you did it accidentally, and if the latter, you "lost control of the vehicle." You were either in control or not. I believe she will heartily affirm she was not in control, given the alternative.
So, you support her running over her clown husband-what if she had pulled a Baretta 92F and double tapped him, would that be okay, too? Besides the New Black Panthers, according to news reports, kept a lot of people from voting in the ‘08 elections in Philly, and they got away with it. Good ol’ Eric Holder says he won’t prosecute black crimes.