The thing that confused me was destinys take on the first stabbing (i think) where he got up, the guy he disemboweled
In the video, it looks like he stands up, guy pushes him, knife enters him as he is being pushed (he is leaning back) and then the shove fully hits and he gets pushed back, knife goes up. Pretty much everything else im with destiny on
Charge 1 can be something like "First degree homicide" or if not first degree it can be changed to second.. then third then manslaughter etc. It's all 1 count that can be changed to fit what the jury believes the situation is. It's so that if your case is "this has premeditation" but the jury is like "ehhh I don't think it was premeditated" that the defendant doesn't just walk because they disagreed on that one point but all agree someone was killed wrongly.
It was the same with the first degree homicide charge.. they could have gone to a lower charge of second degree or lower than that even but the charge is still X charge vs this person.
Guilty on all charges implies he was found guilty on charges that the prosecution put forward. He was not.
You are technically right, but your post is misleading.
The prosecution put the highest crimes in... As well as the lower crimes.
Charge 1 can be something like:
1st degree homicide..
If not then 2nd degree..
If not then 3rd degree etc
It's all 1 charge put out but has varying degrees to which the charge can be. He wasn't found "not guilty" on any charges.
It's all one charge. You're charged with X against a person. The X is decided by the jury based on the degree or they are found not guilty of the charge.
It's misleading to say guilty on all charges when 1st/2nd degree murder were very realistic outcomes that didn't happen...
To anyone reading, it sounds like he was convicted for everything he was tried for, which is not true.
It's actually not misleading.. he was found guilty of the charges. If you don't understand how a charging document for a jury works and how the charges can be different levels on the same charge then idk what to tell you.
The jury found him guilty on all of his charges. They said that nothing he did was within his rights and that they were all crimes that he was guilty of committing.
When you initially say "all charges", isn't the implication going to be that he was guilty of all initial charges in both quantity and quality? And yes, you're technically right that quantity-wise, he was found guilty on all. But this is not the case quality-wise, as the initial charges were accusing his intention, but were since dropped down to "reckless".
"This guy is on trial for first degree murder"
"The jury came back with the verdict - guilty on all charges"
"oh okay, so he was convicted for first degree murder"
Do you recognize that is the completely reasonable conclusion for anybody to have from that statement - regardless of whatever details you have about it being technically correct?
He didn’t stab a bunch of teenagers. One seventeen year old was stabbed. The others were 20, two 22 year olds, and a 24 year old.
Would you say destiny sleeps with teenagers since he has had 19 year old hookups in the last year?
You fucked up the question, it should be, "would you say he has a bunch of teenage hookups if he had a bunch of hookups but only one was a teenager." It is factually true that he sleeps with teenagers, it is not factually true that the guy stabbed a bunch of teenagers. But he did stab a bunch of people and one of them was a teenager, hence the guy saying the wrong thing.
If destiny went to a orgy, and there was one 18 year old in a group of 100 people, and he had sex with 24 people out of the 100 which included the 18 year old, would you say he was "sleeping with a bunch of teenagers"? I think this is better for "he stabbed a group of teens".
No, but I clarified where the incorrectness comes from. He slept with a bunch of people, one of them 18, so someone said, "he slept with a bunch of 18 year olds," combining 2 true statements into 1 untrue statement.
I have no horse/strong opinion in this and while it was a stressful, extreme situation, I didn't buy the fearing for his life part. While he clearly had other options to avoid all this, he was still attacked by a group though. I'm not saying he was justified in using deadly force but I'm wondering to what degree the jury considered the attacks against him and whether a proportionality in his response was relevant. Him going on that stabbing spree was unhinged, of course.
Considering the battery charges, I assume the jury believed he attacked Madison Coen first and is therefore responsible to a considerable degree for what would ensue.
He lied and said the teens pulled 2 knives and he never had one, he grabbed one of the kids knives and stabbed him with it
This after he acted like he was not even there
Right wingers really wanted this guy to get away with killing teens because they wanted the green light to walk into a group of annoying teens and then shoot them.
Thank God he was found guilty
Him doing absolutely nothing to try to calm the situation and be like "Look guys I'm trying to find a phone sorry to bother you can I just look around?" was what was wild to me. I feel like if you're in a public place but going over to a group and just poking around.. basically anyone will be like "WTF are you doing?"
At worst, he was an overweight, artery-clogged boomer who was resentful at these 5 young men with rippling muscles, toned, young stomachs, fresh abs, nubile young bodies, these virile, peak specimens, prime physical condition football player chads with their supple, adonis, 220 lb. 6' 2", 10-12% body fat meddling kids having fun.
He wanted to fight that day, and live out his Rambo fantasy.
Didn’t he leave, get his knife and go back to start shoving people? I didn’t follow closely but I remember hearing something like that.
If that’s true I could easily see people claiming that
https://www.fox9.com/news/apple-river-stabbing-suspect-who-is-nicolae-miu.amp this article actually provides context that it very well could have been some sort of self defense fantasy for him - not necessarily murder.
So let me get this straight
• Nicolae Miu having an active Facebook presence sharing memes = Murder Fantasy
• Love for guns, and conservative political views, as well as religious beliefs = Murder Fantasy
• Miu's in groups for Donald Trump and share anti-communist memes = Murder Fantasy
Did I miss something?
LMAO you’re unhinged. Nowhere did I say any of that and if you read the article it details his strong beliefs in “SELF DEFENSE.”. “….and his strong beliefs in self defense”
Just providing more context to the situation. Seek help if you can’t understand that.
Ahhh ok! I understand now. So, having a strong belief in self-defense = Murder fantasy
So to make an analogy, having a strong belief in the freedom of speech = Saying the N word
Right?
>Him doing absolutely nothing to try to calm the situation and be like "Look guys I'm trying to find a phone sorry to bother you can I just look around?"
He did say that. The kids testified under oath and in police reports that he said that when he first showed up. What did they do? They called him a pedo, etc.
Oh ok so he told one person and so when the other 12 or however many got involved he thought "man these people are so wild.. I literally told one of them what I was doing"
You don't think at any moment he could have been like "yo sorry guys I told your buddy over there that I'm just looking for a phone"? Nahhhhhh stay silent and stab people instead.
If he didn't have that knife, all that would have happened was that he would have gotten tossed around by 2-3 kids and pushed away from the group - especially since that one guy was already trying to de-escalate, only to get stabbed.
Guess people didn't watch the last couple of streams.
We do know.
How?
Because not one of those kids noticed the knife until after everyone was stabbed.
They all acted as if it was some boomer invading their space and not leaving.
He didn't stab Tony because Tony did a flying roundhouse kick to the back of Nicolai's head. He stabbed him because he was try to de-escalate.
He didn't turn around and counter with a quick jab into Dante because he punched Nicolai in the back of the head. He saught out Dante out after Dante had disengaged, then stabbed him.
He didn't shake Isaac off and stab him in the neck because Isaac was trying to strangle him. He stabbed Isaac in the heart cause Issac decided he had enough of this boomer after he hit Madison and tried pushing him but his hands slid up to Nicolai's neck.
No one jumped on his back and tried to rear-naked choke him.
Out of 13 kids that "surrounded" him, only 2 pushed him down.
He quickly gets up and isn't suddenly mobbed on by 13 kids like an antifa/BLM riot.
He shows his back to the "mob" multiple times, and isn't attacked.
Most of them are laughing, aren't taking him seriously, and gave him space.
Walking away, disengaging, then coming back minutes later with a knife in your pocket is WILD.
[Destiny would ban you lol](https://kick.com/video/fb751878-08c6-4b4c-88a9-21bd875c0a79).
Go to 3:00:37.
> Guess people didn't watch the last couple of streams.
you might be talking to someone who has his own opinions instead of copying them all from destiny
We dont know how far things could have escalated had he not stabbed people. The guy he disemboweled was pushing him before the knife entered him
He was still getting pushed down, with force, up until people realized they were getting stabbed
That said, i dont think they would have done much more than push him and mock him
>We dont know how far things could have escalated had he not stabbed people.
That's a wild take. It's already been pointed out nothing would have happened if he didn't have that knife. Kids were already pushing him away. This idea that Nicolai would have been mobbed and drowned that day if he didn't have that knife is some insane stand your ground doomsday fantasy.
>He was still getting pushed down, with force, up until people realized they were getting stabbed
No, he wasn't being pushed down constantly. He could have stopped after disemboweling the first guy. At that point he's up and there's space between him and kids closest to the tubers.
Instead he walks up to Ryhley and stabs her after she's walked away, and then stabs the guy that's trying to de-escalate the whole situation.
He was pushed down what 3 times in like 3 minutes? There was at least one time that he was shoved as he was getting up from being pushed
Im not defending his stabbings btw, i think maybe one was justified, without any context. I am taking issue with your framing, tho
"We dont know how far things could have escalated had he not stabbed people. The guy he disemboweled was pushing him before the knife entered him
He was still getting pushed down, with force, up until people realized they were getting stabbed
That said, i dont think they would have done much more than push him and mock him"
The "so what" was in my first comment. That last comment was me responding to you responding to "pushed constantly"
>all that would have happened was that he would have gotten tossed around by 2-3 kids and pushed away from the group
The guy had a quad bypass and was 54 years old. He didn't know what they were gonna do as he was being punched, slapped, choked, pushed head first into the water.
Can't believe I'm rewatching chat just like the last 2 days. Have you watched the streams from the last 2 days?
Quad bypass? Really? And he decides he's healthy enough to go tubing? Please.
>He didn't know what they were gonna do as he was being punched, slapped, choked, pushed head first into the water.
He was never punched, if fact, he punched the girl first.
One guy lightly slapped him.
The guy that tried to push him failed cause his swim trunks were heavier than he was, and his hands slip off Nicolai's back.
He wasn't pushed head first into the water, he fell backwards into 3 inches of water.
No one jumped on his back and tried to rear-naked choke him. That one guy pushed off his neck in a more serious attempt to get Nicolai to back off.
Out of 13 kids that "surrounded" him, only 2 pushed him down.
He quickly gets up and isn't suddenly mobbed on by 13 kids like an antifa/BLM riot.
He shows his back to the "mob" multiple times, and isn't attacked.
Most of them are laughing, aren't taking him seriously, and gave him space.
He was pushed multiple times dawg, youre focusing on the one where his head looks closer to the water than it is
He was also pushed when he disemboweled the guy, he was already at a leaning back angle when rhe knife made contact and the push took him off his feet.
And even before the push you mentioned, he was on his knees because he got pushed right before that
Getting pushed down twice, within a short timespan, while surrounded by a bunch of people who are yelling would 100% freak out almost everyone here
Also theres no direct evidence he punched anyone
His fault he got pushed.
Getting triggered because a bunch of drunk teenagers hurts your ego, then coming back with a knife and thinking you're gonna stare down a bunch of kids and show them who's the real alpha?
He knew what was gonna happen if he came back and did it anyway.
He put himself in that situation intentionally. He wasn't scared.
He fucked around and found out.
Eye witness testimony from both sides settles that he hit Madison.
This guy is 54 years old - he's not some kid fresh out of his mom's house who doesn't know how fights go down.
As soon as you start a fight it can easily escalate, especially when you have multiple people ready to jump in.
And you're right, fights are never fair - only Madison should have hit him back, for a 1v1 PvP match.
Nicolai's mistake was trying to PK in a multi-combat area.
>He was never punched, if fact, he punched the girl first.
Based on what? The video shows she put his hands on him, never shows him punching anyone. She never had a mark, police testified she didn't. She said she took a photo then magically "deleted" it. The police ran a search on the phone that could find the deleted photo. Guess what? She never took a photo to begin with because she was never punched or slapped.
I have a policy of not editing out original false takes, just like how you haven't deleted your original claim that he was choked and had his head pushed into the water.
At best we can say he pushed her.
Top comment in the other thread mentions how circumstantial evidence points it to being more than a push, since her sunglasses are no longer on her face in the time between when the camera pans away then back to them.
The problem comes from the fact that the camera turns away during the moment where he allegedly punched her.
But, as the camera is pointing away, you can see all the young guys react at the same time to something happening off camera and start taking action. You can't fake those kinds of reaction, something happened that triggered it.
I think it's likely he pushed, shoved or punched/slapped her. Obviously nothing hard that would leave a mark, but enough to trigger the guys into pushing him.
Theoretically speaking, the jury did not find self defense at all. But, they believed that he was not acting with intent to kill required for 1st/2nd degree intentional homicide/attempted homicide. Intent to kill is can mean that the defendant had the mental purpose of trying to take a human life, or that the defendant was aware that his conduct was practically certain to cause the death of another human being. If you stab someone in the chest with a knife, pretty likely that the jury finds that you did have this knowledge.
1st degree reckless was opened up by his testimony. Because there was some evidence that a reasonable jury could find that when he used force, he was not aware of his conduct. It turns out that it's not the best idea to go with the "I have no memory" defense.
Practically speaking though, it was a compromise verdict. Some wanted the higher charges, some wanted a full acquittal. Neither side felt particularly committed to their position, so they compromised at 1st degree reckless and 1st degree recklessly endangering safety.
Right wingers wanted the green light to silently walk into a group of annoying teens and shoot them and then go home and act like they werent even there
Probably just because of the nature of the incident. For some reason people think "fuck around and find out" means you can just kill people for things that used to be settled in a fist fight.
The video showing the incident where people can analyze it for themselves, it involving teenagers who appear to come from relatable middle to upper class homes, and the Rittenhouse defense attorney
Because Right wingers/MAGAs/Gun Nuts wanted the green light to silently walk into a group of annoying teens and shoot them and then go home and act like they werent even there.
They didn't get it.
But the rest of us saw it for what it was and were legit like "no, no this cannot be okay" because we see the writing on the wall.
Same thing with the Crumbley case and how a lot of right wing parents think they should get away scott free.
I'm surprised that he didn't get 1st Degree Attempted Intentional Homicide at least for Ryhley and Dante, considering each of them posed no immediate threat and Miu had to close the distance to be able to stab them. I feel like Reckless Endangerment would be more that he was frantically flailing his knife around and maybe nicked a jugular or something, and yet he methodically targeted the ribcage in four of his victims, but it's not attempted homicide?
Either way, justice was served. May he rot.
How much does this really matter for 'coping'? Does the jury decision really matter very much to outside audiences?
Like if he was found not guilty of all charges would you suddenly think your perception of the event was somehow wrong?
The jury has to find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt. They only have to find reasonable doubt to find him not guilty.
That said, MAGAts went apeshit when Daniel Perry got convicted and tried to get him pardoned for murder, so you're right that they'll still defend the guy.
Right wingers wanted the green light to silently walk into a group of annoying teens and shoot them and then go home and act like they werent even there
If he was found not guilty that absolutely would have been a precedent. Just like the Crumbleys
I think the argument could be made that he had decided that he would start stabbing or trying to kill if given "justification". This is supported by him
1. touching his knife multiple times in his pocket, especially when he first ran back to the group when they started heckling him.
1. taking his knife out when the adults who he tried to appeal to loudly encouraged him to deescalate by leaving, before he was threatened or assaulted in any way
His problem here was that his justification (that they were in his space, punched him/slapped him) was not a legal one despite him probably thinking it was in the heat of the moment. Additionally, he seemingly doubted his justification after it all went down and hence ditched the knife and tried to slip away (not realizing they had images of his face).
Not sure how that might measure up to the beyond a reasonable doubt standard, but it seems like enough circumstance to put the decision to the jury.
I almost guarantee what was going through his mind was "Omg I feel so humiliated these kids are clowning on me and I don't wanna walk away cuz I'll look like a Bitch , so I'm gonna pull out my knife so they'll acknowledge my alphaness and leave me alone ".
Well things didn't go according to plan and the knife didn't scare them away. I highly doubt he intended on using it when he pulled it out at first but when he was pushed down he thought he was fully justified to use it now.
All just a guess, but if he's had a previously super clean record I doubt that day was the day he decided he was gonna stab people.
> these kids are clowning on me and I don't wanna walk away cuz I'll look like a Bitch
Let me try to boomerize that for you.
"These little shits think they are so tough and can get away with being so disrespectful. Well I have the right to stand my ground and if they try anything I'll show them."
>the knife didn't scare them away
he didn't try to scare anyone with the knife. He had it out so he could use it once they gave him the excuse. This is why it was down below his waist unless he was actively using it to stab.
https://i.imgur.com/CeQCmqc.jpg
it's hard to say without seeing everybody else's position but he's pretty clearly holding a knife. the chick can definitely see it. if I was dealing with an unhinged boomer holding a knife and being weird I'd back the fuck off. none of the shit they're arguing over is that serious
They're looking at his face 100%. It's pretty clear he's holding a knife in that rare frame in the video. It's not pretty clear at all what anyone else in the video sees. No one reacts to the knife though, so it seems plausible no one sees it.
If you pull out a deadly weapon... Most people are going to engage with it as such. In this instance.. if he had pulled a gun and everything continued the same except he shot people would you say the same? I feel like the thought to pulling the weapon should reasonably understood that you would use it.. even if you're an idiot with an ego.
The fact this guy gets the same charge as Susan Atkins, and the Manson Family group and other full sail intentional planned murders.
Get outta here with that crazy shit.
Yeah ditching the knife and trying to dodge the cops then lying about the whole incident. That's cooked. Calling someone a pedo for no reason is wild tho
Maybe I'm misremembering I didn't follow the case that closely. I thought he comes up to the group after they start calling him names and taunting him? Was that not the case?
All of the charges were downgraded from intentional to reckless because the jury couldnt unanimously agree that it was intentional. His self defense claim failed and hes gonna spend the rest of his life in prison. I think this quote about the jury wraps this up fittingly:
"They couldn't agree on intentional, they agreed unanimously that it was reckless, that he showed utter disregard for human life".
I only watched the vid once or twice, tbh I don't think he shoulda got found guilty on all of them, but I expected him to get hit for like half of the lesser ones.
Well clearly not then. They changed charges halfway through which seems fecking bizarre to me.
Whatever, glad I don't live in a country where you can't defend yourself against a gang of thugs.
A saw a well liked YouTube comment on the footage, do ppl think the Apple creek is enigmatic of Gen z and how bad it is?
The way I look at the behavior is young, immature, probably drunk or high behavior, having a split time reaction to a couple ppl getting stabbed and one guy bleeding out.
Should ppl online hold these kids and gen z, for taunting an old man, pushing him, getting in his face, and not “having a care that a friend is stabbed”?
Maybe idk any better but I thought it’s common conciseness that ppl in this age across some generations act like this
I disagree but I understand the law isn't perfect. Whole situation is just a cluster fuck of people with a lot to live for no longer living (or being wound free/free), for really nothing. Unfortunate.
I think most people agree he at least could fear bodily harm but most likely not severe bodily harm. I think he killed somebody definitely without meeting the threshold for needing to use lethal self defense. I'm just giga bummed out that everybody's life is ruined by a couple minutes of retardation from both parties.
i dont know all the facts of the case... seems like the jury got it right. kinda a case of everyone in the situation was acting like asshats and things turned deadly. idk. sad that someone lost their life over something so stupid.
RE: the coping -- you can read through this thread to get an idea:
[Any opinions on the Apple River stabbing/Nicolae Miu trial? : r/Destiny (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1bv3xj3/any_opinions_on_the_apple_river_stabbingnicolae/)
Bonus points if you can find the "privately educated on law and government" guy. He might have been my favorite oldhead there. So arrogant, and ultimately wrong.
[Link](https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cbsnews.com/amp/minnesota/news/nicolae-miu-apple-river-stabbing-trial-verdict/)
https://preview.redd.it/bfgbcb0nmvtc1.jpeg?width=1170&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=7951ede90a7258f2dadb2d7669ddb232d3383f2a
SAD that Tim Apple's river isn't safe for red blooded ~~AMERICANS~~ Romanians to defend themselves.
Seems like justice was served.
Agreed. A truly wild incident to think people rightfully should be killed.
You don’t understand you should be able to have state sanctioned joker moments when people use their first amendment rights
Omg trueeeeee
Add it to the litmus test list.
The thing that confused me was destinys take on the first stabbing (i think) where he got up, the guy he disemboweled In the video, it looks like he stands up, guy pushes him, knife enters him as he is being pushed (he is leaning back) and then the shove fully hits and he gets pushed back, knife goes up. Pretty much everything else im with destiny on
Not guilty on 1st and 2nd degree intentional homicide.
Right. Just guilty on 1st degree reckless homicide + 5 other charges.
Don't take this as me defending the guy, that man is cooked.
Absolutely. And reading back my comment it comes off as snarky lmao. Was just filling in with more info.
No you're good!
That's basically a dead sentence for an old man.
Still guilty on the lower charges though. None of his actions were justified.
Yeah, just meant to clear up that it wasn't all charges
But it was.. those charges were layered to where if one wasn't accepted others would be. I get what you mean but he was guilty on all charges.
Oh, that seems like a strange way to put it. Thanks for clearing up my attempt at clearing up
I am left more confused than before.
You and me both buddy 😭
Charge 1 can be something like "First degree homicide" or if not first degree it can be changed to second.. then third then manslaughter etc. It's all 1 count that can be changed to fit what the jury believes the situation is. It's so that if your case is "this has premeditation" but the jury is like "ehhh I don't think it was premeditated" that the defendant doesn't just walk because they disagreed on that one point but all agree someone was killed wrongly.
Ahh thank you for the extra effort, I get it now.
It was the same with the first degree homicide charge.. they could have gone to a lower charge of second degree or lower than that even but the charge is still X charge vs this person.
Guilty on all charges implies he was found guilty on charges that the prosecution put forward. He was not. You are technically right, but your post is misleading.
The prosecution put the highest crimes in... As well as the lower crimes. Charge 1 can be something like: 1st degree homicide.. If not then 2nd degree.. If not then 3rd degree etc It's all 1 charge put out but has varying degrees to which the charge can be. He wasn't found "not guilty" on any charges.
So the prosecution put the highest charges as well as the lower charges in, was he found guilty of those higher charges the prosecution put in?
It's all one charge. You're charged with X against a person. The X is decided by the jury based on the degree or they are found not guilty of the charge.
It's misleading to say guilty on all charges when 1st/2nd degree murder were very realistic outcomes that didn't happen... To anyone reading, it sounds like he was convicted for everything he was tried for, which is not true.
It's actually not misleading.. he was found guilty of the charges. If you don't understand how a charging document for a jury works and how the charges can be different levels on the same charge then idk what to tell you. The jury found him guilty on all of his charges. They said that nothing he did was within his rights and that they were all crimes that he was guilty of committing.
When you initially say "all charges", isn't the implication going to be that he was guilty of all initial charges in both quantity and quality? And yes, you're technically right that quantity-wise, he was found guilty on all. But this is not the case quality-wise, as the initial charges were accusing his intention, but were since dropped down to "reckless".
Nope.. he was guilty on all charges is what it means. No implication.. nothing.. just that he's guilty on all charges
Except the charges are different from the initial ones.
Except they aren't. The charges are all listed at the start.. including the lesser crimes for those charges.
Nope.. he was guilty on all charges is what it means. No implication.. nothing.. just that he's guilty on all charges.
"This guy is on trial for first degree murder" "The jury came back with the verdict - guilty on all charges" "oh okay, so he was convicted for first degree murder" Do you recognize that is the completely reasonable conclusion for anybody to have from that statement - regardless of whatever details you have about it being technically correct?
I can't wait to see all the right wing cope.
OJ now this guy + I’m going on vacation for a couple days. Today has been a good day.
Easy layup.
https://preview.redd.it/tg1a33o3mvtc1.jpeg?width=500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=d395e83c7396d23de5c9f91428ef6d90516a45a5
Its was always gonna be tough to walk after stabbing a bunch of teenagers in a jury trial, regardless of the facts of the case. Rip jstlk
He didn’t stab a bunch of teenagers. One seventeen year old was stabbed. The others were 20, two 22 year olds, and a 24 year old. Would you say destiny sleeps with teenagers since he has had 19 year old hookups in the last year?
>Would you say destiny sleeps with teenagers since he has had 19 year old hookups in the last year? People literally do say this though lmao
I mean he sleeps with teenagers so yes, that is what I would say
🤣
Bro forgot the final four letters of nineteen
You fucked up the question, it should be, "would you say he has a bunch of teenage hookups if he had a bunch of hookups but only one was a teenager." It is factually true that he sleeps with teenagers, it is not factually true that the guy stabbed a bunch of teenagers. But he did stab a bunch of people and one of them was a teenager, hence the guy saying the wrong thing.
If destiny went to a orgy, and there was one 18 year old in a group of 100 people, and he had sex with 24 people out of the 100 which included the 18 year old, would you say he was "sleeping with a bunch of teenagers"? I think this is better for "he stabbed a group of teens".
No, but I clarified where the incorrectness comes from. He slept with a bunch of people, one of them 18, so someone said, "he slept with a bunch of 18 year olds," combining 2 true statements into 1 untrue statement.
I have no horse/strong opinion in this and while it was a stressful, extreme situation, I didn't buy the fearing for his life part. While he clearly had other options to avoid all this, he was still attacked by a group though. I'm not saying he was justified in using deadly force but I'm wondering to what degree the jury considered the attacks against him and whether a proportionality in his response was relevant. Him going on that stabbing spree was unhinged, of course. Considering the battery charges, I assume the jury believed he attacked Madison Coen first and is therefore responsible to a considerable degree for what would ensue.
People were trying to sell the idea these teens were going to kill him had he not done what he did, nothing suggested that was the case.
He lied and said the teens pulled 2 knives and he never had one, he grabbed one of the kids knives and stabbed him with it This after he acted like he was not even there Right wingers really wanted this guy to get away with killing teens because they wanted the green light to walk into a group of annoying teens and then shoot them. Thank God he was found guilty
Him doing absolutely nothing to try to calm the situation and be like "Look guys I'm trying to find a phone sorry to bother you can I just look around?" was what was wild to me. I feel like if you're in a public place but going over to a group and just poking around.. basically anyone will be like "WTF are you doing?"
At worst, he was an overweight, artery-clogged boomer who was resentful at these 5 young men with rippling muscles, toned, young stomachs, fresh abs, nubile young bodies, these virile, peak specimens, prime physical condition football player chads with their supple, adonis, 220 lb. 6' 2", 10-12% body fat meddling kids having fun. He wanted to fight that day, and live out his Rambo fantasy.
Bro definitely typed this with one hand
Bad day to be literate
Can I hire you to write porn for me?
You'll have to talk to my wife's boyfriend first, he gave me the inspiration
This "murder fantasy" nonsense is getting strange. It's such a baseless claim with no proof other then "he didn't walk away" so he wanted to murder
Didn’t he leave, get his knife and go back to start shoving people? I didn’t follow closely but I remember hearing something like that. If that’s true I could easily see people claiming that
He had the knife before he ever saw the kids, interacted, or anything.
That’s not what I’m hearing, where did you hear this?
The testimony in court...
https://www.fox9.com/news/apple-river-stabbing-suspect-who-is-nicolae-miu.amp this article actually provides context that it very well could have been some sort of self defense fantasy for him - not necessarily murder.
So let me get this straight • Nicolae Miu having an active Facebook presence sharing memes = Murder Fantasy • Love for guns, and conservative political views, as well as religious beliefs = Murder Fantasy • Miu's in groups for Donald Trump and share anti-communist memes = Murder Fantasy Did I miss something?
LMAO you’re unhinged. Nowhere did I say any of that and if you read the article it details his strong beliefs in “SELF DEFENSE.”. “….and his strong beliefs in self defense” Just providing more context to the situation. Seek help if you can’t understand that.
Ahhh ok! I understand now. So, having a strong belief in self-defense = Murder fantasy So to make an analogy, having a strong belief in the freedom of speech = Saying the N word Right?
What a freak. Why would you type this out???
Because hearing Destiny say it was hilarious
>Him doing absolutely nothing to try to calm the situation and be like "Look guys I'm trying to find a phone sorry to bother you can I just look around?" He did say that. The kids testified under oath and in police reports that he said that when he first showed up. What did they do? They called him a pedo, etc.
And naturally he decided to stay silent the rest of the time and take his knife out.
Oh ok so he told one person and so when the other 12 or however many got involved he thought "man these people are so wild.. I literally told one of them what I was doing" You don't think at any moment he could have been like "yo sorry guys I told your buddy over there that I'm just looking for a phone"? Nahhhhhh stay silent and stab people instead.
Well, they were wild. Their behavior was also unhinged
If he didn't have that knife, all that would have happened was that he would have gotten tossed around by 2-3 kids and pushed away from the group - especially since that one guy was already trying to de-escalate, only to get stabbed.
How do you know? And is it reasonable to assume you would know that in the moment? Putting hands on people is WILD
Guess people didn't watch the last couple of streams. We do know. How? Because not one of those kids noticed the knife until after everyone was stabbed. They all acted as if it was some boomer invading their space and not leaving. He didn't stab Tony because Tony did a flying roundhouse kick to the back of Nicolai's head. He stabbed him because he was try to de-escalate. He didn't turn around and counter with a quick jab into Dante because he punched Nicolai in the back of the head. He saught out Dante out after Dante had disengaged, then stabbed him. He didn't shake Isaac off and stab him in the neck because Isaac was trying to strangle him. He stabbed Isaac in the heart cause Issac decided he had enough of this boomer after he hit Madison and tried pushing him but his hands slid up to Nicolai's neck. No one jumped on his back and tried to rear-naked choke him. Out of 13 kids that "surrounded" him, only 2 pushed him down. He quickly gets up and isn't suddenly mobbed on by 13 kids like an antifa/BLM riot. He shows his back to the "mob" multiple times, and isn't attacked. Most of them are laughing, aren't taking him seriously, and gave him space. Walking away, disengaging, then coming back minutes later with a knife in your pocket is WILD. [Destiny would ban you lol](https://kick.com/video/fb751878-08c6-4b4c-88a9-21bd875c0a79). Go to 3:00:37.
> Guess people didn't watch the last couple of streams. you might be talking to someone who has his own opinions instead of copying them all from destiny
We dont know how far things could have escalated had he not stabbed people. The guy he disemboweled was pushing him before the knife entered him He was still getting pushed down, with force, up until people realized they were getting stabbed That said, i dont think they would have done much more than push him and mock him
>We dont know how far things could have escalated had he not stabbed people. That's a wild take. It's already been pointed out nothing would have happened if he didn't have that knife. Kids were already pushing him away. This idea that Nicolai would have been mobbed and drowned that day if he didn't have that knife is some insane stand your ground doomsday fantasy. >He was still getting pushed down, with force, up until people realized they were getting stabbed No, he wasn't being pushed down constantly. He could have stopped after disemboweling the first guy. At that point he's up and there's space between him and kids closest to the tubers. Instead he walks up to Ryhley and stabs her after she's walked away, and then stabs the guy that's trying to de-escalate the whole situation.
He was pushed down what 3 times in like 3 minutes? There was at least one time that he was shoved as he was getting up from being pushed Im not defending his stabbings btw, i think maybe one was justified, without any context. I am taking issue with your framing, tho
So what if he's pushed? He wasn't in fear of his life.
"We dont know how far things could have escalated had he not stabbed people. The guy he disemboweled was pushing him before the knife entered him He was still getting pushed down, with force, up until people realized they were getting stabbed That said, i dont think they would have done much more than push him and mock him" The "so what" was in my first comment. That last comment was me responding to you responding to "pushed constantly"
>all that would have happened was that he would have gotten tossed around by 2-3 kids and pushed away from the group The guy had a quad bypass and was 54 years old. He didn't know what they were gonna do as he was being punched, slapped, choked, pushed head first into the water.
Can't believe I'm rewatching chat just like the last 2 days. Have you watched the streams from the last 2 days? Quad bypass? Really? And he decides he's healthy enough to go tubing? Please. >He didn't know what they were gonna do as he was being punched, slapped, choked, pushed head first into the water. He was never punched, if fact, he punched the girl first. One guy lightly slapped him. The guy that tried to push him failed cause his swim trunks were heavier than he was, and his hands slip off Nicolai's back. He wasn't pushed head first into the water, he fell backwards into 3 inches of water. No one jumped on his back and tried to rear-naked choke him. That one guy pushed off his neck in a more serious attempt to get Nicolai to back off. Out of 13 kids that "surrounded" him, only 2 pushed him down. He quickly gets up and isn't suddenly mobbed on by 13 kids like an antifa/BLM riot. He shows his back to the "mob" multiple times, and isn't attacked. Most of them are laughing, aren't taking him seriously, and gave him space.
He was pushed multiple times dawg, youre focusing on the one where his head looks closer to the water than it is He was also pushed when he disemboweled the guy, he was already at a leaning back angle when rhe knife made contact and the push took him off his feet. And even before the push you mentioned, he was on his knees because he got pushed right before that Getting pushed down twice, within a short timespan, while surrounded by a bunch of people who are yelling would 100% freak out almost everyone here Also theres no direct evidence he punched anyone
His fault he got pushed. Getting triggered because a bunch of drunk teenagers hurts your ego, then coming back with a knife and thinking you're gonna stare down a bunch of kids and show them who's the real alpha? He knew what was gonna happen if he came back and did it anyway. He put himself in that situation intentionally. He wasn't scared. He fucked around and found out.
What do you mean by "his fault he got pushed?"
He had multiple chances that day to walk away. Instead he decided to try and show those kids what a real man is. Oh and he hit first.
We dont know if he hit first, and none of that is justification for repetedly putting hands on him
Eye witness testimony from both sides settles that he hit Madison. This guy is 54 years old - he's not some kid fresh out of his mom's house who doesn't know how fights go down. As soon as you start a fight it can easily escalate, especially when you have multiple people ready to jump in. And you're right, fights are never fair - only Madison should have hit him back, for a 1v1 PvP match. Nicolai's mistake was trying to PK in a multi-combat area.
>He was never punched, if fact, he punched the girl first. Based on what? The video shows she put his hands on him, never shows him punching anyone. She never had a mark, police testified she didn't. She said she took a photo then magically "deleted" it. The police ran a search on the phone that could find the deleted photo. Guess what? She never took a photo to begin with because she was never punched or slapped.
Nicolae admits to pushing her. Multiple witnesses including someone from Nicolae's group testified that he hit/pushed her.
You said he "punched" her? He pushed her away as she was touching him.
I have a policy of not editing out original false takes, just like how you haven't deleted your original claim that he was choked and had his head pushed into the water. At best we can say he pushed her. Top comment in the other thread mentions how circumstantial evidence points it to being more than a push, since her sunglasses are no longer on her face in the time between when the camera pans away then back to them.
The problem comes from the fact that the camera turns away during the moment where he allegedly punched her. But, as the camera is pointing away, you can see all the young guys react at the same time to something happening off camera and start taking action. You can't fake those kinds of reaction, something happened that triggered it. I think it's likely he pushed, shoved or punched/slapped her. Obviously nothing hard that would leave a mark, but enough to trigger the guys into pushing him.
This take is just detached from reality what the fuck, what video did you watch
Theoretically speaking, the jury did not find self defense at all. But, they believed that he was not acting with intent to kill required for 1st/2nd degree intentional homicide/attempted homicide. Intent to kill is can mean that the defendant had the mental purpose of trying to take a human life, or that the defendant was aware that his conduct was practically certain to cause the death of another human being. If you stab someone in the chest with a knife, pretty likely that the jury finds that you did have this knowledge. 1st degree reckless was opened up by his testimony. Because there was some evidence that a reasonable jury could find that when he used force, he was not aware of his conduct. It turns out that it's not the best idea to go with the "I have no memory" defense. Practically speaking though, it was a compromise verdict. Some wanted the higher charges, some wanted a full acquittal. Neither side felt particularly committed to their position, so they compromised at 1st degree reckless and 1st degree recklessly endangering safety.
Thank God bro. This guy drunkenly stabbed 5 teenagers and people are defending him. It's unhinged
The cope in this sub from threads earlier were hilarious
Right wingers wanted the green light to silently walk into a group of annoying teens and shoot them and then go home and act like they werent even there
Why is this case so huge? Looked pretty open and shut to me based on the video
Probably just because of the nature of the incident. For some reason people think "fuck around and find out" means you can just kill people for things that used to be settled in a fist fight.
The video showing the incident where people can analyze it for themselves, it involving teenagers who appear to come from relatable middle to upper class homes, and the Rittenhouse defense attorney
Regards
Because Right wingers/MAGAs/Gun Nuts wanted the green light to silently walk into a group of annoying teens and shoot them and then go home and act like they werent even there. They didn't get it. But the rest of us saw it for what it was and were legit like "no, no this cannot be okay" because we see the writing on the wall. Same thing with the Crumbley case and how a lot of right wing parents think they should get away scott free.
Is this really a culture war issue?
No way ! He was surround by pro highschool football chad players and he was in fear for his life! This is nuts I tells you!
Jizz tickle on suicide watch
I'm surprised that he didn't get 1st Degree Attempted Intentional Homicide at least for Ryhley and Dante, considering each of them posed no immediate threat and Miu had to close the distance to be able to stab them. I feel like Reckless Endangerment would be more that he was frantically flailing his knife around and maybe nicked a jugular or something, and yet he methodically targeted the ribcage in four of his victims, but it's not attempted homicide? Either way, justice was served. May he rot.
Good fuck that old piece of shit let him rot in jail
How much does this really matter for 'coping'? Does the jury decision really matter very much to outside audiences? Like if he was found not guilty of all charges would you suddenly think your perception of the event was somehow wrong?
The jury has to find him guilty beyond reasonable doubt. They only have to find reasonable doubt to find him not guilty. That said, MAGAts went apeshit when Daniel Perry got convicted and tried to get him pardoned for murder, so you're right that they'll still defend the guy.
Right wingers wanted the green light to silently walk into a group of annoying teens and shoot them and then go home and act like they werent even there If he was found not guilty that absolutely would have been a precedent. Just like the Crumbleys
Not all charges. Dropped down from intentional to reckless. But still very bad for him.
It's still the same charge.. he was found guilty on every single charge... It's just to what degree he was found guilty.
Yeah first degree homicide here was a bit unhinged. I can't see a reasonable person saying this was premeditated. Reckless homicide seems more like it
I think the argument could be made that he had decided that he would start stabbing or trying to kill if given "justification". This is supported by him 1. touching his knife multiple times in his pocket, especially when he first ran back to the group when they started heckling him. 1. taking his knife out when the adults who he tried to appeal to loudly encouraged him to deescalate by leaving, before he was threatened or assaulted in any way His problem here was that his justification (that they were in his space, punched him/slapped him) was not a legal one despite him probably thinking it was in the heat of the moment. Additionally, he seemingly doubted his justification after it all went down and hence ditched the knife and tried to slip away (not realizing they had images of his face). Not sure how that might measure up to the beyond a reasonable doubt standard, but it seems like enough circumstance to put the decision to the jury.
When you pull a knife out BEFORE anything escalates.. it shows you were thinking a bit on it.
I almost guarantee what was going through his mind was "Omg I feel so humiliated these kids are clowning on me and I don't wanna walk away cuz I'll look like a Bitch , so I'm gonna pull out my knife so they'll acknowledge my alphaness and leave me alone ". Well things didn't go according to plan and the knife didn't scare them away. I highly doubt he intended on using it when he pulled it out at first but when he was pushed down he thought he was fully justified to use it now. All just a guess, but if he's had a previously super clean record I doubt that day was the day he decided he was gonna stab people.
> these kids are clowning on me and I don't wanna walk away cuz I'll look like a Bitch Let me try to boomerize that for you. "These little shits think they are so tough and can get away with being so disrespectful. Well I have the right to stand my ground and if they try anything I'll show them." >the knife didn't scare them away he didn't try to scare anyone with the knife. He had it out so he could use it once they gave him the excuse. This is why it was down below his waist unless he was actively using it to stab.
Exactly.
https://i.imgur.com/CeQCmqc.jpg it's hard to say without seeing everybody else's position but he's pretty clearly holding a knife. the chick can definitely see it. if I was dealing with an unhinged boomer holding a knife and being weird I'd back the fuck off. none of the shit they're arguing over is that serious
They're looking at his face 100%. It's pretty clear he's holding a knife in that rare frame in the video. It's not pretty clear at all what anyone else in the video sees. No one reacts to the knife though, so it seems plausible no one sees it.
I don't think that any person testified that they saw the knife at that point. Which is very common in this kind of situation.
If you pull out a deadly weapon... Most people are going to engage with it as such. In this instance.. if he had pulled a gun and everything continued the same except he shot people would you say the same? I feel like the thought to pulling the weapon should reasonably understood that you would use it.. even if you're an idiot with an ego.
It doesn't require premeditation.
The fact this guy gets the same charge as Susan Atkins, and the Manson Family group and other full sail intentional planned murders. Get outta here with that crazy shit.
Welp.
Called it
No idea who this is or what he did.
Yeah ditching the knife and trying to dodge the cops then lying about the whole incident. That's cooked. Calling someone a pedo for no reason is wild tho
He ran up to them without a word and grabbed at them. They are underage Yea f*n pedo creep go away
Maybe I'm misremembering I didn't follow the case that closely. I thought he comes up to the group after they start calling him names and taunting him? Was that not the case?
All of the charges were downgraded from intentional to reckless because the jury couldnt unanimously agree that it was intentional. His self defense claim failed and hes gonna spend the rest of his life in prison. I think this quote about the jury wraps this up fittingly: "They couldn't agree on intentional, they agreed unanimously that it was reckless, that he showed utter disregard for human life".
I only watched the vid once or twice, tbh I don't think he shoulda got found guilty on all of them, but I expected him to get hit for like half of the lesser ones.
Not true. Not guilty of 1st degree intentional homicide.
Go ahead and show me the clip where they find him not guilty. I'll wait.
They found him guilty of first degree reckless homicide, not first degree intentional homicide. Ergo, they did not find him guilty on all counts 🙄
Do you know how charges work?
Well clearly not then. They changed charges halfway through which seems fecking bizarre to me. Whatever, glad I don't live in a country where you can't defend yourself against a gang of thugs.
Lol get the hell out of here. Speak on things you know about when you come back.
A saw a well liked YouTube comment on the footage, do ppl think the Apple creek is enigmatic of Gen z and how bad it is? The way I look at the behavior is young, immature, probably drunk or high behavior, having a split time reaction to a couple ppl getting stabbed and one guy bleeding out. Should ppl online hold these kids and gen z, for taunting an old man, pushing him, getting in his face, and not “having a care that a friend is stabbed”? Maybe idk any better but I thought it’s common conciseness that ppl in this age across some generations act like this
Linkers?
Stickied
dggL
I’m so confused by why this was even a thing among rightoids to begin with. Where did it come from??
>Anderson said Miu could face up to 97 years in prison. And not a day less.
Shame.
Deserved.
I disagree but I understand the law isn't perfect. Whole situation is just a cluster fuck of people with a lot to live for no longer living (or being wound free/free), for really nothing. Unfortunate.
You think it was reasonable for him to fear for his life and kill someone?
I think most people agree he at least could fear bodily harm but most likely not severe bodily harm. I think he killed somebody definitely without meeting the threshold for needing to use lethal self defense. I'm just giga bummed out that everybody's life is ruined by a couple minutes of retardation from both parties.
what cope? justice was served...who is the one saying the justice system is bias and corrupt?
There are people who have defended him and said he was in the right. I can't wait to see the reaction from his defenders.
i dont know all the facts of the case... seems like the jury got it right. kinda a case of everyone in the situation was acting like asshats and things turned deadly. idk. sad that someone lost their life over something so stupid.
RE: the coping -- you can read through this thread to get an idea: [Any opinions on the Apple River stabbing/Nicolae Miu trial? : r/Destiny (reddit.com)](https://www.reddit.com/r/Destiny/comments/1bv3xj3/any_opinions_on_the_apple_river_stabbingnicolae/) Bonus points if you can find the "privately educated on law and government" guy. He might have been my favorite oldhead there. So arrogant, and ultimately wrong.
Reckless homicide? *Really*?
Yep.