[quote=âStray Dogâ][quote=âRobinTaiwanâ][quote=âStray Dogâ]Circumstantial evidence such as the airbag not being activated would suggest he may have been telling the truth, thoughâthat the impact was not enough to wake an unconscious man (but repeated attempts by the driver to wake him were). Thatâs just as plausible as the prosecutionâs explanation.[/quote]Hereâs some damage done to a car by a deer. The damage is far more extensive and the air bags never deployed. Iâve just looked up a ton of similar stories from Aussies who hit kangaroos. Air bags seldom deploy.
[color=#BF0040]NSFW[/color] view at your own risks. Lots of gore. pbnation.com/showthread.php? ⌠genumber=1
And a word from an insurance agent:
Thanks for finding all that info, Robin. It totally backs up my suggestion that this kind of accident wouldnât alter the speed of the car, and why Mr Dean may not have been woken up by the impact, because there simply wasnât an abrupt stop.
Good detective work! 
[/quote]
And so he went on home with an eight inch bulge in the hood of his car and a missing headlight. Plus, if you look at the damage done, it would make a whole lot of noise. This was just to explain to you that the air bags would not likely deploy contrary to what you thought. The impact itself is still tremendous as shown by the damage. Enough to kill someone, apparentlyâŚ
You are convinced he slept through the accident and has no recollection of it. Itâs your opinion. I have my suspicions. Between the impact and driving home with a smashed up car, I do not blindly believe he parked his car home that night oblivious of what had happened.
The air bag thing is just one more thing that contributes to the staggering ignorance displayed in your posts. Youâre the guy who tried to tell everyone that a lawyer believes the legal system is perfect, arenât you? 
You also thought that the fact the air bags didnât deploy played in Deanâs favor and once itâs proven to be wrong youâre just struggling to save face. As far as Iâm concerned, your posts in this thread rank below anything Iâve ever read online, and as such, your posts on this board have quickly been reduced to insignificant and hardly worth reading, never mind replying to. I wonât spend one more minute of my time bothering with your posts. 
[quote=âheadhonchoIIâ][quote=âRobinTaiwanâ][quote=âGot To Be Kiddingâ]
Questioning his honesty is important⌠in what way?
[/quote]You have got to be kiddingâŚ
The credibility of the accused is fundamental, especially so if the accused is trying an affirmative defense without any evidence.[/quote]
This is where I think you are going wrong. How can you establish the credibility of one versus the other? Just tell me how?[/quote]This is a good question well-worth answering. 
First of all, you are using the pronoun âyouâ to ask âmeâ how âIâ establish credibility. I prefer to answer on general terms to explain how credibility is established in a court of law.
In brief, credibility refers to the subjective and objective components of the believability of a source or message. So if you were asking whether subjectivity is a reality in the modern courtroom, the answer is yes. Itâs always been that way and it always will be unless we can think of something better.
Rob, how do you know how heavy a sleeper Zain is?
I find it very plausible that SOME people could sleep through that, others maybe not.
For example, my wife will wake up at a pin being dropped, I slept through a Naval Gun Fire Support mission. That was with over 50, 5"(~155MM) cannon rounds being fired directly above my bunk. Not only is there the concussion from the blast, but also each round fired moves the ship sideways about 15â, about the same as a 30 ft wave hitting you sideways. Also, there is the loud noise of the metal powder casing hitting the steel deck of the ship about 6â over my bunk. I was stone cold sober at that time, as you are not allowed to have alcohol on a Navy vessel. Drunk I am sure I could sleep through a Nuke blast, or Taiwan during Chinese New Year and The Bombing of Master Han Dan!
[quote=âsaddletrampâ]Rob, how do you know how heavy a sleeper Zain is?
I find it very plausible that SOME people could sleep through that, others maybe not.
For example, my wife will wake up at a pin being dropped, I slept through a Naval Gun Fire Support mission. That was with over 50, 5"(~155MM) cannon rounds being fired directly above my bunk. Not only is there the concussion from the blast, but also each round fired moves the ship sideways about 15â, about the same as a 30 ft wave hitting you sideways. Also, there is the loud noise of the metal powder casing hitting the steel deck of the ship about 6â over my bunk. I was stone cold sober at that time, as you are not allowed to have alcohol on a Navy vessel. Drunk I am sure I could sleep through a Nuke blast, or Taiwan during Chinese New Year and The Bombing of Master Han Dan![/quote]
I donât know how deep a sleeper Dean is. But I do know that if he canât see an eight inch bulge on the hood of his car, he shouldnât be driving it. Doing so could end up in a nasty court case.
That judgment has some interesting stuff in it. For example, it has the name and part of the address of the hostess bar, and the name of the hostess bar employee who drove that night.
Plugging the name of the hostess bar into Google can lead to some interesting Web pages.
[quote=âsaddletrampâ]Rob, how do you know how heavy a sleeper Zain is?
I find it very plausible that SOME people could sleep through that, others maybe not.
For example, my wife will wake up at a pin being dropped, I slept through a Naval Gun Fire Support mission. That was with over 50, 5"(~155MM) cannon rounds being fired directly above my bunk. Not only is there the concussion from the blast, but also each round fired moves the ship sideways about 15â, about the same as a 30 ft wave hitting you sideways. Also, there is the loud noise of the metal powder casing hitting the steel deck of the ship about 6â over my bunk. I was stone cold sober at that time, as you are not allowed to have alcohol on a Navy vessel. Drunk I am sure I could sleep through a Nuke blast, or Taiwan during Chinese New Year and The Bombing of Master Han Dan![/quote]
I canât beat that one! But maybe I can add a little to it.
One night several decades ago, when I was in the military, I came back from the enlisted club to the barracks in quite a drunken state (which was not at all unusual for me). My bunk was next to an open window. The next day, the guy whose bunk was next to mine, a guy from Alabama, said, âYou snored last night. Loud.â Of course, I didnât think that was very important information, so I just said something like, âYeah?â He said, âYeah, and then it started raining, and the rain came through the window, and it was hitting you in the face.â I knew I was capable of some unusual stuff when drunk, so with some trepidation I asked him what I did next. He said, âYou just snored louder.â I guess heâd shut the window, but I donât remember.
[quote=âRobinTaiwanâ]This was just to explain to you that the air bags would not likely deploy contrary to what you thought. The impact itself is still tremendous as shown by the damage. Enough to kill someone, apparentlyâŚ
You are convinced he slept through the accident and has no recollection of it. Itâs your opinion. I have my suspicions. Between the impact and driving home with a smashed up car, I do not blindly believe he parked his car home that night oblivious of what had happened.
The air bag thing is just one more thing that contributes to the staggering ignorance displayed in your posts. Youâre the guy who tried to tell everyone that a lawyer believes the legal system is perfect, arenât you? You also thought that the fact the air bags didnât deploy played in Deanâs favor and once itâs proven to be wrong youâre just struggling to save face. As far as Iâm concerned, your posts in this thread rank below anything Iâve ever read online, and as such, your posts on this board have quickly been reduced to insignificant and hardly worth reading, never mind replying to. I wonât spend one more minute of my time bothering with your posts. 
[/quote]
And here, Robin, is an easy way for me to show you the strange world you live in. Your bizarre sense of summation is incredible. And thatâs why I can so easily laugh off your very, very strange opinions of me and my posts.
You just supplied evidence to support my suggestion that Zain could have slept through the impact. Itâs totally fine. Really. Calm down. Youâre just winding yourself up, and the more worked up you get, the morse mistakes you make. But Iâm sure youâre an intelligent guy/girl, Robin.
[quote=âZain Deanâ][quote=âGot To Be Kiddingâ]Our job here is not to retry the case. Zain has been through a lot and appears to have been handed an unfair and unjust deal. Playing âarmchair quarterbackâ (or armchair lawyer) is not helpful.
If we have advice that is supportive, we should give it. Unless we are in full command of the details and law attributable to this case, we should keep our unsupportive comments to ourselves.
I truly hope that Zain is ignoring us.
(which would make our discussion here meaningless)[/quote]
I have not been ignoring the comments on this forum, but instead, I have rather taken aback by some of the aggression and tone of some posters.
[/quote]
Well that is not surprising considering you were CONVICTED of killing a father while driving as pissed as a newt, attempting to hide the evidence and blaming someone else for your crime.
I am impressed with your friends Mr Dean. They are loyal I truly hope they are helping an innocent man and not just being cynically used by you. Itâ would be a pity to abuse the loyalty and trust of such a loyal bunch. I donât believe your cock and bull story for a second however I am impressed that they stick with you.
[quote=âfenlanderâ][quote=âZain Deanâ][quote=âGot To Be Kiddingâ]Our job here is not to retry the case. Zain has been through a lot and appears to have been handed an unfair and unjust deal. Playing âarmchair quarterbackâ (or armchair lawyer) is not helpful.
If we have advice that is supportive, we should give it. Unless we are in full command of the details and law attributable to this case, we should keep our unsupportive comments to ourselves.
I truly hope that Zain is ignoring us.
(which would make our discussion here meaningless)[/quote]
I have not been ignoring the comments on this forum, but instead, I have rather taken aback by some of the aggression and tone of some posters.
[/quote]
Well that is not surprising considering you were CONVICTED of killing a father while driving as pissed as a newt, attempting to hide the evidence and blaming someone else for your crime.
I am impressed with your friends Mr Dean. They are loyal I truly hope they are helping an innocent man and not just being cynically used by you. Itâ would be a pity to abuse the loyalty and trust of such a loyal bunch. I donât believe your cock and bull story for a second however I am impressed that they stick with you.[/quote]
I donât know Zain and wouldnât know him if he jumped out in front of me.
And, itâs ironic that I seem to be arguing as a âfriend of Zainâ, since I have an extreme antipathy towards those who drink and drive - especially those who cause the death of others in the process. A very good friend of mine lost his son and only child to a drunk driver.
Intent is an important part of guilt, and it appears to me that Zain did not intend to âdrink and driveâ and that the club had a responsibility to make sure that he didnât. It appears that the club failed in that responsibility, and here we are.
However, thatâs not my point here.
It is appalling that vigilanteism is alive and well on Forumosa. If we were in a court of law, then maybe there would be some logic to your discussion. But, this isnât a court of law, and we are acting in a vicious and irresponsible manner - especially since this case is murky and full of problems
Unless you can prove that Zain intended to drive home drunk, we should give the guy the benefit of the doubt.
I still see a load of waffle on this thread. Who was driving the car at impact, the trial chose one person to charge and not the other, why?
I havenât read the judgement or followed the trial, maybe somebody can explain this point?
[quote]It is appalling that vigilanteism is alive and well on Forumosa. If we were in a court of law, then maybe there would be some logic to your discussion. But, this isnât a court of law, and we are acting in a vicious and irresponsible manner - especially since this case is murky and full of problems[/quote]I disagree. Personally, Iâve just tried to explain how his conviction is very possibly legit on legal terms.
Dean explained why he put his statement on Forumosa.
Itâs like he said, we can make our own mind about what he has to say. Additionally, Dean is free to respond to those who are suspicious. He stated that he started this thread to âset the record straight.â Instead of doing that, he is being evasive and apparently incapable of appeasing our suspicions. Instead of answering questions, he says something like âI would answer some of the posts but Iâm taken aback with how aggressive some posters are.â
Saying I donât believe your statement to be true is not aggressive in the least, Dean. Are we or are we not supposed to make our own mind about this as you mentioned early in your statement? Additionally, you have now been convicted of this crime. According to the court of law, you left a father to die on the side of the road. Of course you hope that we will believe your side of the story, but you canât expect everyone to believe you and moreover, you certainly should not be taken aback if this doesnât happen. You had to expect that, and you also have to understand that large parts of your statement are simply difficult to believe.
You can blame people for their aggressiveness and you can continue to be evasive, but this will only prove to fail your original intention to set the record straight. Your evasiveness only serves to reinforce our suspicions. And it is OK to have suspicions because you have been shown guilty in a court of law.
Got to be kidding, itâs pretty clear he intended to drive home. He could have hired a taxi. Instead, he let someone drive him home but he didnât want this person to see where he lives. He took over the control of his vehicle, and according to his own admission, he wasnât even able to walk properly let alone drive. According to his statement, this happened right near the 101 where taxis are abundant.
Youâre talking about vigilantism on Forumosa, but this is not any different than other discussions. If you put a statement on Forumosa in which you explain that your entourage is such that you wonât trust a designated driver to find out where you live, it beats the purpose of having a designated driver, and it does little to show that Dean is an upstanding and honest citizen who hangs out with equally upstanding and honest people.
What exactly do you do in these KTV places to fear having an employee drive you home to the extent that you are âwillingâ to drive your car pissed drunk, instead?
Anybody paste that clubâs name into Google yet? I found the name by pasting the judgment into Google Translate.
When using the name in a search on Google, it might help to put it in quotes. It might also help to persevere a littleâto keep browsing the Google pages. But it shouldnât be terribly difficult, and it shouldnât take a terribly long time.
I donât know Chinese, so I didnât fully understand what I read, but anyway, it probably wasnât earthshaking. And Iâm not thinking about whether it would have an effect on the case. As I said earlier, I just found it interesting.
Oh, well.
Iâm old now, and some people say old people should try to keep learning. I think I might also be learning a little bit about people. I sometimes wonder whether it might not be too wise to learn any more about people. For me, sometimes learning about people can be a bummer (and I include learning about myself in that statement; sometimes that can be a big bummer). But I guess I should try to learn a little bit anyway. And if it looks as if I might be learning a little too much about people (including myself) at one time, why, I can take a little break from it.
I hope things work out well for everyone.
Of course, Zain was making a particularly stupid decision. He was drunk. Drunks make stupid decisions. That is why the designated driver was needed. It is also why the designated driver should have 1) taken the keys if he was forced out of the car and 2) called his boss to let him know the situation.
But, this is beside my point.
The point is that if we treated any other member of our community in the same way that we are treating Zain, we would quickly stop becoming a community. Furthermore, there are several long-term expats that I have spoken with that avoid this forum specifically because this kind of behavior endures. We have become a toxic community when we should be something else.
And, in the case of Zain Dean, thereâs no point to it.
It is one thing to raise doubts and voice skepticism, but another thing all together to attack a manâs integrity, kicking him while heâs down.
Fine, upstanding citizens you are. I sincerely hope nothing ever goes awry in your perfect worlds while in country. Pray for no manâs downfall, and perhaps, no misfortune will be visited upon you.
[quote=âWookieeâ]It is one thing to raise doubts and voice skepticism, but another thing all together to attack a manâs integrity, kicking him while heâs down. [/quote]Voicing skepticism is in itself attacking his integrity.
The way I see it, some posters are screaming injustice but Iâm suspicious. I have explained where my suspicions lie and Iâve also explained that it is possible to have a guilty verdict based on the evidence we know about.
Posters who know him personally all agree that heâs being framed. If what we read in this thread is true, it would appear that lawful procedures werenât followed, evidence was tampered with and witnesses have lied. Itâs enough to raise equal if not more suspicion.
I got caught up explaining how the evidence we know about plays against Dean. It looks like Iâm lynching him, but Iâm not. Some people say heâs guilty. Some people say heâs innocent. I tend to think he was convicted for something he didnât do, but I donât think heâs as innocent as he claims he is, either. If this is something I shouldnât post, then please advise.
[quote=âWookieeâ]It is one thing to raise doubts and voice skepticism, but another thing all together to attack a manâs integrity, kicking him while heâs down.
[/quote]
As far as the Mr. Dean supporters in this thread seem to be concerned, even a soft ball question is deemed a personal attack on his integrity, and no attempt to answer the question is made either. So now the supporters are making veiled threats of how they might react should any poster ask a question should they find themselves in legal trouble?
[quote=âMickâ]So now the supporters are making veiled threats of how they might react should any poster ask a question should they find themselves in legal trouble?[/quote]Donât be dramatic. No veiled threats have been made. 
Thats the vibe Iâm getting.
Its not like Im asking impossible questions like Robin who asks how can you be able to recall with such accuracy what happened before and after but be unconscious at the critical moment.
Im asking simple questions like did you immediately tell the police you ejected the KTV driver, and this apparently is making me a " internet vigilante"? Its a softball question that could be answered in one word. You would think Mr. Dean would welcome such a question so he could set the record straight.
Thats the vibe Iâm getting.
Its not like Im asking impossible questions like Robin who asks how can you be able to recall with such accuracy what happened before and after but be unconscious at the critical moment.
Im asking simple questions like did you immediately tell the police you ejected the KTV driver, and this apparently is making me a " internet vigilante"? Its a softball question that could be answered in one word. You would think Mr. Dean would welcome such a question so he could set the record straight.[/quote]
I didnât eject any driver. I asked for a driver to be provided. Why would I eject someone I asked for? I had been to a bar beforehand and asked for a driver. I thus did not eject anyone. (This was pointed out by sandman.) This is a simple question, and Iâm sorry, Iâm not a lawyer like Robin, so canât frame my question in legal-ize, but in terms of âcommon senseâ why would you kick out a driver you asked for? Why would I leave the KTV and ask for a driver and then ask them to leave the car one minute later ?!
EDIT: I think Mick is referring to me parking the car in the garage after the driver took me to a block of where I lived, in that case yes, I asked the driver to drop me off near my house.
In terms of the prosecution argument, did I eject the driver after leaving the KTV, of course I did not, for the reasons I mention above.
Please bear in mind, that NONE of the KTVâs staff statements were found to be true âin a court of lawâ, neither was there any âevidenceâ to show what they said was true.