A woman bystander was struck during the gunfire exchange and was taken to the hospital with serious conditions. Gonzalez said the man was believed to have two open felony warrants.
the man refused to exit his vehicle and identified himself as a sovereign citizen. Deputies engaged the man in conversation for over an hour in an attempt to remove him from the vehicle.
It’s obviously relevant context. This situation wouldn’t exist if he wasn’t a sovidiot.
How this dude has so much support in this thread is beyond me. Literally the first thing he did was stepped out of his vehicle was announce that he identified as a sovereign citizen then proceeded to argue with the cops for over an hour. Then he drives off and gets in a shoot out.
How on earth is this dude’s sovcit announcement not relevant
The line between “imply” and “provide” is pretty damn razor thin here. The first thing this sovcit with 2 felonies did was announce he was a sovcit then proceed to argue with the police for over an hour before driving off not recognizing their authority. Then he got into a shootout with said law enforcement.
I mean this is “if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…” incarnate. We are not a court of law here. We can draw conclusions based on this.
It’s providing the motive.
It’s obviously relevant context. This situation wouldn’t exist if he wasn’t a sovidiot.
How this dude has so much support in this thread is beyond me. Literally the first thing he did was stepped out of his vehicle was announce that he identified as a sovereign citizen then proceeded to argue with the cops for over an hour. Then he drives off and gets in a shoot out.
How on earth is this dude’s sovcit announcement not relevant
Its implying a motive
The line between “imply” and “provide” is pretty damn razor thin here. The first thing this sovcit with 2 felonies did was announce he was a sovcit then proceed to argue with the police for over an hour before driving off not recognizing their authority. Then he got into a shootout with said law enforcement.
I mean this is “if it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck…” incarnate. We are not a court of law here. We can draw conclusions based on this.