Amy Cooper tells her side of the story

Post Reply New Topic

Unfortunately, nuance is something that many are unable to deal with, preferring to see things in simple black and white terms - with their prejudices for/against particular sides on public display.

In the case of this incident, neither side was in the "right", but due to the way the media presented it, many fixate on "race" to the exclusion of all other factors and use this sole component of the incident to "justify" the conclusions they come to regarding it.

Given others had put forward similar descriptions of interactions with him that matched hers, unprompted, and prior to any charges being laid (or even investigation being announced), her account of what happened would seem credible...



The video only "corroborates" a small portion of the interaction - courts consider what occurred over the entire incident, and will include details about previous similar incidents involving either of the participants as well, not take a simplistic "we have a video of part of what occurred, and that is all we care about" approach.

As far as this case goes, a large portion relies on her former employer's claims of having conducted an investigation and the implication of racism they made against her - If this didn't occur (or was done without providing the "target" of the investigation to put forward their account of the incident), then Ms Cooper's case will be reasonably strong.

The filing for this case includes quite a lot of interesting information which will be considered by the judge, not simply a short video produced by a single participant in an incident which is favourable to themself. To assert that only this video would be considerd by a judge (or that this is all that "legally matters") demonstrates a complete lack of understanding of the legal system...

Personally, I'm interested in seeing how this case goes - the complaint lodged by\on behalf of Ms Cooper is persuasive, but it's hard to determine how likely she is to prevail without being able to see what her former employer presents in their defence (there are 2 sides to a story, after all, and they may have exculpatory evidence to present which counters certain of the claims in the case) as well as what comes out through discovery should it not be settled prior to this. After all, the video was very "persuasive" to some, yet the experienced prosecutors were unable to find evidence to support common assertions made regarding the interaction, when all the evidence regarding the incident (beyond the video) was considered as a whole...

Regardless of how her case goes, I hope it costs her former employer a significant amount of time, money, and general hassle, to discourage these rushes to judgment over internet drama.

Had the internet and mobile telephones been around in the 1950's, and the races of those involved reversed, I can imagine that similar reactions would have likely played out (though with more severe outcomes for the dogwalker) in the southern states of the U.S.A.

It would be interesting to know how many of those passing judgement here have in the past weaponised race against others, or, worse, used derogatory racial terms about people of a different race, yet feel "justified" in their moral stance on this case...

Some people have a reputation for not doing their research, and as a consequence, have little credibility.
This is not an opinion.
It is an observation.

I haven't seen anything/k to suggest the man was "yelling".
He made a sinister threat in the form of "You won't like what I am going to do", however.

The problem with some people, here, is that they are being hyperpartisan and have little respect for objectivity and the Truth.
I have no time for that.
I am the "Oracle of Truth" after all.

This is the first time I have heard about him yelling.
I am on the fence on this one.

Yes, the threat was sinister, and why he isn't being lambasted for this is a sign of left-wing cyclopianism.
I really have to wonder why it is so hard for some people to acknowledge there was fault on both sides.
Not doing so destroys their credibility.
Perhaps "objectivity" is a concept they haven't fully comprehended yet.

As a dog owner who luvs his kids, some stranger, and in this case, an aggressive, threatening stranger offering treats would freak me out.
People do leave bait around.

I have been threatened with having my kids poisoned, in the past, so I have zero tolerance for something like this.
The guy acted like a moron, no offence to the morons out there.

I'd agree, there's nothing to confirm one way or another whether he was "Yelling", but there is evidence that he had approached other dog walkers in a particular way, which suggests that it is probable:

Source: Exhibit "A" (page 26) of https://legalinsurrection.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Amy-Cooper-v.-Franklin-Templeton-Complaint.pdf

Given this pattern of reported behaviour, it is more likely than not that he did approach her in a threatening manner (whether "Yelling", or simply in an aggresive tone), rather than the "meek" persona presented in his video of the later portion of the interaction.

As a side note, it has been interesting to see how many people seem to believe it is perfectly acceptable for a male, in a secluded area, to tell a female that they "will do what I want to do and you're not going to like it", and that the female should be prepared to accept whatever may follow, rather than seeking help.

The incident does put me in mind of the "racist baby" video - so many people choose to judge an event on a small portion at the end, rather than being curious as to (or dismissive of) what led up to this.

I get the distinct impression that without the racial angle, this could just as easily have been a #MeToo incident, with Amy Cooper as the victim and Christian Cooper as the villain.

Exquisite irony.

That catchup, whatever, keeps on deleting what is written.
I can be bothered re-writing my argument.
Trust me, was insightful and very intelligent.

Or, as suggested elsewhere, had Ms Cooper been the birdwatcher and Mr Cooper the dogwalker (all other factors being the same), Ms Cooper would still likely be considered at "fault" in the interaction.

Most people are more interested in virtue signally than acknowledging an objective Truth.
Rather embarrassing.
Same old same old.
"Nothing to see, people, move along."

You would have to be an Olympic spin doctor to concoct a lone woman intimidating a fit larger male story, however.
Then again, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story.

Humanity.
What a pathetic beast.

I'll try that next time.

In what world is Christian Cooper a fit larger male?

He's a small-framed gentleman who's old enough to be Amy Cooper's father, and she's middle-aged.

But at no point did he ever say anything that could be construed as what Amy Cooper claimed. If she felt he was enough of a threat that she needed to call the cops, that's fine but she didn't need to say he was threatening her life. There's a man harassing me and my dog in the Ramble wouldn't have created the same response as there's an African-American man threatening my life and it wouldn't have sounded like she purposefully lied in order to use the threat of a violent police encounter as a weapon.

He probably shouldn't have been trying to enforce the bylaws even though it harms his hobby of bird-watching. He's been the head of ornithological societies and social advocacy groups, that might be relevant to why he was acting rather Karenesque on that matter.

If someone pulls out their phone and starts recording they're not likely to be a physical threat even if they might have been just a moment ago; it shows they're adopting a non-physical approach to the confrontation.

It's when someone's friend starts recording a physical confrontation you need to worry.