it's illegal to go to Macy's and look??
and there were 2600 people at the soccergame last Friday...and this accuser somehow spotted TB making "threatening gestures"? :roll:
If you worked at a public place like Macy's and there was someone that, for whatever reason, had a problem with you, and he came into your place of work to stare at you... that could be considered stalking or threatening... and while that is not a crime, it could have lead to the crime in question.
Who knows what is true and what is not... if TB was going to shop there, happened to see him, and stared him down for a little bit- no big deal. If he went there to specifically stare at him, there is a problem with that. It's boarderline stalking...
One correction... the mutual friend is not a "him". That may explain things better, and it may explain why a guy from ICC is hanging around Bradley. He is not a Bradley student.
Also, I am fairly certain this guy is not a Bradley soccer fan.
I agree that is does make a difference that it is a female mutual friend... could be a "lover's quarrel" of sorts. People to crazy things for women...
And one more clarification- It's my understanding that there was a Bradley fraternity party going on in Haussler Hall that was the reason TB was there. The altercation occurred outside of Haussler, but TB went back into the party.
This also makes like a little more clear. It seems as though the victim of the incident and TB were probably both there for a party.
Now if the victim came to start trouble with TB because he knew he was there, that is no different then TB going to his work or making threatening gestures to him at the soccer game. Both parties are in the wrong.
I am somewhat amused by references in the Dave Reynolds article about TB visiting Macy's, making gestures (whatever is meant by that?), or staring. When has any of that been a crime? Why is it even mentioned in the article, and why does anyone care?
It is circumstancial evidence (if true) that TB obviously had a problem with this guy, and probably vice versa. It may not be a crime but it is involved in, and related to, the reported crime that was committed. None of that may have been a crime, but it could have lead up to the crime in questions. Also, those things could be considered stalking under certain circumstances...
Not trying to start a fight here by any means, just voicing my opinion... Until all the facts come out, its basically a moot point. This guy could be making everything up and split his own lip for all we know... it also could be the case that TB had done this before and just now did the guy call the cops... its all speculation at this point
Edit: I am not sure if circumstancial evidence is the term I am looking for there... maybe something more like a contributing factor...