Raymond Davis Case: Developing Story

[pak-marine]

Robbers in crowded markets use weapons for intimidation. They don't necessarily want to fire them which will cause unnecessary attention to their activities. So had he not had a gun and not fired it, the worst is he would have lost his possessions. Why did he fear for his life? Was it a knee jerk reaction that prompted him to draw his weapon? Or did he not want to part with his possessions? Sorry if I'm repeating anything already discussed in this long thread.

if those were killed were robbers than to fire back and kill those was infact a favour for us

 

[SEAL]

Raymond Davis, terrorist illegally in Pakistan

I think his a$$ is perfect for chitrool.
Raymond Davis admit your crime and tell the authorities about your mission and CIA terrorist activities in Pakistan.

 

[Abu Zolfiqar]

hey Eagle

be nice to your kids, old man, they'll be the ones paying for your retirement home


look at the bulletholes in the windshield a little closer

 

[VCheng]

"There's a Pakistan investigation. We will cooperate fully," he said.

That is the most important thing.

Regardless of the rhetoric flying around from both sides, I will WAIT for the investigation to be completed before saying anything.

 

[Shameel]

Here's what I know from a police source:

The two people Raymond Davis shot dead were returning from a court hearing where one of them was a witness in a murder case. One of the murder victim’s brother had been murdered a month ago and he was carrying a licensed pistol for his own protection, fearing for his own life. Raymond Davis, the US Consulate ‘Technical Advisor’, off-duty, comes out of a bank after withdrawing some money from an ATM machine. In a case of pure bad luck, the two guys on the motorcycle pass by his car as he drives away from the bank. At a traffic stop, Raymond sees the sidearm of one of the guys and pulls out his gun as a precuation thinking they either want to rob him or could be terrorists. In Lahore, people have a tendency to stare at foreigners because they are a novelty, especially in public. The guy on the motorcycle, who himself is paranoid about his own life, sees Raymond pull out his gun and grabs his own weapon for protection. He doesn't pull it out or fire at Raymond, just grabs it. At that moment Raymond, mistakenly thinking he's about to be fired upon and trained to pre-empt, fires shots through the windshield of his car at both the motorcycle guys killing both. They were shot from behind. He then takes pictures of the two dead people (to prove later that one of the dead guys was armed) and starts to leave the scene of the crime. At this moment eye-witnesses start to chase him. Raymond had already called for back up soon after the shots are fired. A back-up vehicle arrives in minutes and sees the traffic jam and takes the incoming lane on the wrong side to get to Raymond. In the process it hits two pedestrians, one of whom is killed. It then abandons the rescue plan and speeds away (i.e. hit and run). In the meantime a traffic warden and eyewitnesses stop Raymond’s car, which is blocked by a traffic jam. He hit a rickshaw while trying to get away and overturns it with four children inside it. This further infuriates an already agitated crowd. Raymond refuses to come out of his car telling the traffic warden the crowd would kill him. A couple of angry people shatter his rear window and one of his back lights. The traffic warden, sensing the mood of the crowd and in a move that probably saved Raymond from being lynched by the crowd, asks Raymond to move into the passenger seat and himself gets into Raymond’s driver seat and drives him to the nearest police station.

 

[architect_cobb]

The fact that it can be traced back to you, if I want to kill some to steal their mobile, Id rather not have anything traced back to me.

so if one robs you would he leave his licensed weapon with you as an exchange so that it could be traced back?

licenses are only helpful in hands of gentlemen, With robbers whether you have a license or not doesnt make a difference.

 

[Shameel]

Of course vehicles take bullets in the front windshield which then exist the rear window of the same vehicle.

A guy is shot at, windshield is hit three times, bullets pass through and knock out the rear window. Who wouldn't then shoot back?

I'm afraid you're wrong. Here's why:

(i) Raymond Davis fired at the motorcylists through the windshield of his car. 4 bullets hit one guy, 3 bullets hit the other guy. If you look at the picture of the windscreen, at first sight, it appears there are 5 holes, but if you look closely, some are double holes (where the bullets passed twice or thrice through the same spot). If the windshield holes were caused by the motorcyclists, Raymond would have been dead as they were bang in the centre of the driver's seat section of the windshield. If you shoot at a Honda Civic from a motorcyle from the front, the bullets cannot exit from the rear window because the guy on the motorcycle is sitting higher and you're pointing your gun downwards towards the front passengers. If the bullets miss the passengers in front, they will, at best, hit the rear seats, not the rear window. Go to a Honda showroom and see for yourself. There are no bullet holes in the front or rear seats of the vehicle.

(ii) The motorcyclists, only one of whom had a gun, didn't fire a single shot. The car has no bullet holes except the windshield ones, which were caused by Raymond's own shots from the inside.

(iii) No shots were fired towards the rear of the vehicle. The motorcylists were in front of the vehicle and were shot at towards the front.

(iv) The rear window was shattered by angry protestors, no bullets were fired through the rear window. ARY NEWS, which is a local TV news channel, has just shown new footage of the incident from atop a nearby building after the shooting in which Raymond's car is surrounded by an angry mob and the rear window is intact. Somone please find out if the ARY NEWS footage has been uploaded on YOUTUBE. The mob shattered the rear window.

 

[architect_cobb]

Here's what I know from a police source:

The two people Raymond Davis shot dead were returning from a court hearing where one of them was a witness in a murder case. One of the murder victim’s brother had been murdered a month ago and he was carrying a licensed pistol for his own protection, fearing for his own life.

so do you carry a gun each time you go to the court?

Raymond Davis, the US Consulate ‘Technical Advisor’, off-duty, comes out of a bank after withdrawing some money from an ATM machine. In a case of pure bad luck, the two guys on the motorcycle pass by his car as he drives away from the bank. At a traffic stop, Raymond sees the sidearm of one of the guys and pulls out his gun as a precuation thinking they either want to rob him or could be terrorists.

and what if one claims that certain group had been tracking him and him being an american would have been a trophy kill, chased him and on a signal wanted to kill/rob him.

Or what if these two were Ray's agents and had some kind of a tussle/disagreement with him on money and decided to settle it on the roads with guns?

Well yes I know this is all out of thin air but so is your story so till the time more facts are known neither of us is in a position to corroborate what actually happened. Since as I have mentioned earlier the suspect was not on a shooting rampage and not killing at random.

In Lahore, people have a tendency to stare at foreigners because they are a novelty, especially in public. The guy on the motorcycle, who himself is paranoid about his own life, sees Raymond pull out his gun and grabs his own weapon for protection. He doesn't pull it out or fire at Raymond, just grabs it. At that moment Raymond, mistakenly thinking he's about to be fired upon and trained to pre-empt, fires shots through the windshield of his car at both the motorcycle guys killing both. They were shot from behind. He then takes pictures of the two dead people (to prove later that one of the dead guys was armed) and starts to leave the scene of the crime. At this moment eye-witnesses start to chase him. Raymond had already called for back up soon after the shots are fired. A back-up vehicle arrives in minutes and sees the traffic jam and takes the incoming lane on the wrong side to get to Raymond. In the process it hits two pedestrians, one of whom is killed. It then abandons the rescue plan and speeds away (i.e. hit and run). In the meantime a traffic warden and eyewitnesses stop Raymond’s car, which is blocked by a traffic jam. He hit a rickshaw while trying to get away and overturns it with four children inside it. This further infuriates an already agitated crowd. Raymond refuses to come out of his car telling the traffic warden the crowd would kill him. A couple of angry people shatter his rear window and one of his back lights. The traffic warden, sensing the mood of the crowd and in a move that probably saved Raymond from being lynched by the crowd, asks Raymond to move into the passenger seat and himself gets into Raymond’s driver seat and drives him to the nearest police station.

and now that he is in custody, I don't know if he jumped to conclusions and had a knee jerk reaction but I can tell for sure that many people on this forum are for sure are jumping to one while nobody knows what happened for sure?

 

[Shameel]

so do you carry a gun each time you go to the court

Are you sure you live in Pakistan? In Pakistan, witnesses are murdered in court and near courts so it is very common to carry weapons to and from court. They don't enter the court rooms with the weapons, but to the court gates, yes.

 

[Shameel]

and now that he is in custody, I don't know if he jumped to conclusions and had a knee jerk reaction but I can tell for sure that many people on this forum are for sure are jumping to one while nobody knows what happened for sure?

This is a "discussion forum" where people have the right to formulate and express their opinions about events. If you don't like opinions, don't hang around discussion fora.

 

[architect_cobb]

Are you sure you live in Pakistan? In Pakistan, witnesses are murdered in court and near courts so it is very common to carry weapons to and from court. They don't enter the court rooms with the weapons, but to the court gates, yes.

so if an american pulls out a gun or carries one cause of what you just said he is wrong????

Dude you just contrdicted your previous posts.

 

[architect_cobb]

This is a "discussion forum" where people have the right to formulate and express their opinions about events. If you don't like opinions, don't hang around discussion fora.

No need to get overly emotional. Seems I touched a nerve there. Apparently you are the one who doesn't like my opinions here, I was just pointing out what was wrong with yours and thats what happens in a DISCUSSION FORUM.

 

[architect_cobb]

I'm afraid you're wrong. Here's why:

(i) 4 bullets hit one guy, 3 bullets hit the other guy. .

source of this information???

 

[pakdefender]

so if an american pulls out a gun or carries one cause of what you just said he is wrong????

Dude you just contrdicted your previous posts.

wow! I mean just WOW! the american was not just carrying the gun he USED it to KILL and not just the one who was carrying the gun but the one drivng the bike also AND his rat accomplice who ran over a bystander killing him as well!

There is no way this guy should be let off .. this is a clear cut case of murder and this guy must be prosecuted , convicted and sentenced.

 

[Shameel]

so if an american pulls out a gun or carries one cause of what you just said he is wrong????

Dude you just contrdicted your previous posts.

Dude, how exactly did I contradict my previous posts?

Did I say anything about the American not having the right to carry a weapon?

And now that you've raised the issue, for the record, in Pakistan, a gun license does not mean you can use it to kill a human being. If you kill somebody, you will be arrested (notwithstanding the license) and charged with First Degree Murder under Section 302 of the Pakistan Penal Code, 1860, and the onus will be on you to prove that you used it in self defence.