Dead Black Man with Rope Around his Neck "Not Lynched", says Sherrif

[HansMustermann]

OK. I'd have to look through the laws on all the states, but... maybe it's not legal in some of the states he would be driving through? Like, still classified as a narcotic, and a stop by a state trooper could land his ass in jail? Also, the company he was delivering for may have a "no dope in the rig while you are working for us" policy. I don't think that's so far-fetched.

So while he is staying over in bumble **** North Carolina, he asks around to see where he can get a little nightcap. He asks exactly the wrong person.

Not according to the maps I've seen, but even then, I don't see much connection, if he wasn't going to buy for the whole road back. Just go to sleep, and make a stop tomorrow in Virginia where it's legal, or whatever. Or even if he needs a nightcap, I mean, according to Google maps, it's 36 minutes from Henderson NC to Clarksville VA, where it's been legal since 2021. It probably takes more time to find a dealer as a stranger and arrange a meeting, than to drive 36 minutes to a place you can get it legally and safely and is along a reasonable route back to Chicago IL. I'm pretty sure most bosses won't bust your ass over "I thought I could still drive another half an hour of the route today"

 

[Thermal]

Not according to the maps I've seen, but even then, I don't see much connection, if he wasn't going to buy for the whole road back. Just go to sleep, and make a stop tomorrow in Virginia where it's legal, or whatever. Or even if he needs a nightcap, I mean, according to Google maps, it's 36 minutes from Henderson NC to Clarksville VA, where it's been legal since 2021. It probably takes more time to find a dealer as a stranger and arrange a meeting, than to drive 36 minutes to a place you can get it legally and safely and is along a reasonable route back to Chicago IL

See my eta. The hommes just drove from Illinois to NC and made his delivery. He's now off the deliverer's clock and can enjoy a little down time. Some guys drink a couple, some guys blow a bone. Sounds like a perfectly normal evening to me.

{Eta: when you buy papers at a smoke shop, that's usually a dynamite place to say "hey man, you know anybody?" It's not like Mission: Impossible to go out in search of a shady dealer in the wilds}

But looked at your way: why did he otherwise buy rolling papers and set them down next to him at all? Practicing his origami game, maybe?

 

[HansMustermann]

I'm still saying that if I wanted to enjoy some time off, I would probably do the 36 minute drive to where I can do it legally and safely, and doubly so when I can sell that trip to the boss as part of the route (back) and get paid for it. I'm pretty sure it would take me more than half an hour to find a dealer as a stranger in a place where it's illegal.

To use your going to the bar to relax analogy, it's like if instead of spending half an hour worth of a walk there and back to get my vodka fix at the local store, I'd spend half the evening trying to arrange a meeting in the woods with an illegal moonshine brewer.

I mean, it's certainly possible, but it's a very weird choice.

$#!&, that reminds me, I'm out of vodka! Guess which of the two options I'll take.

 

[Thermal]

So you're sticking with the Origami Hypothesis for why he bought rolling papers? Or maybe it was a Blue Light Special sale that was too good to pass up, so he bought them in advance of buying his weed in another state?

I guess I'm the only one who finds the unopened rolling papers to have a specific meaning?

And hell ya man, bottoms up!

Eta: and regarding this:

I'm pretty sure most bosses won't bust your ass over "I thought I could still drive another half an hour of the route today"

In the states, your driving hours are deadly serious. Trucker buddy of mine once had to pay a $5000 US fine for a single offense of going over the drivable hours line. They really, really don't want rig drivers falling asleep at the wheel

 

[HansMustermann]

Well, I can go that route too. Because that's not the single detail that is weird for one hypothesis or the other. If you're gonna take the paper to be what breaks a hypothesis, then I'm gonna use the same kind of details to poke holes in yours:

Then why did he buy a rope and several packs of rolling paper and took them with him to buy a few grams of weed? Like, what, was he going to roll the most comically oversized mega-joint and tie it with that rope? I mean, he gets out of the truck and leaves everything in it, including ID and whatnot, but feels a need to take the rope along to buy weed? Just one pack of rolling paper in a pocket wasn't enough?

Or in your scenario where someone marches him at gun point into the woods to rob and lynch him, like... wait, what? What was the plan there? He rummages in the guy's bag to find a rope to kill him with? Why not just shoot him? Who comes up with a plan to lynch some random guy, that hinges on the guy bringing his own rope?

Or why march him at gunpoint into the woods at all. If the place is secluded enough to let you march a guy at gunpoint, and all you want is his money and cell phone (which IIRC apparently was not taken), why not just rob him there and then? If you've already pulled out a gun, it's far quicker to go, "YO! Hand over your money and your phone, and no funny moves!"

And if it's a robbery, why escalate it from something that probably isn't even at the level of larceny, to first degree murder? Which if you took the time to find a rope to strangle him with, it would be first degree for almost any jury. And why oh why escalate that especially in a state like North Carolina, which still has the death penalty for murder?

Some years ago, I was reading an interview with an actual FBI agent, and he was saying that that kind of escalation is very rare even in actual hard drug deals in the desert, involving briefcases full of money and trunks full of cocaine. When one of the groups flashes a badge and says "FREEZE! FBI!" it almost never escalates into a gun fight. Because even actual drug cartel goons aren't stupid enough to escalate straight to life in prison or death penalty.

 

[HansMustermann]

BUTT, ok, so let's address the wrapping papers specifically.

How do you even know it was for weed? Not only I was rolling my own tobacco cigs when I was a poor-ish kid in college, but many of my coworkers still do. And I'm talking about highly paid IT architecture consultants, but when they go to the designated smoking area, out comes a pack of tobacco and one of rolling paper.

It seems to me like a much more parsimonious explanation than assuming he was going for an illegal drug deal, especially since there was one freshly opened pack of wraps, is that the poor guy just rolled a normal tobacco cigarette before... whatever happened. Maybe smoked it on the way there. Whether he offed himself or someone offed him, I see no reason to slander his good name by assuming he MUST have been trying to score some illegal weed.

If only because, if we're gonna talk origami, there was no reason for him to open one of the packs of wraps, if he had nothing yet to roll one of those papers around.

 

[Thermal]

Well, I can go that route too. Because that's not the single detail that is weird for one hypothesis or the other. If you're gonna take the paper to be what breaks a hypothesis, then I'm gonna use the same kind of details to poke holes in yours:

What are you talking about? It doesn't break anything. It's just fairly otherwise inexplicable, and might account for what was going on, lacking anything else.

Then why did he buy a rope

He just dropped off a long distance haul. I think it's the most normal thing in the world to need some rope to secure loose junk left from the payload delivery.

and several packs of rolling paper and took them with him to buy a few grams of weed?

I didn't see a quantity mentioned? Just thatthey were unopened, in the OP article. If he is a regular smoker, why in the world not by in quantity when you are picking some up?

Or in your scenario where someone marches him at gun point into the woods to rob and lynch him, like... then what? What was the plan there? He rummages in the guy's bag to find a rope to kill him with? Why not just shoot him?

Gunshots attract attention for miles around in a rural area. Strangling doesn't. You cant even scream.

Plus i was just pointing out that when faced with a hypothetical murderer, it makes a hell of a lot more sense to get yaself some privacy, rather than the shoulder of the freaking road.

Or why march him at gunpoint into the woods at all. If the place is secluded enough to let you march a guy at gunpoint, and all you want is his money and cell phone (which IIRC apparently was not taken), why not just rob him there and then? If you've already pulled out a gun, it's far quicker to go, "YO! Hand over your money and your phone, and no funny moves!"

And if it's a robbery, why escalate it from something that probably isn't even at the level of larceny, to first degree murder? Which if you took the time to find a rope to strangle him with, it would be first degree for almost any jury. And why oh why escalate that especially in a state like North Carolina, which still has the death penalty for murder?

If it was in fact a couple good ol boys who intended, opprtunistically or otherwise, to kill a stranger blowing through town, they would do just that. Or if the hommes was in fact carrying something of significant value, in or out of the truck (touching on your ton of papers posit), could be a leave no witnesses thing.

Some years ago, I was reading an interview with an actual FBI agent, and he was saying that that kind of escalation is very rare even in actual hard drug deals in the desert, involving briefcases full of money and trunks full of cocaine. When one of the groups flashes a badge and says "FREEZE! FBI!" it almost never escalates into a gun fight. Because even actual drug cartel goons aren't stupid enough to escalate straight to life in prison or death penalty.

Again, I was mostly arguing against the suicide supposition being put forth by posters here. I feel pretty confident it was a murder, for whatever reasons. Barring new info, it looks more like someone killed him rather than he bought his suicide rope, then stopped to stock up on rolling papers with nothing to smoke and didn’t use them anyway, then garroted himself to death.

 

[Thermal]

BUTT, ok, so let's address the wrapping papers specifically.

How do you even know it was for weed? Not only I was rolling my own tobacco cigs when I was a poor-ish kid in college, but many of my coworkers still do. And I'm talking about highly paid IT architecture consultants, but when they go to the designated smoking area, out comes a pack of tobacco and one of rolling paper.

It seems to me like a much more parsimonious explanation than assuming he was going for an illegal drug deal, especially since there was one freshly opened pack of wraps, is that the poor guy just rolled a normal tobacco cigarette before... whatever happened. Maybe smoked it on the way there. Whether he offed himself or someone offed him, I see no reason to slander his good name by assuming he MUST have been trying to score some illegal weed.

If only because, if we're gonna talk origami, there was no reason for him to open one of the packs of wraps, if he had nothing yet to roll one of those papers around.

Ya I'm sure he bought colored rolling papers because he was really a cowboy. Come on man. This is 21st century America.

Eta: and the articles say specifically that the pack of rolling papers was unopened. Are you confusing the wrappings from the rope that police found with that or something?

 

[HansMustermann]

He just dropped off a long distance haul. I think it's the most normal thing in the world to need some rope to secure loose junk left from the payload delivery.

Except that makes it even more inexplicable why he'd feel a need to bring it along to buy weed, instead of just doing that, or leaving it in the truck for next day when he gets around to it.

I didn't see a quantity mentioned? Just thatthey were unopened, in the OP article. If he is a regular smoker, why in the world not by in quantity when you are picking some up?

No, one of them was specifically mentioned as opened, some were not. So, at the very least, more than one.

 

[Thermal]

Except that makes it even more inexplicable why he'd feel a need to bring it along to buy weed, instead of just doing that, or leaving it in the truck for next day when he gets around to it.

Dude... his delivery, according to the OP, was to that exact ******* Walmart. Why in the name of God would you drive around with something that needed to be secured and pick up rope later if you were literally right at the ******* place for cheap rope that you needed shortly?

{Eta: I think I see your point, misunderstood at first. If he brought the rope for suicide, why bring accessory papers to leave around at all? Why buy a lot when you were going to kill yourself in a few minutes? And if you say he wasn't going to kill himself, why bring rope at all, in addition to heaping piles of papers?}

No, one of them was specifically mentioned as opened, some were not. So, at the very least, more than one.

Which article are you seeing that in, and why is it more credible than the others that report one and unopened?

Eta: here's the quote from the newobserver article, and the heraldsun says the same, almost verbatim. The OP says nothing:

At the man’s feet, investigators found ripped paper wrapping which displayed the brand of the blue rope and Walmart.com, the warrant states. Unopened “colors sheet wraps” which are used for smoking, were also found.

The ripped paper wrapping was from the rope packaging. No quantity on the rolling papers, but specifically unopened.

 

[HansMustermann]

Ya I'm sure he bought colored rolling papers because he was really a cowboy. Come on man. This is 21st century America.

I've rolled cigarettes out of graph paper before, and I wasn't trying to be the Maths Mafia or anything. It was just cheaper than the regular kind

But anyway, my point was, to quote Dr Carrington from Fallout 4: "If you chain too many assumptions together, you rarely get what you bargained for."

Realistically, none of us know if it was suicide or homicide. And I don't think anyone argued that it's sure it's suicide. Trying too hard to tie assumption X with assumption Y to assumption Z, might not get what you bargained for.

 

[Thermal]

I've rolled cigarettes out of graph paper before, and I wasn't trying to be the Maths Mafia or anything. It was just cheaper than the regular kind

And I once had a cigarette rolling machine, filters and everything. Of course, I was using it to camouflage other smokables that you could rip the filter off and enjoy. But that's another story.

But again, in 21st century America, pretty much no Chicagoean 21 year Olds are A) rolling their own tobacco, B)commercial long hail delivery drivers so broke they roll their own, C) smoke unfiltered cigarettes, or D) ******* smoke cigarettes at all, lol.

But anyway, my point was, to quote Dr Carrington from Fallout 4: "If you chain too many assumptions together, you rarely get what you bargained for."

Realistically, none of us know if it was suicide or homicide. And I don't think anyone argued that it's sure it's suicide. Trying too hard to tie assumption X with assumption Y to assumption Z, might not get what you bargained for.

Two posters argued straight up that it looked more like suicide. Given the meager evidence, I think homicide is far more likely, and suicide almost ridiculous.

Eta: all y'all are making far, far more assumptions than I am. I'm fitting the reported facts together. Stopping to buy rolling papers, when you have nothing reported to smoke, after you bought your suicide rope, then leaving them sit next to you while you commit your nearly impossible self-strangulation makes no sense at all. It only makes sense if he planned to smoke something, then and there.

He was not reported to be "tied to the tree", as argued upthread by others. He is reported to have a rope with no knots in it around his neck. That's it. Sounds more to me like someone else strangled him with it.

 

[Ron Obvious]

Interesting speculation. But I'm guessing that if the dead man hadn't been black, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place.

 

[Thermal]

Interesting speculation. But I'm guessing that if the dead man hadn't been black, we wouldn't be having this discussion in the first place.

True. But the whole "dead black man with a rope around his neck against a tree in a southern state" is an image too familiar to ignore.

Eta: and the cops saying "no man its not what it looks like" when the investigation has barely begun is super suspicious. As is their refusal to let the survivors see his body

 

[rdwight]

Where are you seeeing that? The OP article and others don't say anything (thar I saw) about the rope being wrapped around the tree. They say only that it was around his neck.

Yup, not sure where I read that but I am not seeing it in the news reports I opened so assume I confused hear say on social media vs confirmed.

So he brought a white bag big enough to be seen on camera, and then...ate the bag full of pot instead of smoking it? The papers he just bought were reported to be unopened.

im saying the bag he bought the rope and papers in, not any weed involved. Why would he have the papers? Cause they were already in the bag. Pretty straight forward.

I don't know how "deep in the woods" he was, and I don't see much to indicate how far back he was. If he was going off road, it's possible (pure speculation) that if he met someone who he thought he was buying weed from, might that person pulled a weapon and marched him back away from civilization a bit? An out of state trucker, alone, would mean an easy robbery target, and likely have goodies that they are living on in their rig (cash, personal electronics, etc).

I never said deep in the woods. I said hide in the woods. If they walked him off at gun point, you would think it would be visible in the video the police reference. If they were going to bother doing this murder robbery, but not willing to get out of easy sight on the main road, still seems dumb. Why not just do in in the truck?

So he walked off away from his wallet and truck for some reason to do a drug deal just out of camera shot, luckily for the dealer, at night for some bud. I just don't see it. Add in bringing you bag of rope with you, and again it just doesn't make sense.

To you, this seems out of place for suicide. Recently around here a guy brought his family on vacation. Walked out the place, and went to a crawlspace in a house near by and offed himself. Why did he leave the house? Why wait until he was on vacation with his family? Why do it where he did? Cause suicide doesn't make sense a lot of the times, and trying to rationalize it can push you to conspiracy thinking.

 

[Myriad]

One quick point, without any claim it’s actually relevant here.

Why not just buy legal weed in the next state, when that’s so much easier? It’s not, if you can be fired for using legal weed and your vehicle has GPS and cameras that your employer can monitor or review.

 

[Checkmite]

And I once had a cigarette rolling machine, filters and everything. Of course, I was using it to camouflage other smokables that you could rip the filter off and enjoy. But that's another story.

But again, in 21st century America, pretty much no Chicagoean 21 year Olds are A) rolling their own tobacco, B)commercial long hail delivery drivers so broke they roll their own, C) smoke unfiltered cigarettes, or D) ******* smoke cigarettes at all, lol.

Your greatest weakness is your almost impressive refusal to consider anything outside your personal experience as plausible, nearly to the point of practically calling other people liars when they try to describe theirs. A poster describes the common practice of poor college kids rolling their own cigarettes by sharing his personal experience doing just that and your response is OH ARE WE COWBOYS NOW IN 2024, YEE-HAW ROFL. Really now.

Are you a 21-year-old from Chicago? I strongly suspect not, so I'm curious to learn what your nexus is to authoritative knowledge about what 21-year-old Chicagoans definitely are and aren't doing "in 21st century America" that justifies the confidence with which you are trying to shut down anyone who disagrees.

 

[Thermal]

Yup, not sure where I read that but I am not seeing it in the news reports I opened so assume I confused hear say on social media vs confirmed.

No problem, thanks for clarifying.

im saying the bag he bought the rope and papers in, not any weed involved. Why would he have the papers? Cause they were already in the bag. Pretty straight forward.

When your post said "he had the stuff in the bag", I read that as "the weed". I get you now.

So ok. He bought his suicide rope, and then... he stops to stock up on rolling papers for smokables he doesn't have? Then takes them out of the bag (that police didn't report finding either) and sets them down at his feet unopened? Seems a little disjointed for someone who was otherwise behaving normally, operating self checkouts, driving his rig around, etc.

I never said deep in the woods. I said hide in the woods.

Fair enough. But not much difference.

If they walked him off at gun point, you would think it would be visible in the video the police reference.

Why? It was the surveillance camera for the Trailer repair place. Why would it be pointed half a football field down the road? It caught Magee in their lot, heading "in the direction" where he was found the next day, 70 yards away.

If they were going to bother doing this murder robbery, but not willing to get out of easy sight on the main road, still seems dumb. Why not just do in in the truck?

Directly under the surveillance camera, you mean?

So he walked off away from his wallet and truck for some reason to do a drug deal just out of camera shot, luckily for the dealer, at night for some bud. I just don't see it. Add in bringing you bag of rope with you, and again it just doesn't make sense.

Agreed, none of it makes sense. Speculating a bunch more (just to get the facts to fit): what if he was the seller, not the buyer? Bought some rope he needed anyway and now had a bag, picked up papers to light one up, asks the smoke shop if anyone was looking to buy, smoke shop guy recommends someone down the road. Magee loads up some weed from his truck, puts it in the bag, and walks over (really don't want to drive up in a rig, draws attention). Buyers are psychos and kill him, taking the (missing from evidence) bag with the pot with them.

Of course, I'm not saying this happened. But it fits the available facts in their entirety with nothing left that "doesn't make sense".

To you, this seems out of place for suicide. Recently around here a guy brought his family on vacation. Walked out the place, and went to a crawlspace in a house near by and offed himself. Why did he leave the house? Why wait until he was on vacation with his family? Why do it where he did? Cause suicide doesn't make sense a lot of the times, and trying to rationalize it can push you to conspiracy thinking.

No, this answer's in my wheelhouse. If you love your family, you don't die at home if you can help it. You want them to always feel dread in the place where you did it and had to clean up after your corpse? In their own ******* home? You do it elsewhere.

I thought I was having a heart attack once at home (prob just bad heartburn, lol). I right away stumbled out the front door and down the street where my family doesn't usually head (nothing interesting in that direction, as opposed to the other three). It was specifically so they wouldn't have to deal with my corpse on the living room where they lived.

 

[Thermal]

Your greatest weakness is your almost impressive refusal to consider anything outside your personal experience as plausible, nearly to the point of practically calling other people liars when they try to describe theirs. A poster describes the common practice of poor college kids rolling their own cigarettes by sharing his personal experience doing just that and your response is OH ARE WE COWBOYS NOW IN 2024, YEE-HAW ROFL. Really now.

Are you a 21-year-old from Chicago? I strongly suspect not, so I'm curious to learn what your nexus is to authoritative knowledge about what 21-year-old Chicagoans definitely are and aren't doing "in 21st century America" that justifies the confidence with which you are trying to shut down anyone who disagrees.

What Hans experienced in 20th century Germany (I think?) does not necessarily compare to 21st century American big city lifestyles.

If you are aware of any evidence of young Chicago guys rolling their own tabaccy smokes nowadays, I'm all ears. Otherwise I'm laughing at the very idea. Because I'm not utterly oblivious in this country.

Eta: seriously man, you're not this ******* stupid. Not only has smoking plummeted in the last 15 years or so, but black guys are well known for smoking Newports (menthol filters) if they smoke at all. I challenge you to come up with something to support the idea that young Chicago brothers are hand rolling their own tobacco cigarettes in any numbers. Or just a social media post. Something. Anything. It's ******* ridiculous.

And how am I so sure? Because if it actually happened, social media would be reporting on this super weird trend. And I mean super wildly weird.

 

[Thermal]

《Oops, misread》

 

[HansMustermann]

Look mate, let me illustrate what's wrong with stringing too many assumptions together. And it's an example I've used before, but hey, I'm lazy.

So let's say I'm visiting me ol' pal and drinking buddy, Trevor McGregor in Scotland. So I take a flight, and...

1. It's a friday. I know that Trevor likes to cut work short on fridays. Like most fridays, you'd be lucky to find him at work by 1 PM.

2. It's probably rainy. I mean, have you seen Scotland in autumn?

3. When it rains, me ol' pal Trevor usually doesn't have an umbrella and likes to take shelter in a pub. Man after me ol' heart.

4. Trevor, surprisingly enough for a Scot doesn't hold his booze well. He usually ends up downing a mug or shot too many, and becoming the violent kind of drunk.

5. Unfortunately, he's a wee scrawny lad. Going violent, usually gets him knocked out on his ass.

6. And when that happens, he usually gets taken to St Mary's hospital.

So, being a smart fellow, I don't call for a taxi to his home, but to St Mary's hospital. I just know that the scrawny old drunk will be there

Now let's even assume that all of those assumptions are about 80% likely to be true. Based in evidence, even. Like, I've chatted to the old boy for years, been in the same online guild for a decade, I KNOW that he cuts work short 4 fridays out of 5, ok?

The problem is that for all of that to be true, the probability is 0.8*0.8*0.8*0.8*0.8*0.8=0.26. If I think I'll surprise him at the St Mary hospital, I'm 3 times as likely to be wrong as to be right

 

[Thermal]

Totally get all that. But it's not what's going on. For starters, when know exactly where the brother ended up, lol. We're just trying to work out how he got there. So we're not predicting, as you claim. We are more reverse engineering.

But not even that. I'm challenging a narrative, as I do day and night. The narrative is full of holes. I am speculating on how those holes might be filled within the facts as we know them. Importantly: nothing more than that. A poster says "it's likely he committed suicide." I point out thee is no reason to conclude that, and lobby for one of a dozen scenarios why we shouldn't.

Speaking of facts, you've been ducking questions. The most recent, I think was you correcting me on his use and (according to you) high volume of rolling papers. Are you still standing behind your assertion that I am wrong? Y'all kinda abruptly changed the subject, brah.

Eta: you overlooked in your oddsmaking that you could be wrong on any number of the starting assumptions and Trevor could still end up in the same place at the end of the night. Like, whether he stopped work at 1 or 5 could easily land him in the same place at the same time.

But again, I'm not lobbying that I'm right. Almost the opposite: I'm lobbying that a variety of scenarios could be right, by pointing out a counter narrative that fits the facts better. Only two things I feel fairly confident about: this was not a suicide, based on the facts as-is, and subject to change. And the brother wasn't hand rolling his smokes.

 

[novaphile]

While we're making up stories, how about this one?

The guy was running out of rolling papers so he bought some.

For reasons unknown, strangled himself against the tree.

Person or persons unknown find him tied to the tree, undo the rope and try to help him.

Being unable to help, they flee the scene, and they, or others contact the police.

(There are many, many, reasons why a person would not want to have dealings with the police in the USA.)

 

[Thermal]

While we're making up stories, how about this one?

The guy was running out of rolling papers so he bought some.

For reasons unknown, strangled himself against the tree.

Person or persons unknown find him tied to the tree, undo the rope and try to help him.

Being unable to help, they flee the scene, and they, or others contact the police.

(There are many, many, reasons why a person would not want to have dealings with the police in the USA.)

You make my point for me.

 

[Thermal]

....The guy was running out of rolling papers so he bought some.

For reasons unknown, strangled himself against the tree.

Although tbf, the second makes dead zero sense following the first (you don't strangle yourself to death after making sure you are stocked up on rolling papers for the future) and the second is pretty much entirely what we are trying to figure out.

 

[novaphile]

Although tbf, the second makes dead zero sense following the first (you don't strangle yourself to death after making sure you are stocked up on rolling papers for the future) and the second is pretty much entirely what we are trying to figure out.

Well, back in the day, I used to smoke 'rollies'.

Typically I'd buy a pack of papers at the same time that I bought tobacco.

One tobacconist told me a joke, that he sold lots of extra tobacco to people if he told them, that he had to record the name and address of anyone that bought papers alone...



But, sometimes I'd buy papers on impulse, because I knew I was running out.

(In the case of this guy, maybe he wasn't thinking clearly at all?)

In recent times, there have been a number of cases of people who strangled, while performing a lone sex act. Maybe this guy just liked doing it in the woods?

He could easily have been doing that, or as others suggested, doing a Jussie, and made a mistake, that led to asphyxiation and death.

 

[Checkmite]

Eta: seriously man, you're not this ******* stupid. Not only has smoking plummeted in the last 15 years or so, but black guys are well known for smoking Newports (menthol filters) if they smoke at all.

That's what you went with? "Everyone knows the blacks smoke Newports"?

 

[Thermal]

That's what you went with? "Everyone knows the blacks smoke Newports"?

No, I went with the rest of the post that you took the extra time to snip out.

But if that is the extent of your argumentation, feast your eyes on this article in Wikipedia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_marketing_targeting_African_Americans

Behold: 90% of black smokers smoke menthols, and of smokers under 25 years old, a whopping 84% smoke Newport brand. Kool has a smallish share,and Marlboro bringing up the rear in single digit representation.

So when I say that a young black men are well-known for smoking Newports, I am spot-*******-on, baby. As far as your brilliant observation that young black men around Chicago are rollin' their own tabaccy, you wanna venture a guess how many are reported? Give you a hint: starts with a zero... ends with a ".0%".

This level of dumb-ass argumentation is beneath you, man. Knock it off.

 

[Thermal]

...sometimes I'd buy papers on impulse, because I knew I was running out.

(In the case of this guy, maybe he wasn't thinking clearly at all?)

Possible. He sure seemed perfectly capable and moving around normally, though, operating self checkout with his card and driving his big rig and all.

In recent times, there have been a number of cases of people who strangled, while performing a lone sex act. Maybe this guy just liked doing it in the woods?

Again, surely possible. Sex acts would normally include dropping trou, if I understand that jazz correctly? Seems like the sheriff would have made note of that.

He could easily have been doing that, or as others suggested, doing a Jussie, and made a mistake, that led to asphyxiation and death.

Much more likely IMO, and not in conflict with any known facts. Chicago guy passing through a southern state and wants to get insta-famous for a bit. Accounts well for why he was buying the rope and carrying it around while evidently making plans for the future.

 

[Trausti]

It's so interesting how a thread about suicide leaps off to Blacks people smoking menthols.

 

[Ron Obvious]

It's so interesting how a thread about suicide leaps off to Blacks people smoking menthols.

Well, smoking is a slow form of suicide. I think I've read that menthols (my father referred to them as "polar bear farts") are particularly unhealthy.

 

[Thermal]

It's so interesting how a thread about suicide leaps off to Blacks people smoking menthols.

It's not a thread about suicide. Although smoking menthol cigarettes probably counts as suicide.

ETA: my ass got ninja'd

 

[Trausti]

Well, smoking is a slow form of suicide. I think I've read that menthols (my father referred to them as "polar bear farts") are particularly unhealthy.

Perhaps not as bad as the micronite filter, but enough of this odd derail.

 

[PitPat]

I don't know if it was suicide or lynching, but I'd rather have the NC SBI and AG (which appears happening) determine it than local authorities. And it's a big enough story to not evade scrutiny.

Suicide by hanging is pretty common. Of course a black man hanging from a tree invokes a thought of lynching. It's only been a couple of days so it's easy to speculate.

 

[HansMustermann]

While the percentage does seem to be much lower than in other countries, according to Wiki, 6.7 percent of the USA rolls their own cigarettes. So, no, it's not 0.0%.

 

[Checkmite]

No, I went with the rest of the post that you took the extra time to snip out.

I can assure you it took no substantial time.

But if that is the extent of your argumentation, feast your eyes on this article in Wikipedia:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tobacco_marketing_targeting_African_Americans

Behold: 90% of black smokers smoke menthols, and of smokers under 25 years old, a whopping 84% smoke Newport brand. Kool has a smallish share,and Marlboro bringing up the rear in single digit representation.

So when I say that a young black men are well-known for smoking Newports, I am spot-*******-on, baby.

I'm still waiting for you to reveal how this article which cites statistics from 2010 proves it's so implausible that a truck driver in North Carolina could have rolled his own cigarettes in 2024 that you feel comfortable declaring the suggestion "stupid" and personally attacking forum members who suggest it as making "dumb-ass arguments".

As far as your brilliant observation that young black men around Chicago are rollin' their own tabaccy, you wanna venture a guess how many are reported? Give you a hint: starts with a zero... ends with a ".0%".

That is a creative but certainly misleading way of pointing out that the article you link contains no statistics about rolled cigarettes whatsoever and in fact never even addresses them. Yes, technically "not included in the report" can be phrased as "0% reported", but nobody will believe that makes a positive case for your argument as you suggest here.

This level of dumb-ass argumentation is beneath you, man. Knock it off.

This kind of vapid performance where you disguise a personal insult as pretend-concern and then order them to quit making arguments you disapprove of is most certainly not beneath you, since it seems to be your favorite debate-stopping tactic these days; but it fools no one. It is presumptuous and slimy. I do not know the cause of your slow devolution into this expletive-laden personalized invective of late, but it's becoming a signature of your posting style. If you keep calling people with different ideas "dumb-ass", "stupid", "******* stupid", and so on (and don't bother with the "I'm talking about your arguments not you" prevarication, kindly save the rules-lawyering for the tabletop nerds), even the people who are willing to overlook your habit of lapsing into stereotyped "black speak" in any thread involving an African-American subject are eventually going to stop trying to talk to you. If that's the whole plan then okay, but if it's not, you need to take a step back and consider how you sound to the people you're trying to communicate with.

 

[HansMustermann]

True. But the whole "dead black man with a rope around his neck against a tree in a southern state" is an image too familiar to ignore.

But actually that would typically involve another element you ignore: some signs of struggle, defensive injuries or whatnot. Which are not present in this case.

In fact most historical cases of lynching were as cruel to the victim as they could. They'd at the very least beat him up to make a case, but some went even above and beyond that into nightmare fuel territory. Again, no sign of that.

Also, none required the victim to bring his own <bleep>ing rope for the event

Also, "southern state" is vague. The actual place in the south is one that's about half-way between over two thirds black, and just under three quarters black. And has a black sheriff. You can't use the super-category to override the specifics.

Eta: and the cops saying "no man its not what it looks like" when the investigation has barely begun is super suspicious. As is their refusal to let the survivors see his body

It's not at all suspicious or even abnormal, when notifying the next of kin, to say something preliminary like "it looks like a suicide, but we're still investigating" when they ask how. Like, what's even the alternative? Tell them it's a mystery and nobody knows anything, until the investigation is over? Yeah, that ought to calm them down

 

[Thermal]

I can assure you it took no substantial time.

I'm still waiting for you to reveal how this article which cites statistics from 2010 proves it's so implausible that a truck driver in North Carolina could have rolled his own cigarettes in 2024 that you feel comfortable declaring the suggestion "stupid" and personally attacking forum members who suggest it as making "dumb-ass arguments".

Full disclosure: I tried like hell to find a single reported instance of a young black American rolling his own tabaccy cigarettes. Not just Chicago dwelling under 25 year olds: any black American under 40. In this nation of a third of a billion, of which 97% have an Internet abled device, I could not find a single reference. Older men (mostly white), sure. Even a hipster market of again almost entirely whites, sure. But not one young black guy. I honestly expected to find some niche Facebook group or subreddit, but nada

And I was ready to compare the odds of how many there were in contrast to my belief that they are essentially non existent. But I need to find at least one to argue that they are "virtually" non existent, compared to my claim that 84% of young black smokers smoke Newports, followed by Kools and a smidge using Marlboro. But nothing. So I stand behind my claim: young black men are known for being Newport smokers, and roll your own young black smokers don't exist (statistically). Again, if you have anything to refute that, I will happily concede the point.
.

That is a creative but certainly misleading way of pointing out that the article you link contains no statistics about rolled cigarettes whatsoever and in fact never even addresses them. Yes, technically "not included in the report" can be phrased as "0% reported", but nobody will believe that makes a positive case for your argument as you suggest here.

I found nothing anywhere, not just on this Wikipedia page. Kind of difficult to provide statistics on a phenomenon that apparently doesn't exist. Again, the floor is yours if you can show otherwise.

This kind of vapid performance where you disguise a personal insult as pretend-concern and then order them to quit making arguments you disapprove of is most certainly not beneath you, since it seems to be your favorite debate-stopping tactic these days; but it fools no one. It is presumptuous and slimy. I do not know the cause of your slow devolution into this expletive-laden personalized invective of late, but it's becoming a signature of your posting style. If you keep calling people with different ideas "dumb-ass", "stupid", "******* stupid", and so on (and don't bother with the "I'm talking about your arguments not you" prevarication, kindly save the rules-lawyering for the tabletop nerds), even the people who are willing to overlook your habit of lapsing into stereotyped "black speak" in any thread involving an African-American subject are eventually going to stop trying to talk to you. If that's the whole plan then okay, but if it's not, you need to take a step back and consider how you sound to the people you're trying to communicate with.

This is beyond precious.

Your lone, sole contribution to this discussion was a paragraph long character assassination directed against yours truly. Seems you have a deep seated panty-twistimg dilemma with "dishing it out" vis a vis "taking it".

And your long term memory seems to be fading, re "talking in black stereotypes". We've discussed this before, several times. Allow my still functioning memory to refresh yours:

My speech is a dialect that linguists call South Jersey Mother ******. It's a blend of biker, surfer, and yes, black and brown influences. Calling someone "the brother, bro or brah" is not stereotyping. It's how I naturally talk when discussions get a little tiny bit rambunctious. If you find the use of colorful expressions and profanity to be disturbing, I suggest you leave the recluse of your monastery and acclimate yourself to 21st century civilization.

Hans, who you felt compelled to defend in your earlier post, seems to understand that the tone was barbed but entirely good natured. if you don't like being mocked or insulted, maybe consider not making your sole thread contribution to be personally mocking and insulting? Just a thought.

 

[HansMustermann]

I found nothing anywhere, not just on this Wikipedia page. Kind of difficult to provide statistics on a phenomenon that apparently doesn't exist. Again, the floor is yours if you can show otherwise.

That's funny. It took me about a minute to find out that about 6.7% of Americans roll their own cigarettes, sometimes even just because they can do it with pipe tobacco which is taxed less. On the same Wiki. Is that article blocked in the USA, or...?

You might argue that you only have the P(A) probability, not specifically the P(A|B) (means conditional of B), but then the correct assumption is to fall back to P(A) as an approximation, not just postulate ex rectum that it's 0.0%.

 

[Thermal]

But actually that would typically involve another element you ignore: some signs of struggle, defensive injuries or whatnot. Which are not present in this case.

Ignore? No, I'm just fully aware that people can be overpowered without a struggle. Did you know that women are raped daily without a scratch on them? Magee could have been drugged, from his own doing or by others, or just 3 on 1 manhandled without putting a bruise on him. Or had been moved to that location, ie a body dump. Just because there is usually signs of struggle, it doesn't mean it should be taken as a given. The investigation has just started, not reached it's conclusion.

In fact most historical cases of lynching were as cruel to the victim as they could. They'd at the very least beat him up to make a case, but some went even above and beyond that into nightmare fuel territory. Again, no sign of that.

Also, none required the victim to bring his own <bleep>ing rope for the event

I have been assuming the rope was an opportunistic device, not part of the script, lol.

Also, "southern state" is vague. The actual place in the south is one that's about half-way between over two thirds black, and just under three quarters black. And has a black sheriff. You can't use the super-category to override the specifics.

Not overly concerned about whether Southern State is a perfect descriptor of North freaking Carolina, with it's long and rich lynching history. The Henderson area is still referred to as a Sundown Town online, no matter what the actual demographics. The bad guys can easilybe out numbered by their victims and still enact evil.

It's not at all suspicious or even abnormal, when notifying the next of kin, to say something preliminary like "it looks like a suicide, but we're still investigating" when they ask how. Like, what's even the alternative? Tell them it's a mystery and nobody knows anything, until the investigation is over? Yeah, that ought to calm them down

Not talking about what was said to the family. Talking about the Sheriff's public statement, broadcast within a day of finding the body, that it was not a lynching. The brother had no freaking idea at that point, as the investigation was barely starting. He just wanted to be able to say "well there was no actual noose per se, so there was no lynching on my watch, partner. No sirree Bob".