Arkay
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2019
- Messages
- 2,508
- Reaction score
- 38,359
It may be because I follow true crime but I personally would rather intervene and than risk someone going off alone, too drunk, and then becoming a victim of crime like an SA.
IMO it’s obvious that all of us on WS follow true crime, that’s why we are here!
Of course I agree, we all would wish we could prevent a tragedy. However, this is all in hindsight.
Since Riley is missing, we have a microscope on his actions. Again, it’s after the fact and when he has been isolated from the crowd.
Yet, AT the bar, which going by what people and MSM are saying, could’ve been 10 or 20 people deep, he was just one more bar patron. Only conspicuous due to his height, nothing more.
I imagine the bartender would primarily check IDs for age, and thereafter be swamped by patrons calling for drinks. I sincerely doubt Riley was the only intoxicated customer surrounding the bar, and even his own friend said there was some kind of precipitating incident (the “good deed” issue).
The bar served him one drink and then two waters. Something had to take place for the bartender or bouncer to tell him to leave. IMO it was perceptive of the bar staff to notice him in the crowd and after he’d only had one alcoholic drink there.
IMO this is seconded by the next bar deciding he wasn’t worth the trouble and refusing him entry.
If we could all predict what would happen next, I believe we would ALL intervene. It seems drunk people wind up in bodies of water all too frequently. Perhaps the bartender or bouncer could not glance at him and think “oh, he’s the one, better tail him home.”
JMO and I know we disagree.