There's a few things about the story that don't quite sound right to me.
The robber stole money from the lady, which is believable and common, but then became angry after seeing a McCain sticker on her car, and beat her up, kicked her and carved a "B" in her face.
What time of day was this happening? Were there witnesses to the attack? How long does it take to carve a "B" in someone's face with a knife? If he had a knife, I'm happy he didn't use when he was kicking and punching her, but surprised he didn't use it to stab her. What was the victim doing during this time, especially when the man was carving a letter into her face? I can assure you I would be screaming, kicking, biting, spitting, and probably pissing my pants..........and anything else it took to keep him from carving a letter into my face. An "I" would be easy to carve, and maybe an "L" but a "B" would be rather difficult to maneuver while someone was fighting back and squirming around.
Then refusing medical treatment is just ridiculous. Unheard of insanity.
And of course the attacker was black.
Kind of reminds me of that horrible "mom" who drove her kids into a lake and watched them drown and then said a "black man carjacked her and killed her kids."
Not saying the story couldn't be true, but the whole bumper sticker, carving her face, refusing medical treatment, not getting caught on camera stuff raises many questions for me.
Exactly. All my yellow lights are flashing over this one.
I am prompted to think of two famous cases in the annals of criminology that get taught in college criminology classrooms as literal (literal!) textbook examples of screwy stories told by lying-through-their-teeth witnesses.
1) The MacDonald Family Murders (late 1960's/early 1970's). This was the tale of the alleged "drug-crazed hippes" who, in the middle of the night, broke into the
suburban house of a young, cleancut
Texas doctor and his wife and their two VERY young kids. The hippies were chanting "Acid is groovy!" and "Kill all pigs!" and they murdered the wife and two children. But somehow the doctor survived to tell the tale, left with just superficial wounds.
At first everyone believed the guy. And the whole nation was shocked at the horror of hippies breaking in and killing people in such senselessness. But then it just didn't add up after a while. a) Why were the wounds on the other family members so deep and so thoroughly mortal, yet the doctor's wounds so minor? Would not those "drug-crazed hippies" have been smart enough to inflicted GREATER wounds upon the one member of the household who was probably strong enough to put up a REAL fight? b) And what's with this "acid is groovy" nonsense? No REAL hippie ever actually says "acid is groovy" and certainly wouldn't ever chant it over and over again. Although maybe some naive middle-class doctor might THINK that such is exactly what a hippie might say. And we're all writers here, so "bad dialogue" written by a total amateur is something most of us can spot very easily.
2) Another case whose name I do not have at my fingertips. I think it was in Boston in the early 1980's. A doctor and his wife were out for the evening n the city. And they returned to their street-parked car (a BMW or Mercedes, something very expensive) and as they got into the car, they were pounced upon by a robber. The robber demanded they hand over their valuables. But then when the robber saw the doctor's car phone (car phones were still rare in that era, and tended to be large, cumbersome monstrosities) the crook exclaimed out loud: "An off-duty cop!" and in a panic he shot them both. The wife died. The doctor suffered only minor wounds and lived to tell the tale.
But then the story just didn't add up. Why would a crook say right out loud: "Oh my god! You're an off-duty cop!" That was just dumb! And so once again think we had a case of very bad dialogue here written by a total amateur.
As for the story on the OP and this woman's claim that as soon as this guy saw the bumper it prompted him to suddenly shift gears in his criminal activity and go from a mere robbery to an ELABORATE assault, my response to that is ... oh really?
.