• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Cop Indicted For Murder

Update: Now we know why he was acting squirrely: He was hauling drugs.

http://www.wlwt.com/news/source-2-b...uboses-car-at-time-of-fatal-shooting/34533640

What difference does that make? He was still shot in the head at point blank range by an incompetent cop who lied about what happened.

You haven't proven that he lied--it has been demonstrated that the car was moving before he fired.

The point of that article is that we now have a very solid reason for why he would take the big risk of rabbiting.
 
Apparently there are videos from the other two police officers that have also been released. I haven't seen those yet.
 
Make it easier on yourself, Ron; Dubose' car is two car lengths behind the car in front of him (about 16 feet for an average four-door car).

Lying to yourself is easy, so you should stop making it easy on yourself and start requiring a little honest rational thought from yourself. First, there are at least 2.5 car lengths between those cars. With even smaller 4 door sedans being about 15 feet each that means about 37 feet. Also the cop is another 5 feet back from the front of Dubose's car, so that puts him about 42 feet from the back of that white car.


The water stain in the middle of the street is more or less at the midpoint of those two car lengths,
Bullshit, the water stain is notably closer to the white car, more like 60% of the way there, meaning .60 X 37 = 22.2 (+5 feet from front of Dubose car to the drivers seat where cop is standing) = 27.2 feet that the cop was pulled and thrown by the forward motion of the car. In addition, he got up a few feet toward the left side of the road because the Dubose was not only going forward but steering to the left to get around the parked white car in front of him.


and by the time Tensing has rolled back to his feet he is slightly behind the position of the water stain. That's a displacement of fourteen feet maximum, far less than the 30 feet Loren and Derec are claiming.

Nope, closer to 27 feet which is quite close to the 30 they are claiming, and which makes it impossible that the car was not already well in motion and at least 10 feet down the road prior to the shot.

The car wasn't in motion when Tensing dove into the window.

True. DuBose started the car and put his right hand back on the wheel getting ready to take off, which is when and why Tensing dove in to stop him. Dubose hit the gas right after Tensing dove in.

It wasn't in motion when he fired the shot.

False, both the magnitude and timing of the fall after the shot require that the car already be accelerating at about .3 gs for about a second, putting it at about 7mph and 10 feet from where it started. In addition, there is the leftward motion of the car that was pushing Tensing backwards.


It WAS in motion immediately AFTER the shot
The car was in motion after the shot only because it was already in motion prior to the shot.

(you can actually hear the engine rev up in the audio)

The car accelerates rapidly after the shot and Tensing falls over, rolls, gets back to his feet.

False, you can hear no such thing. Any increase in seeming loudness of the engine would be expected by change in position of the mic when DuBose fell to the ground along side the car where the engine and exhaust sound would be greater. Also, the car is going faster, because that is what constant rate of acceleration means. It means increasing ground speed. A constant .3 g rate of acceleration means 0 to 7 mph after the first second when the shot was fired, 7 to 14 mph during the second after, and then 35 mph by 5 seconds and 56 mph by 8 seconds. A 2000 Honda Civic that is floored will be at 60 MPH at 8 seconds, and only 8 MPH after 1 second.
IOW, Dubose hit the gas very hard after Tensing jumped in, resulting in .3 g of force and 7 mph after the first second, which is when Tensing shot then fell, and the car continued at about the same acceleration which means ever increasing speed until it hit that object.

Your blinding ideology is getting an assist from your ignorance of basic physics.


Displacement of about 14 feet, let's call it a generous 16 for the sake of argument. He wasn't being dragged for that long, maybe a quarter a second. But covering 14 feet in one half to one quarter of a second means the car would have an average speed in that period of about 20 mph.

No, it would be closer to 27 feet in less than half a second, which would require that the car was going 35mph by the end of the first second., meaning more than 60 mph in less than 2 seconds, which is 50% faster than the fastest cars commercial cars available. Sorry, but a car like his only accelerated at about 0-60 in 7 seconds, which would mean it could only travel about 5 feet in the first half second, which in not even close to your absurd under estimate of 16 feet. Keep in mind that your underestimate of 20 mph average speed in the first half second of travel, includes the speed of 0 mph at the start of that half second. For the average speed in that half second to be 20 mph, the speed at the half second mark would have to be close to 40 mph, requiring that he was driving a record breaking rocket car.


Which seems to me consistent with the car suddenly having its accelerator driven to the floor by the dead man's foot.
First, it isn't consistent with anything that is remotely possible with current auto technology, but also how does a dead man drive a gas pedal to the floor? He did not fall foward onto the pedal, and the mere weight of a dead foot (whose heel is already on the floorboard as when people drive) would barely get the car moving. Also, when Tensing was falling out, Dubose was still knocked back and to his left by the force of the bullet, which would move his momentum away from the pedal and not onto it. Any pressure on the pedal had to have been applied prior to him being shot.

Which is what we see in the video and what we hear in the audio: Tensing yells stop, followed by a tussle, followed by a gunshot, followed by the sound of the engine revving and Tensing falling over and rolling backwards.
Nope. What we see and hear is Dubose start the car, then the cops yells stop and reaches in while Dubose puts his hand back on the wheel to steer as it moves. We see a tussel as the cop pulls his gun and points it, at which point we see a direct camera shot through the drivers seat showing that is now parallel with the bushes on the other side of the road from where the altercation began. That means about 10 feet down the road prior to the shot. Then we see the shot and the cop falls backward and to the ground almost immediately, winding up 27 feet down the road, which is impossible if the car did not move prior to the shot.

Your alternate explanation is that Tensing ran alongside the car for two seconds while he was wrestling for control of the car. The struggle itself lasts about two seconds; if that motion alone accounts for Tensing's new position, then the car was moving at an average speed of about 5 mph, which is basically a brisk walking speed. But then that doesn't account for the car's burst of acceleration or Tensing falling backwards, which means it would have to have been moving slower than that, far less than 3mph.

My explanation (the only one consistent with the facts and the laws of physics and realities of car technology) is that Dubose stepped on the gas right after Tensing jumped in, putting .3 gs of force on Tensing. Being positions sideways the forward and to the left motion of the car forced Tensing to shuffle madly to the left and backward at a rate of 7mph just to keep his feet under him, making it extremely difficult to get out and free from the car without serious risk of injury or falling under the tires. Pankicked by that he fired right before he fell (as nearly all people would if trying to shuffle sideways and back at that rate of acceleration. This is required to account for him being even 15 let alone the more likely 25 feet down the road only 2-3 seconds after diving into the car. Continuing at about the same rate of acceleration, the cars ground speed sped up each second until it hit the object down the road.

Which means there are three possibilities:
1) The car was stationary when Tensing shot Dubose and the burst of acceleration knocked him on his ass (he hits the ground so hard that for a second the bodycam is pointed at his face).

That is not a possibility. It is made 100% impossible by the laws of physics, as I explained above. There is no possible way the car would gain the speed needed in that timeframe to pull Tensing more than a couple feet down the road, let alone 16, alone the actual 25 or so that he was pulled. Also, the still frame right before the shot shows a straight on shot through the drivers cabin out the passenger window and of the bushes on the SUV side of the sidestreet. That shot in impossible from where the car was prior to moving, and could only be taken if the car was about 10 feet forward from where it started.

2) The car was crawling at a fast walking pace and Tensing was leaning in, following along when he shot Dubose and the burst of acceleration caused him to fall over.

3) The car was crawling at a snail's pace and Tensing was leaning in, following along when he shot Dubose and the burst of acceleration startled him into loosing his balance.


Both 2 and 3 use "crawling" concepts rooted in your ignorance of physics and acceleration, as I already explained. The car had to be going at near full acceleration (again that is not max ground speed) for a full second to put Tensing that far down the road (even by your absurd 15 foot estimate). 7 mph after 1 second is as fast as most sedans can accelerate from a full stop. Also, you ignore that he is not "running" in any traditional sense, but rather shuffling his feet sideways and backwards just to keep them under him, which most people could not sustain at 7 mph. He fell because the constant acceleration applied prior to the shot meant an every increasing ground speed that exceeded what any human could keep up with.


But that, again, is a danger of his own making, a result of his choice to end Dubose's life rather than allow him to resist.
Dubose was not merely resisting arrest, he was a DUI suspect and thus a lethal threat to all others on or near the road. After Dubose showed clear intent to flee and put others in danger, Tensing dove in to stop him, at which point Dubose made the choice to hit the accelerator, which he definitely did a full second prior to being shot, and thereby put Tensing's life in danger. Tensing tried to maintain his balance for a second, then pulled the trigger and fell.
That is the rational, science-based analysis of the facts. They still leave room for recklessness and wrongdoing by Tensing, possibly even involuntary manslaughter, but not for murder. They don't leave much room for sympathy for DuBose, however, whose efforts to flee in a manner that people others at risk where a key necessary factor in the cause of his death.




Not to mention he was also now on the other side of the road from the car because the moving criminals car not only pulled him forward but pushed him backward due to the driver steering to his left to try and get around that white car as he tried to flee, all of which he did before being shot in the head.
We actually see Dubose's steering wheel immediately before the shooting; it's already turned slightly to the left, and Dubose never has a chance to touch it before he is shot in the head.

Dubose right hand is on the steering wheel during and prior to being shot. It has it there prior to Tensing trying to open the door, removes only for a second to turn the ignition on, then puts it right back and it stays there throughout the struggle and up to and during the shooting. Whether turned the wheel out prior to or after starting the car isn't very relevant. The fact is that the car was both going foward and to the left when the shot was fired, meaning Tensing was having to shuffle sideways and back at 7mph to maintain his balance and keep from having his feet fall out from under him and possible slide under the car.

And it bears repeating: Tensing PULLED FORWARD on Dubose's seatbelt, from a position slightly in front of him, close to the rearview mirror, immediately before he fired the shot. Whatever speed the car was moving at that point (anywhere between 0 and 5mph, we've determined) Tensing was moving faster.

More gross ignorance of basic physics. If you pull your seat back forward on an airplane, are you going faster than the plane? If you do it a bunch of times will you get to your destination before the plane does ? The fact that he can move part of his body forward relative to his center of gravity doesn't affect how fast he is going. Also, the fact that he could barely keep his feet under him for a second doesn't mean that he wasn't in serious danger.
 
What difference does that make? He was still shot in the head at point blank range by an incompetent cop who lied about what happened.

You haven't proven that he lied--it has been demonstrated that the car was moving before he fired.

The point of that article is that we now have a very solid reason for why he would take the big risk of rabbiting.

1. It has not been "demonstrated" that the car was moving before the police officer shot Dubose point blank in the head. It has been "demonstrated" that possibly the car was rolling forward extremely slowly, or possibly the cop was moving his position towards the front of the car.

2. Seriously, stop using the term "rabbiting" incorrectly. It does not mean what you think it means, and it makes your comments look very foolish when you keep using it in the wrong context.

BRITISH informal - talk at length, especially about trivial matters. "stop rabbiting on, will you, and go to bed!"

Rabbiting - Talking continuously/non-stop. This comes from Cockney rhyming slang - 'Rabbit and Pork' = talk. Therefore in the tradition of Cockney rhyming slang to 'rabbit' or 'rabbiting on' is to talk a lot.

RABBIT

Rabbit (shortened from rabbit and pork) is Cockney rhyming slang for to talk, often unceasingly. Rabbit is derogatory slang for a person who is a novice or bad at a sport or game. Rabbit is Australian and nautical slang for a smuggled or stolen article.
Rabbit is Australian and nautical slang for borrow, steal.

RABBIT AND PORK

Rabbit and pork is London Cockney rhyming slang for talk.

RABBIT FOOD

Rabbit food is slang for fresh, uncooked fruit and vegetables.

RABBIT HUTCH

Rabbit hutch is London Cockney rhyming slang for the groin (crutch).

RABBIT'S PAW

Rabbit's paw is London Cockney rhyming slang for to scold (jaw).

RABBIT−O

Rabbit−o is Australian slang for an itinerant seller of rabbits for food.
 
2. Seriously, stop using the term "rabbiting" incorrectly. It does not mean what you think it means, and it makes your comments look very foolish when you keep using it in the wrong context.
We are not in Britain.
dictionary.com said:
Slang definitions & phrases for rabbit Expand
rabbit
verb

To run away fast; escape in a hurry; lam: The man who had rabbited was later identified (1887+)

The Dictionary of American Slang, Fourth Edition by Barbara Ann Kipfer, PhD. and Robert L. Chapman, Ph.D.
Copyright (C) 2007 by HarperCollins Publishers.
 
What difference does that make? He was still shot in the head at point blank range by an incompetent cop who lied about what happened.

You haven't proven that he lied--it has been demonstrated that the car was moving before he fired.

The point of that article is that we now have a very solid reason for why he would take the big risk of rabbiting.

No, the point of the article is to demonstrate that he was just a drug dealing no good black man unlike, well I am not sure what Derec or you would consider evidence of being a good black man or person, for that matter, and therefore deserved to be executed in the street.

As far as me 'proving' that he lied: I don't have to 'prove' anything. I am not one of the investigators on the case. I have, however, linked (you do know what linking is, right Loren?) video that shows pretty much that Dubose had his hands in the air immediately before being shot in the head by the cop.

It is fairly uncommon for a police officer to be arrested and charged in the death of anybody involved in the officer discharging his/her weapon. Since I am no more privy to the evidence used to determine whether the officer would be charged and what those charges would be than anyone else on this board, I will accept the premise that the DA felt there was sufficient evidence to bring charges. Whether that holds up in court is to be determined. I like the cop's chances, though. Not because I don't believe he killed an unarmed man because the officer is incompetent and panicked and is possibly very racist. But because I know it is very hard to convict a police officer for anything he/she did while on duty, anywhere in the US.

But we'll see how it goes.
 
We are not in Britain.
dictionary.com said:
Slang definitions & phrases for rabbit Expand
rabbit
verb

To run away fast; escape in a hurry; lam: The man who had rabbited was later identified (1887+)

The Dictionary of American Slang, Fourth Edition by Barbara Ann Kipfer, PhD. and Robert L. Chapman, Ph.D.
Copyright (C) 2007 by HarperCollins Publishers.


This is what I took Loren's meaning to be. However, it still seems to be contradicted by any established fact as well as videotape of the incident.

If DuBose took off (rabbitted), and did so with such sudden and quick speed that the cop was thrown back, how did the cop manage to fire a bullet directly into his skull at close range?

I have tried and tried and tried to figure that out but I simply cannot see how that was managed. If Dubose suddenly accelerated, to escape detection for whatever crimes he was supposedly attempting to avoid being charged with, how did the cop manage to fire so quickly? What threw the cop down/back? The recoil from the gunshot---Loren swears that is not possible. The sudden acceleration? OK, but then how did the cop manage to fire point blank into Dubose's skull?

If the car accelerated so quickly to throw the cop down/away and drag him behind the speeding car (and clearly, from the video, the car was not speeding), how did the cop manage to shoot Dubose in the head? Remember, the shot was fired at very close range, so it cannot be a case of the cop either being a crack shot or a very lucky one.

It seems not only unlikely but actually impossible that either scenario was the actual sequence of events.

Maybe there's a scenario that I have not thought of and which is supported by known facts.
 
We are not in Britain.


This is what I took Loren's meaning to be. However, it still seems to be contradicted by any established fact as well as videotape of the incident.

If DuBose took off (rabbitted), and did so with such sudden and quick speed that the cop was thrown back, how did the cop manage to fire a bullet directly into his skull at close range?

I have tried and tried and tried to figure that out but I simply cannot see how that was managed. If Dubose suddenly accelerated, to escape detection for whatever crimes he was supposedly attempting to avoid being charged with, how did the cop manage to fire so quickly? What threw the cop down/back? The recoil from the gunshot---Loren swears that is not possible. The sudden acceleration? OK, but then how did the cop manage to fire point blank into Dubose's skull?

If the car accelerated so quickly to throw the cop down/away and drag him behind the speeding car (and clearly, from the video, the car was not speeding), how did the cop manage to shoot Dubose in the head? Remember, the shot was fired at very close range, so it cannot be a case of the cop either being a crack shot or a very lucky one.

It seems not only unlikely but actually impossible that either scenario was the actual sequence of events.

Maybe there's a scenario that I have not thought of and which is supported by known facts.
Instead of rabbitting maybe DuBose was turtling.
 
Update: Now we know why he was acting squirrely: He was hauling drugs.

http://www.wlwt.com/news/source-2-b...uboses-car-at-time-of-fatal-shooting/34533640

Are we to infer from this that you now believe this makes killing the man justified?
That cops are to think, if a man has drugs, it is BETTER THAT HE DIE THAN GET AWAY.

That's revolting.

Based on his posts, I don't think Loren considers black people as human beings. A cop shooting a black person on the street is likely no more revolting to him than a cop putting down a rabid dog.
 
We are not in Britain.
dictionary.com said:
Slang definitions & phrases for rabbit Expand
rabbit
verb

To run away fast; escape in a hurry; lam: The man who had rabbited was later identified (1887+)

The Dictionary of American Slang, Fourth Edition by Barbara Ann Kipfer, PhD. and Robert L. Chapman, Ph.D.
Copyright (C) 2007 by HarperCollins Publishers.

1. Loren keeps using "rabbiting". You have provided a rarely used slang definition for "rabbited". "Rabbiting" means to talk endlessly.
2. It is still ridiculous, and every post using it in this thread sound ridiculous. Right along with the bullshit "good shoot" and "thug" and "baby mama" and all of the other crap words/phrases you and Loren constantly use to belittle the dead victims.

If either of you ever want to be taken even slightly seriously in these discussions, you can start with that.
 
You haven't proven that he lied--it has been demonstrated that the car was moving before he fired.

The point of that article is that we now have a very solid reason for why he would take the big risk of rabbiting.

1. It has not been "demonstrated" that the car was moving before the police officer shot Dubose point blank in the head. It has been "demonstrated" that possibly the car was rolling forward extremely slowly, or possibly the cop was moving his position towards the front of the car.

Look at the post above your reply that goes into some of the physics. In the time of the altercation a floored car moves mere feet.

2. Seriously, stop using the term "rabbiting" incorrectly. It does not mean what you think it means, and it makes your comments look very foolish when you keep using it in the wrong context.

https://www.google.com/search?q=rabbit+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8

Verb meaning #3. You'll have to expand the pane to see it.

- - - Updated - - -

As far as me 'proving' that he lied: I don't have to 'prove' anything. I am not one of the investigators on the case. I have, however, linked (you do know what linking is, right Loren?) video that shows pretty much that Dubose had his hands in the air immediately before being shot in the head by the cop.

Did you actually watch the video??
 
We are not in Britain.


This is what I took Loren's meaning to be. However, it still seems to be contradicted by any established fact as well as videotape of the incident.

What are you smoking?!

If DuBose took off (rabbitted), and did so with such sudden and quick speed that the cop was thrown back, how did the cop manage to fire a bullet directly into his skull at close range?

Because a human can outrun a car for a very short time. He was able to keep his feet under himself long enough to get a shot off.

I have tried and tried and tried to figure that out but I simply cannot see how that was managed.

Your lack of physics knowledge isn't proof of the cop's guilt.

If Dubose suddenly accelerated, to escape detection for whatever crimes he was supposedly attempting to avoid being charged with, how did the cop manage to fire so quickly? What threw the cop down/back? The recoil from the gunshot---Loren swears that is not possible. The sudden acceleration? OK, but then how did the cop manage to fire point blank into Dubose's skull?

Because a human can only outrun an accelerating car for a very short period of time. After he shot he lost it and fell. He was no doubt trying to pull away from the car, with DuBose dead he succeeded.

If the car accelerated so quickly to throw the cop down/away and drag him behind the speeding car (and clearly, from the video, the car was not speeding), how did the cop manage to shoot Dubose in the head? Remember, the shot was fired at very close range, so it cannot be a case of the cop either being a crack shot or a very lucky one.

He was not dragged after he was down. He was still on his feet during the dragging. The shot is at very close range, cops get a fair amount of practice with their weapons. Hitting isn't exactly a surprise at point blank range.

- - - Updated - - -

Update: Now we know why he was acting squirrely: He was hauling drugs.

http://www.wlwt.com/news/source-2-b...uboses-car-at-time-of-fatal-shooting/34533640

Are we to infer from this that you now believe this makes killing the man justified?
That cops are to think, if a man has drugs, it is BETTER THAT HE DIE THAN GET AWAY.

That's revolting.

Whatever he had in the car has nothing to do with whether the shooting is justified. The relevance is in understanding his actions, why he chose to run from the cop.
 
Because a human can outrun a car for a very short time. He was able to keep his feet under himself long enough to get a shot off.

Except he didn't _need_ to "get a shot off". He couold have kept his hands outside the car and his gun in his holster. UNless you are claiming that for some reason it it proper to think it is better that this man DIES rather than him getting away. I still don't get why you think that is a reasonable stance.

Whatever he had in the car has nothing to do with whether the shooting is justified. The relevance is in understanding his actions, why he chose to run from the cop.

Meh, he could be running from the cop because he's black and cops are known to shoot black men without cause. And he was, demonstrably, right to be afraid of that, now, wasn't he.

WHATEVER the reason he was trying to get away from the man who would later shoot him dead, are you saying that this attempt at escape means it is better that this man DIES rather than him getting away.

Still waiting to find out where is the line for you - when does it ever become NOT a good enough reason to shoot a black man dead?
 
Lying to yourself is easy
That's kinda what I meant. You should stop doing that.

DuBose started the car and put his right hand back on the wheel getting ready to take off
Watching the video again, and I do not see DuBose's right hand return to the wheel. I see him reaching for something obscured BY the wheel (presumably starting the engine again) but his hand is not seen returning to it. This, by the way, is what Derec was referencing when he tried to claim that Tensing thought DuBose might have been going for a weapon.

Dubose hit the gas right after Tensing dove in.
The audio from the video suggests otherwise.

False, both the magnitude and timing of the fall after the shot require that the car already be accelerating at about .3 gs for about a second...
And this is when it becomes clear to me that you are pulling these very specific figures directly out of your ass without a shred of evidence to support them. Rapidly loosing interest...

Any increase in seeming loudness of the engine would be expected by change in position of the mic when DuBose fell to the ground along side the car
We don't hear a change in loudness. We hear a change in PITCH. That's the sound of the engine increasing RPMs after the shot, a sound that is absent beforehand.

A 2000 Honda Civic that is floored will be at 60 MPH at 8 seconds, and only 8 MPH after 1 second.
Which means if the car accelerated from a standing start it would have been going about that speed when we last see it over Tensing's head as he hits the ground.

There's also the annoying fact that Tensing managed to get back up and CHASE the car immediately after falling out of it and was otherwise completely uninjured by the fall. That sets an upper limit to how fast HE was going when he fell, unless you think Tensing hit the ground backwards at 15 mph and managed to get up and chase the car down the street without so much as a scratch on him.

First, it isn't consistent with anything that is remotely possible with current auto technology, but also how does a dead man drive a gas pedal to the floor?
Pretty easily, it would seem.

Also, the still frame right before the shot shows a straight on shot through the drivers cabin out the passenger window and of the bushes on the SUV side of the sidestreet.

Really?

suv.png

^ Note the position of the SUV immediately after Tensing dives in


And now:
suv_gun.png

^ Note the position of the SUV as Tensing draws his gun, half a second before the shot

Dubose' car has not moved. And Tensing is actually further forward relative to Dubose at this point than he was when he dove in; Tensing has moved further than the car at this point.

More gross ignorance of basic physics. If you pull your seat back forward on an airplane, are you going faster than the plane?
Depends on three things:
1) Am I standing OUTISDE of the plane?
2) Was I standing BEHIND the seatbelt one second ago?
3) Am I now standing IN FRONT of the seatbelt that I am now pulling on?

You're striking a remarkably self-satisfied tone here as to "rational scientific analysis" but it doesn't appear that you have any idea what the fuck you're talking about.
 
As far as me 'proving' that he lied: I don't have to 'prove' anything. I am not one of the investigators on the case. I have, however, linked (you do know what linking is, right Loren?) video that shows pretty much that Dubose had his hands in the air immediately before being shot in the head by the cop.

Did you actually watch the video??

Did YOU?
 
1. Loren keeps using "rabbiting". You have provided a rarely used slang definition for "rabbited". "Rabbiting" means to talk endlessly.
You claim I have provided a "rarely used slang definition" when you provided a "Cockney rhyming slang" (talk about obscure!) definition from a country none of us is from. So why do you insist that your definition is the only allowable one rather than admit your mistake, wannabe Inigo Montoya?
2. It is still ridiculous, and every post using it in this thread sound ridiculous. Right along with the bullshit "good shoot" and "thug" and "baby mama" and all of the other crap words/phrases you and Loren constantly use to belittle the dead victims.
"Good shoot" is a technical term for a justified shooting. A "thug" is a good description for many of these people shot by police including DuBose but also Michael Brown, Tyrone Harris, Andre Green etc.
"Baby mama" is the mother of your child/ren you have no romantic relationship with. Fits a guy with 13-20 children whose fiancee is only mother to three of them.

If either of you ever want to be taken even slightly seriously in these discussions, you can start with that.
What, not use words that fit? Only use Cockney rhyming slang for everything?
 
Back
Top Bottom