(June 5, 2013 at 4:20 pm)Doubting Thomas Wrote: You know what they say, there are two sides to every story and then there's the truth.
I'm guessing that CD's version is probably closer to the truth, though.
Of course.
In the interest of keeping the story brief, I left out some details (such as why the nutjob was angry in the first place). However, those facts didn't seem relevant, as even though we might feel that he was justified in being upset at one thing or another, there was nothing that justified the menacing and threatening behavior which was at issue.
What sparked the incident was a legitimate beef of his that happened earlier in the day. Everyone involved agreed he had a right to be upset.
On the other hand, to be completely fair, I also did not bring up a bunch of background information which led to my decision to intervene.
After reflecting upon it for a day and a half, if a similar situation comes up in the future, I'm still going to intervene, though I'll try a subtler approach first, before I bring out Louisville's best.
