You decided to commit a hate crime.
No. We're yellin'. He spits at me, I spit back at him.
-Felt really racially motivated. -Did you ever threaten to kill him?
-No. -That's a lie.
Two immature men getting in each other's face.
And that's the scary part.
[narrator] Now, on Tribunal Justice...
[theme music playing]
[narrator] Today's case was filed in Bridgeport, Connecticut.
[Byrd] Your Honor, this is Case #3013 on the calendar
in the matter of St. Raymond vs. Gonzalez.
Parties have been sworn in. You may be seated.
-[Acker] Thank you, Byrd. -[Byrd] Mm-hmm.
What a case. Or shall we call it a cautionary tale?
Mr. St. Raymond, you're suing Mr. Gonzalez
because you allege that he intentionally crashed his vehicle into yours.
[Stephen] Correct.
[Acker] And your claim is for $4,931.
And that's for vehicle damage,
towing and storage fees, and attorney's fees.
Yep.
[Acker] Mr. Gonzalez, you say that you owe the plaintiff nothing,
and that he caused his own damage
after he engaged in a hate crime against you.
Correct.
Mr. St. Raymond, you say that before the collision
Mr. Gonzalez was trying to run you off the road.
Can you go to the chart and show us what happened?
You'll have a chance too, sir.
Well, King's Highway here is a four lane highway.
It's two-way. These two lanes go this way. These two lanes go that way.
Okay? And we were both on this side.
And the defendant...
crossed over, almost backed me into this lane
where oncoming traffic was.
And I pulled back, I put my brakes on and honked my horn.
We both ended up turning and went up here.
[Acker] Okay, I'm gonna pause you right there.
Mr. Gonzalez, you say in your answer that you were trying to get over,
he gave you a dirty look and did not want to let you over.
-[Brayan] Yes. -You show me what happened.
[Brayan] Absolutely.
So, as our cars were headed on King's Highway North,
we were eventually going to take a left on Villa Avenue.
The plaintiff was on the left-hand side, ready to take a left turn as well.
I was on the right-hand side. I needed to merge in.
He did not want me to merge, so he essentially tried to speed up
to prevent me from essentially getting into that lane.
I'm gonna move these other vehicles to illustrate
that St. Raymond is behind me.
Now that I've been... uh...
Now that I was successfully able to merge into his lane,
uh, I take my left turn.
Uh, St. Raymond is as well behind me,
however, he instead takes the left-hand turn
giving the impression that he's going to enter the plaza
that is on the left-hand side of Villa Avenue.
He never had any intentions of entering...
I'm gonna stop you. I don't think you know,
and there's no evidence in the record as to what his intentions were.
I'll ask you to go back to the podium, sir.
And I will note for the record, the fact that you are aware of the fact
that he wasn't trying to let you over,
but you kinda said, I'm gonna come over anyway,
is a little bit troubling. So, Mr. St. Raymond,
he's gotten in front of you. Why is it
that you went over in the next lane instead of staying behind him?
Well, first of all, he was right... I was ahead of him.
And he was trying to pass me. And then he comes over like this.
And we ended up here.
At this point, the defendant and I were having words.
[Acker] You had a war of words.
[Stephen] Your Honor, he was looking me right in the eye.
He turns the wheel, like this, then slams on the accelerator
and then, bam!
Runs into my car and does $5,000 worth of damage.
[Acker] Very good. So, Mr. Gonzalez,
you maintain that the collision happened
because you wanted to make sure he didn't get away.
-Yes. -So, you go to the chart.
And I'd like you to show me your version of what happened.
So, as both vehicles are basically on Villa Ave.
As he rolls his car directly next to mine,
he starts screaming. I can't hear what he's saying,
but I simply start laughing because I know
that he's visibly upset that I overtook him in the lane.
So, as I rolled my window down, I can hear him screaming.
That's when he decides to spit in my face from his vehicle into mine.
So, after he spits in my face, uh, I essentially...
just park my vehicle in front, left fender first.
However, my vehicle in no way, shape or form touches his vehicle.
The only reason his vehicle ever makes contact with mine
'cause he makes an attempt to try to flee the scene.
I'll ask you to go back to the podium.
And the police did in fact find you at fault for the accident.
But that's not really the end of the interaction between the two of you
because you called 911, sir, did you not?
-Yes. -[Acker] Can we play the 911 tape please?
Mr. St. Raymond, that was your voice saying, "He's about to kill me."
But there was certainly no evidence that he was trying to kill you.
In fact, can we look at video number two.
Because the police showed up on the scene,
and they caught very good visuals.
And that's you, sir, is it not, approaching the defendant Mr. Gonzalez?
[Stephen] Yes. And you can see where his car has mine.
[Acker] And your car, Mr. Gonzalez, you can see it is over the line.
[Brayan] Yes. At the time, he gave me a sign that he was going to leave
as he was entering back into his car.
[Acker] You have a cell phone.
I-I introduce this case as a cautionary tale
because this happens all the time.
And sometimes, people get shot.
Sometimes, people are subject to much greater damages
than either of the two of you had with respect to your vehicles.
Yes, I agree, Your Honor.
When he hit me... When he slammed into me intentionally,
yes, I kind of lost it. I was very mad.
And where he lied, he said he... He thought I was gonna get away?
I had to stand in front of his car so he wouldn't drive away.
That's when I said he was gonna kill me.
'Cause he was saying, "I'll run you over."
[Acker] The defendant's position is that that collision
occurred as part of an exchange that you escalated.
Spitting on someone is an assault. So, perhaps this was all a part
of an unfortunately violent exchange that you are in some part responsible for.
And then, you were in fact arrested by the police
and charged with a hate crime. Because I note that among the damages
that you're seeking against the defendant were towing fees.
But you were arrested. Didn't the police tow your car?
Can we please put up the body-cam video of inside the police station?
You were being booked.
[Stephen] My car was not driveable. It had to be towed.
I don't know if the car wasn't driveable,
or if in fact the car was towed into the police tow yard
because you decided to spit on somebody and commit a hate crime.
I spit on him after he spit on me.
We both spit on each other.
[Acker] That wasn't in the police report. Again, no evidence of that.
But what I will entertain are some of your damages.
-You submitted this $4,000 estimate. -Yes.
But when I looked at your damages, one, there was no picture,
and you didn't submit any evidence of damage.
You submitted an estimate which refers to,
my goodness, a myriad of things, including damage to the roof.
Like, what did he do? He used his super powers
to evade your spit and then jump on the roof
and start jumping up and down?
No, ma'am. He slammed into my car.
And a week after the accident, I brought the car into my auto repair person
and they came up with the estimate.
How do you explain the claim for damage on the roof?
That was in your estimate.
Uh, I don't know. I just took the car in to my mechanic,
my body shop man.
Why didn't you submit any pictures of the damage?
You know, I wish I had taken pictures,
but the put me in handcuffs, I couldn't take pictures.
[Acker] Judge DiMango?
Well, I have to say, the reality here is
is that this incident on the street was the confluence of two immature men
getting in each other's face.
And the reality here is that if any one of you had a gun,
you don't know what would've happened next.
And you didn't even have car insurance. Did you?
[dramatic music playing]
[narrator] Coming up on Tribunal Justice...
How did his spit hit you in the face?
I mean, you guys are like a car-length apart.
[theme music playing]
[narrator] Stephen St. Raymond claims Brayan Gonzalez
intentionally slammed into his car.
So, he's suing for nearly $5,000 in damages.
But Brayan says Stephen is the one who hit his car,
then spat on him because of his race.
The reality here is that if any one of you had a gun,
you don't know what would've happened next.
And that's the scary part.
And you didn't even have car insurance.
-Did you? -No, I did.
When an officer approaches my vehicle, he asked me for my identification
which included my license and my insurance.
Anybody can hand an insurance card over.
I have insurance cards in my car that say I'm insured 'til hell freezes over.
But the reality is when you call the insurance company,
they'll say it's not always paid or not.
I don't know if you have a letter from your insurance company,
but the point is, just two people on the road
doing what they shouldn't be doing, and that's playing chickie, basically.
So now, you're next to each other, you're both stopped.
You admit you spit.
Now, how did his spit hit you in the face?
I mean, you guys are like a car length apart.
So, when he spits, does he hit you in the face with the spit?
-Yes. -No. We're yellin'.
He spits at me, I spit back at him.
All right. So now, one of two things could happen.
You could let him go, take his license plate, call the police.
What do you do instead of that? You cut him off.
Now, you already know he's hot and agitated, right?
Yeah.
You are too, because you think it's funny that he's hot and agitated.
At the moment, absolutely.
[DiMango] You think it's funny.
So now you're engaged... This is what I'm saying.
You're like two immature kids. So now, you put your car in front of him.
And now you fear is, I'm doing that because God forbid he should get away.
I did not try to get out of there. That's incorrect, Your Honor.
I got out of my car. I was afraid he would drive off.
And you heard me on the 911 call...
[DiMango] Yeah, you were a lunatic on the 911 call.
'Cause he was yelling, "I'm gonna run your ass over!"
And yes, I was afraid.
Did you at any point, Mr. Gonzalez,
say, "I'm gonna run you over, get out of the way?"
-No. -That's a lie.
But there's a criminal act here for which you were arrested and charged
-with harassment... -I'm not proud of it, yes.
[DiMango] You went to your diversionary program.
With regard to you, Mr. Gonzalez,
your incident where you cut in front of him, your car is hit.
And you're given a summons for moving into the wrong lane.
-Is that correct? -Yes.
By the way, sir, there's no request by you for any damage to your vehicle.
The insurance company covered your damages, sir?
For that incident, he actually had hit the door and the mirror on that angle.
But I did not file a claim for it because I was simply gonna fix it myself.
Or is that because you didn't have insurance coverage on it?
'Cause you could've sued his insurance company.
I could have, but I really wanted to put this whole situation behind me
because it was right after work.
Did you have to pay a fine for the traffic summons?
No. I pleaded not guilty and it was dismissed.
You pled not guilty to being in the wrong lane?
Absolutely.
[DiMango] You were in the wrong lane. Judge Levy?
When I first reviewed all this material, because Mr. St. Raymond,
that this whole story about you spitting in his face
was just not true.
Unless you are a watermelon seed spitting champion...
Cars are about seven, eight feet wide.
You gotta go through the entire vehicle, between the two vehicles,
and nail you with your little head all the way in your car.
And I thought to myself, number one, there's no evidence you actually did spit.
But now you admitted that you did. Maybe you did hit him in the face.
-[Stephen] May I comment? -Yeah.
Okay. Both spits didn't hit either person.
His spit didn't hit me, my spit didn't hit him.
-But he's saying it hit him in the face. -Yes.
-[Stephen] He's lying. -[Levy] It doesn't matter
if he's lying, 'cause even if it's true,
it gives him all the motive to ram into your car.
Anyone would be furious if they got spit in the face.
Let me ask you this, Mr. Gonzalez,
did you ever threaten Mr. St. Raymond prior to the police coming?
-Did you ever threaten to kill him? -No.
[Levy] What about before they arrived?
Before they arrived, he was on my vehicle, in front, banging on the hood of the car
as the car was in neutral, I put it in neutral.
So, I said, do you want me to kill you,
because he's in front of the car and it's in neutral.
I didn't say I was going to kill him.
And you remember denying that to the police when they interviewed you.
-Right? -Yes.
So, you lied to the police because you knew it'd make you look bad.
-Right? -I know how the cookie crumbles.
I know you do. Let's listen to that 911 clip again. Clip one.
[Levy] "Do you want me to do it?" "Do you want me to do it?"
What were you gonna do?
The car could've easily gone forward,
or I could've in anger accidentally pressed the gas pedal.
He was in a dangerous position himself. That is why I said what I said.
[Levy] By the way, Mr. St. Raymond, the issue of your request
for towing fees and attorney's fees is due in part
because you claim that the defendant did something that got you arrested.
-Right? -No. No, sir. I got myself arrested.
You got yourself arrested.
Let's see what you did to get yourself arrested.
[dramatic music playing]
[narrator] Coming up on Tribunal Justice...
[theme music playing]
[narrator] Stephen St. Raymond is suing Brayan Gonzalez
for nearly $5,000 in damages after ramming his car
then threatening to run him over.
Brayan says Stephen hit his car out of rage,
committing a hate crime against him.
Let's see what you did to get yourself arrested.
I'm down, thank you.
[Brayan] He smashed into my car, so...
[officer] Come here for a second.
[Levy] So we're clear, the police report filed by the officer on the scene,
the first one, put in that report that you, sir,
committed no action that contributed to the accident.
So, 1723 clip two. Let's play the video.
[officer] My name is Mike.
[Levy] Stop it right there.
Just so we're clear, the police report, they indicated
there was no alcohol or drugs that affected you in any way.
You were not at fault at all.
-Correct. -[Levy] Keep going.
This is where the problem...
[Patty] Look at him on the ground.
[Levy] There you are on the ground.
Stop. That was you on the ground.
-[Stephen] May I comment on that? -[Levy] Yeah. How'd you get on the ground?
I sat on the ground because I realized I was out of control.
and I figured I'd be better off just sitting and being still.
I never, ever implied or stated that a police officer made me sit.
Let's keep going.
You're not cooperating.
And there you go. You did that yourself.
-I was angry. -[Levy] You were angry.
So, those two, towing and attorney's fees
chances are, I'll speak to my colleagues, not gonna make it.
You said, Mr. Gonzalez that one of the reasons
why you don't think you owe the plaintiff anything is
because the plaintiff spit at you, cut you off because of your race.
Because that's a hate crime, right?
After hearing the word... used more than ten times,
that's what made me believe it felt really racially motivated.
Do you remember giving a statement to the police
during their interview of you,
when you said the reason that he was so upset,
you said it was because you cut him off.
You know what, don't answer that. Let's play it.
No, go for it.
[Levy] So, that's why he was infuriated.
'Cause of how you drove prior.
-Right? -[Brayan] Right.
-[Levy] Nothing to do with your skin. -Right.
-[Levy] Okay. -Sure.
So we're clear, the police report found you to be the cause of the accident.
And it also included a policy number from Progressive Insurance
that you provided the police with. Correct?
Yes, the digital card.
Can you please, Cassandra, show this to the plaintiff?
This is the Progressive letter with respect to the insurance claim
that was filed by you against the defendant.
Read the highlighted portion.
"The 2013 Volkswagon GTI had no policy with any member
of the Progressive Group of Insurance Companies at the time of the accident."
[Levy] Thank you.
That's the reason why you couldn't get his insurance company
to pay for the damage, which is why you had to sue him.
-Spot on. Yes, sir. -[Levy] Got it.
I have nothing further.
We are going to retire to deliberate at this time.
We'll be back.
Court now stands in recess.
This case will be recalled. Parties are excused.
[theme music playing]
Candidly, I don't think the plaintiff has made his case
because I'm not at all convinced of his damages.
He included a damage estimate for $4,000 that included everything under the sun.
When I asked him, for instance, about the specific claim
of damage to the roof... I'm like, how do you support that?
He was like, "Well, I just took the car in and that's what they told me."
We have not one picture of the car before. Not one picture of the car afterward.
So, to me, causation and liability on the defendant is pretty clear.
He caused the accident.
But I'm not gonna make up a damage number,
particularly when the plaintiff himself couldn't be troubled
to submit a picture of his damaged car.
At least then, we would see some correlation between the accident,
between the repair estimate and the car.
Right now, we have a repair estimate and he says,
"I just took it in and they told me a bunch of stuff."
I just don't find that at all persuasive.
[DiMango] Well, that was visible on the video.
Here's the accident report.
And the accident report, it indicates...
the motor vehicle damage, diagram,
and what they're saying is his vehicle was damaged at number two...
-Which is under... -...number three and number four.
Correct. Which is on the passenger side.
-over the right tire and along that way. -Correct.
Again, I still do not know the extent of those damages.
And I don't see how they corroborate. I mean, the police report also said
it was a minor side-swipe and minor damage.
The bottom line is, assuming that we find the damages,
assuming that we recognize that the fault was with the defendant
because it's pretty clear that it was.
Where are we with regard to other issues?
I believe the statute of limitations in this case has already run.
The filing was 21 days late.
[DiMango] I mean, I don't see any way around that.
I would say, but for the statute of limitations,
-I would've awarded him... -Everything.
Everything except for the tow fees and for the legal fees.
Because that was as a result of him getting arrested for breach of peace.
We wouldn't give him the legal fees.
So, but for that, I believed everything that he said.
And I agree with you about the statute of limitations.
I think I'm on my own with respect to a dismissal
based on lack of evidence of damages.
-Yeah. -[Levy] Yeah.
But we're unanimous on dismissing his case.
[DiMango] Dismissed in its entirety.
[theme music playing]
Court is back in session. Parties are reminded you're still under oath.
-Thank you, Byrd. -[Byrd] Mm-hmm.
We've deliberated and we've reached a unanimous verdict.
I like the fact that we don't have to escalate this case
into a debate about racism and tension...
like, this case is far more simple than that.
You were found at fault for the accident.
But sir, I really had questions and problems with your proof of damages.
And I would've dismissed your case on those grounds.
Certainly, on the police report there were some indications and notations
about where minor damage had been found on your car.
It wasn't clear to me how much of that was necessarily caused by the defendant.
And your damage estimate just wasn't corroborated
by any independent evidence that I was able to credit.
My colleagues didn't feel the same way.
They would've awarded you everything you were asking for
except for the towing fees, and the storage and attorney's fees.
They would've given you damages for your vehicle,
however, they found that they cannot do that
because you filed your case too late.
You missed the statute of limitations by 21 days.
-I would also join in that assessment. -[Stephen] That's not true.
So, your case is dismissed. It is dismissed with prejudice.
And I must say, this case doesn't need to be here, it really is.
It's much ado about nothing, and you all turned it into the civil war.
Unnecessary. Your case is dismissed, sir. Good luck.
-I get no damages? -[Byrd] This case is now concluded.
Parties are excused. You may step out.
[triumphant music playing]
Four thousand dollars of damage to my car and he gets off scot-free.
At the end of the day, I still do feel there was some level
of racially motivated hate coming from the plaintiff.
He lied repeatedly to the judges.
I'll just accept the decision as a win.
I was wrong to risk my life to prevent him from driving off.
You can tell he wasn't in the right state of mind.
We live in very woke times, and...
people can hit your car and have no insurance
and that's fine with America. God bless America.
Just watch out for road rages
and watch out for that plaintiff in particular.
[narrator] Have you been scammed?
Let the majority rule in your favor on Tribunal Justice.
Find us on social media.
[theme music playing]