Debt collectors or repo men? I'd expect and anticipate different behavior based on the actual job description. Anyone who thinks that repo men aren't kind of rough and tough haven't been paying attention.

But still? Hitting the woman? Probably above and beyond.

Repo men are tough because the majority of their repossessions result in some type of confrontation. Often, they have the debtor punch THEM in the face and throw them out of the car that is being repossessed. It seems like part of the story isn't being told.

@GirlGoneRiled: "But still? Hitting the woman? Probably above and beyond"

Ummm, assaulting someone to collect a monetary debt? Yeah, "probably."

Seems kind of extreme. Why can't they just wait until she leaves her car to take it? It would suck for the mom, but at least no one would get punched in the face.

@Beerad: Not "probably", definitely ...

Hitting a woman? In front of her 5-year-old daughter? Double that prison sentence. No triple it. And quintuple the bail amount.

Well, the two repo men probably felt threatened by the 25-year-old woman and her daughter, and punched her in the face in self-defense. Once they realized that she wasn't going to be reasonable and hand over her car to two men in the street, punching her in the face was the next logical course of action. I can't even count the number of times I've had to punch young mothers in the face for one reason or another -- all business-related and entirely above-board, of course.

@dr88: That is not an excuse. You just don't touch someone without their consent. Period. The job can be done without confronting anyone.

This woman did the right thing by going to the police and pressing charges and having these two thugs -- that's all they are -- thrown in jail. They should be charged, jailed, AND lose their jobs because they were on the clock when they committed assault.

Generally the Repo men try to take the car when the debtor is not around.

As always, there is another side of the story.

I think 2 possible things... 1 - They were taking the car and she ran out and fought them. Or 2 (less likely) they thought she would be an easy target and wouldn't put up a fight.

@joeblevins: For some reason, #2 makes me think of GWB and Iraq...

They should have just followed her to the grocery store and repoed it while she was inside like any other repo dude would do.

Are we sure these weren't her bookies? Were any of her fingers or kneecaps broken?

@joeblevins:

Well, the "there is always another side of the story" doesn't always hold water. Why are we so quick to blame the victim here? I would think that the Boston Globe would be thorough enough in investigating both sides of "the story".

Even if she fought them, very few 25 year old mother's are any match for TWO men. There's no excuse for them to hit her...even if she hit them. They were on the clock, there were two men against one woman and a 5 year old, and I don't care if they are repo men or debt collectors...they *should* conduct themselves professionally and at the very least have enough self-respect and restraint to NOT hit a women. Period.

@niteflytes: She may not be a match for two men, but her being in the car gives her a 2-ton deadly weapon at her disposal. I'm not blaming her, just stating a fact. I'll withhold judgement until all details come out.

I don't see how "in front of her 5 year-old daughter" changes anything. You're not going to stop and think "Oh, her 5 year-old daughter is there, I'm gonna have to wait to punch her in the face." or "Oh, her daughter is 5 years old. If she was 6, I'd punch her in the face, but now I can't."

@bambino: yes, but then that goes against rule #1 of repoing a car.... never do it when the person is already IN the car.

I agree something more is afoot here, but im sure its all on these two thugs as to why she acted how she did.

@Greg P:

I don't think it necessarily changes anything, it just compounds the wrongness of it. Can I say "wrongness", is that a word?

@dr88: "It seems like part of the story isn't being told."

What sort of tool would suggest that a mother assaulted in front of her 5-year-old child had it coming to get punched in the face? And, genius, note that the police filed charges on the two (!) men assaulting the woman, not on the mom.

By the gods, I hope your daughter, mother, sister or girlfriend is punched in the face in similar circumstances so we can see how quickly you post complaining. Or, really, have it happen to you. I'm *dead certain* that you take a punch about as well as a mother of a 5 year old, and are the type to cry twice as hard.

oh Boston. I love it and hate it at the same time so much. (I'm from Boston)

This is certainly a new record though. I know we're jerks behind the wheel, but hey, you gotta do what you gotta do (directed toward the lady).

Debt collectors around here (ie mafia) know better. These guys must've been from Jersey. (snort)

.....One of the principles of this country is that you can't use violence to collect debts, or lock people up over debts. (Not that such laws will stop Bruno the Loan Shark from breaking your legs if you don't pay...) The repo dudes were wrong. End of story. They can get ready for an assault/battery conviction on their records.

.....Of course, even though it's never supposed to be permissible to imprison anyone over a debt, refuse to pay the IRS and see what happens! Heck, there are folks locked up in the Birmingham Jail indefinitely, till they pay their overdue parking fines. How the city expects them to make the money to pay, inside the Joint, I have yet to figure out...

if forced to choose who to believe based on the facts given, i pick the one who pays his bills

@Greg P: "I don't see how "in front of her 5 year-old daughter" changes anything."

Many people are reluctant to carry out adult disputes in front of children, or, at the very least, are sensitive to the fact that certain interactions (being arrested, having something repossessed) are extremely embarassing to a parent and potentially traumatic for the child, and people will often consent to do it away from the child as long as the parent isn't being violent or an ass.

(In fact, one of the courts near me specifically bars children from family and probate court unless the judge decides their presence is necessary, because there's so often family ugliness in those courts that children shouldn't necessarily be exposed to. It's often better for the child to see dad and grandma being at least cordial to each other than to be exposed to how they secretly hate one another with the fire of a thousand suns over something that happened long before the child was born.)

Of course, the beauty of the whole thing is that they still ended up repoing the car.

Regardless of this woman's situation, what happened to her was inexcusable.

For those of you who complain about people who don't pay their bills -- sometimes thing happen that are uncontrollable. Layoffs, medical bills, psychotic bosses, health problems, or any number of things that change a person's financial situation. If you ever find yourself in a situation where you are unable to pay your bills, I hope that it changes your sanctimonious attitude. Not everyone is perfect or can be blessed with stable employment, health and prosperity that never ends. Shit happens and sometimes it leaves a huge mess that people cannot overcome in a couple of months.

I happen to know lots of people with financial problems who are wonderful, giving and selfless people. Because someone is having financial difficulty does not necessarily make them untrustworthy or unethical. This doesn't mean that there are people who just run up bills and skip out. I would take a guess that these type of people are the exception, rather than the rule.

more to the story here. It appears the brothers were just a couple of teens, probably high during the repo.

http://www.boston.com/news/local/articles/2007/05/23/repo_...

I have one word to describe these gentlemen....classy

@Greeper: Who says the repo dudes pay their bills?

Since when do legimate repo agents go after a car with a young woman and a child inside of it? Unprofessional to the extreme. I hope the criminal charges stick.

I'm confused, are they claiming that they never punched her or claiming that it was ok to punch her? They've already changed their story once:

The debt collectors claim that Ms. Bradley ran over the first debt collector's foot and then rammed the so-called madman hood-clinger with her vehicle, causing him to be thrown onto the car.

Now they're saying:

At the stop light, Robert Simeone stepped in front of the car to tell her they were repossessors, but when Bradley accelerated, they said, he had to leap on the hood or risk being run over.

Well did she hit you with the car or not?

@Greeper:

"The two brothers pleaded not guilty to charges of assault and battery with a dangerous weapon, for allegedly using their car to cut off Bradley's. They also pleaded not guilty to disorderly conduct and disturbing the peace. Michael Simeone was ordered held on $10,000 cash bail, and Robert Simeone was ordered held without bail because of pending drug charges."

Yeah, those classy repo men would never have hit a woman in the face.

Here's the video of the local news covering the story:

http://wbztv.com/topstories/local_story_142103834.html

@Jason: ahhh, guilty until proven innocent, just the way i like it!

This is what confuses me ...

"They said Bradley drove over Michael Simeone's foot after he reached in to turn off the car engine."

Do repo men usually throw people out of their cars when they are trying to repo them? I mean I understand they are authorized to take the cars, but they can't break the law to do the repo'ing can they?

Why is no one mentioning that her fiance was sitting in that car with her and the 5 year old?

From the story it looks like the whole "OMFG HE PUNCHED HER IN THE FACE" was a mistake in that he was trying to yank her out of the car, his hand slipped, and bopped her in the face. Yes, it could have been interpreted as a carjacking.

Either way, neither the people in the car nor the repo men were in the right. Screw em all at this point.

Phew, I'm glad I didn't let my anti-"car payment defaulting mothers with 5 year old daughters" sentiments fly before all the facts were in.

Something is missing here. From the second article it is reported that she was 3 weeks late on a payment. I would hope that the reporter writing that confirmed it. If that is the case, why was the car going to repo for only 3 weeks late on a payment?

Sometimes I forget to make a payment, and about 3 weeks later I get a friendly call asking if I had mailed my payment yet.

I somehow find the defence of "I was trying to yank you out of your car and my hand slipped" as a pretty flimsy excuse. What is that? I didn't that violent thing because I was doing another violent thing. "Repossessing" a car at a stop light is beyond comprehension. There is no way to expect that will go smoothly. You don't script a repossession using a car jacking as the model. Well, not if you don't expect to get arrested you don't. Repo-men can't be above the law. This was unprofessional and clearly it crossed the line into being criminal.

@DashTheHand: Yanking someone out of a car isn't ok, either. Nor is assault ok just because her fiance was in the car and could have helped (after he unbuckled his seat belt, got out of the car, and ran to the other side).

I don't buy the whole "but my young daughter was present!" angle. That's just pleading for extra sympathy and makes the whole description sound one-sided.

Yanking someone out of a car and accidentally hitting them because your hand slipped is MUCH different than the headlines of some guy walking up to a car and punching her in the face on purpose. Guaranteed that one would have been an "ouch" with a bit of surprise and shock, and the other could have led to fractured or broken bones.

Like I said, neither the repo men using force on a person nor the person skipping on their debts is in the right here. MAYBE if she paid her debts than she wouldn't have had this happen at all.

I side with the woman on this. I once had a repo man show up at my parents house and begin trying to hook up to my supra. I ended up having the guy at gunpoint to get him to stop! He would not say anything to me other then " I am here for the car" uhm my car was paid for and I had clear title. I was on the cordless with 911 explaining to the dispatcher that if he reached bhind his seat I was going to shoot to kill. The cops stopped him at the bottom of the hill from my house. The cops came to me and I had to file a report. Guess what? He was supposed to be getting a 'dodge daytona' and the license looked nothing like me. The cop told me that if the car had left my yard I probably never would have seen it again!! Heck where whould I have begun looking I didnt owe anybody money!! And before you ask no charges were brought on me for holding him at gunpoint... Now if I had shot him who knows how bad it would have gotten... But I was younger and stupider then.

@IC18: "Did nothing wrong"? "Want to prove innocence"?

Yeah, like assault, carjacking, assault with a deadly weapon aren't wrong?

These two assholes need to take some damn personal responsibility for their mistakes.

And had they taken the car with people still in it they would have been guilty of kidnapping as well.

@DashTheHand: Not paying your debts is not reason to be physically assaulted and terrified.

@nytmare: The emphasis on that fact is not necessarily all the mother's doing - children amp up the pathos quotient in any story, and a "good" reporter or journalist knows this & will work that angle.

I wish I was this woman. Don't pay thousands of dollars and it can all be redeemed with one punch to the face!

@DashTheHand Whether or not she paid her debts has as much to do with her situation as the price of tea in China. You don't know *why* she hadn't paid, which doesn't matter because she *shouldn't* have been hit or even swung at.

@Tyr_Anasazi: Does it matter why she hadn't paid? The repo people were there to take her car because she hadn't paid. Period. Do you steal from the store and expect them to allow it because you won't have the money available til later?

Seeing as how the two sides of the story are incredibly different on numerous details, how can you defend them?

@DashTheHand: I'm sorry but comparing having a car being repossessed and stealing from store are not even close to being the same things. Arguably one is dealt with civil contract-law and one is dealt by criminal law. I doubt anywhere that Repo men are given the legal authority to assault to conduct their business.

Though I'm not a lawyer, I understand it to work this way: if the woman didn't yield her car to the Repo man, they could have a judge issue a court order to force her to vacate the car. If she refused, then, and only then, would she be in contempt of court, and could she be removed (with reasonable force) from her vehicle (by the police). Even then the police have no grounds to punch her unless it's truly in self-defense.

The repo men had no legal right to punch her unless it was truly in self-defense. Period.

Um why is debt owed on a 7-year-old car? Assault of a 25-year-old woman is unacceptable. Period. Trying to repo a car in the middle of an intersection is also unacceptable. These debt collectors are the scum of the scum. They need life in prison.