Go here, watch the video and read the writing to get some background information:
http://www.newson6.com/story/14211098/vinita-man-beaten-after-accidentally-killing-dog?redirected=true

     Monday, May 9th, 2011 will mark the 2nd month since Osborne's violent beating of Yang occurred on March 9, 2011.  To this date there exists no news about him being charged with aggravated assault or not.  If charged with aggravated assault, Osborne can receive a term in prison since such action falls under a felony crime.  If you watched the video or read the article, shouldn't this case have been solved already with Osborne charged with aggravated assault?  I say what the heck is taking so long?
    
     It is clear that Osborne attacked Yang with disregard for his life or humanity.  Osborne claims self-defense.  What is self-defense? Beating a man half your size almost to death only when he apologized and even offered to pay for the dog.  Even without offering to pay for the dog, no justification exists for Osborne's behavior towards Yang.  Osborne nearly killed Yang who needed a facial reconstruction after the incidence.  Maybe if Osborne just hit Yang once it could be justifiable, but obviously Osborne hit him repeatedly in the face and kicked him in the ribs breaking two ribs.  How can he even claim self-defense?

     People can argue that it was Yang's fault and he deserved it because he ran over the dog.  I say, no matter how expensive the dog, a dog's life can not amount to that of a human being's life.  Also, the road does not belong to Osborne so Yang did not trespassed onto private property and run over his dog.  The dogs chased after his car while he was driving passed the house and then he accidentally ran over the dog.  First of all, an owner should not let his/her dogs run loose unless in the owner's yard.  Second of all, the fault should not be on Yang but on the dog for running towards the car while it was moving.  For example, if you as a driver was driving on the road and somebody decides to jump out into your pathway causing you to run over the individual, does that put you at fault?  Not only so, what do you expect Yang to do?  Just stop? The dogs won't go away.  Get out and move the dogs?  Yang will likely be attacked by them.
    
     In the case of Chai Vang, his trial in court only lasted a week.  In this case, the law is trying to do everything to protect the white man as long as it can.  Even the sheriff department decline to file any charges against Osborne and handed the case to someone else.  In addition to this, the sheriff department might even charge Yang with reckless driving which it definitely not.  I might sound like a racist, but I am not.  I am just pointing out the facts.  Like Yang himself said, if the story was turned around and Yang instead recklessly inflicted as much injury to Osborne, Yang would be charged with felony and incarcerated already; even if Yang was half the size of Osborne.  Somehow others tried to also justify Osborne's action arguing he attacked Yang only out of a "heated moment" because his dog died.
    
     Overall, what message does this case send out to the public?  It says the law won't protect you if someone beats you up because they feel like it.  A more specific message it sends out to minority groups is the law does not really care for you.  I don't hate Osborne, I just dislike his abhor beating of Yang.  No human being should have to experience what Yang experience regardless of any animal being harmed.