CountryPlans Forum

Like all groups, there are bad individuals. 

The best line from the trooper:  (paraphrasing) "You're not gonna pull over to the side of the road for an emergency vehicle?"  If he's gonna use the argument that the ambulance wasn't running its lights/siren, neither was the trooper.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1fLO6f8M_gM

This is absolutely ridiculous.  I can't believe the OHP put the officer on PAID administrative leave.  One of those things that really makes Oklahoma look bad, IMO. The worst part is that there was a patient in the back of the ambulance who was on the way to the hospital.  That OHP officer should have escorted the ambulance to the hospital (which, knowing the area where this happened very well was at least half an hour away, whether they were going to Shawnee or to Okemah).  He could've picked a bone with the driver AFTER the patient reached the destination.

I was about to edit my post, when you pointed-out the trooper's "punishment":  paid leave.  Oh, and they dropped the charges against the EMT.

Apparently, the trooper's wife was in the car at the time.  Was he showing-off for the wife?

His wife was in the car??  If she's turned on by that silly display, she needs some serious mental help.  If my husband was acting like that, i don't think I'd claim him.

about 10 years ago my wife (fiance at the time) was pulled over for doing 38 in a 35.  She apparently had a warrant for a bad check she knew nothing about.  (we later find out it was related to one of her paychecks bouncing when she worked for a shoddy apartment complex).  That was like 6 years before then and neither of us knew anything about it.  The cop was a total redneck asshole, to which she commented to him, "no wonder you guys get shot at all the time". 

Didn't work out so well for her that afternoon, but I knew I had a keeper of a woman! 

Sometimes you just have to tell it like it is.  She did good, muldoon.

 :)  Oh yea, she's a keeper.

I'm tempted to post a poll and start a criminal cop thread.  I'm not a cop hater.  I know people in law enforcement.  I've been given a lift home, a couple times, by my friendly neighborhood police officer.  It's the ones who are weak and power mad who need the light of truth on them. 

Although there are some bad cops. They are asked to do a very difficult job. This guy in the story needs to be fired. But I am sure the union will not allow it. That is the problem imo. The unions have on so many levels created problems in the work force. We have bad teachers and bad cops but the union makes it impossible to rid these good professions of the rotten apples. There are also a lot of bad doctors that need to have their license revoked too. Sigh, I truly believe this is one of this country's big issues, mediocrity.

If I'm not mistaken, fire trucks and ambulances are the only vehicles allowed to refuse to yield to a police car.

This was really dumb...  The trooper was off his rocker.  The whole "incident" he was concerned about took 9 seconds from the time he ran up on the ambulance to the time he passed.  During which, a car blocking the ambulance slammed on his brakes and moved over, then the ambulance (probably concerned for the patient) went around the car and then when it safely could, moved over.

There is a 2nd video taken by a different person on the scene that shows how stupid this trooper was.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvEg6bf_I6Y (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jvEg6bf_I6Y)

The 2nd trooper who comes up tp the scene clearly thought the 1st trooper was over-reacting as he kept telling him, "let go of him".

The ambulance supervisor was calm and courtious the entire time until the trooper attempted to rough him up.  At that point, the trooper was outmatched.   The supervisor was a HUGE pile of muscle.

I like law enforcement.  I believe in what they do.  I have many, many law enforcement friends.  But this guy doesn't belong in law enforcement.  He is not up to the standard.

I wonder if (what I've bold typed) can be verified?  I haven't found anything "official".

QuoteState Trooper Daniel Martin, whose foul-mouthed, petulant assault on paramedic Maurice White, Jr. was recorded and widely disseminated on the Web, "is an Iraq war veteran who returned from the Middle East about a month before the May 24 incident.

...Later, at the hospital, Martin actually said in the presence of witnesses that he was prepared to pull his gun and use lethal force against White.

...This, according to Martin's attorney, is  "a good man.... He's not this ogre, this depriver of people's rights." Ogre he may not be. Petty tyrant with a gun he most certainly is. And both he and his tantrum make the case for two badly needed reforms.

First, assuming that we're stuck with government police agencies, nobody who has served in the military should ever be permitted to work as a civilian police officer. Martin's conduct is typical of a solider in an army of occupation; perhaps he thought that Mr. White, a black man, could be treated like a "Haji."

Second, the states need to restore the legal protection for the common law right to resist unlawful arrest. If an actual criminal resists arrest, this could be taken into account for the purposes of enhancing the sentence for an actual crime against persons or property.

According to Gary James, Trooper Martin's attorney, "One thing that police officers are taught is that a person that will fight a police officer is an extreme danger to the public."

As to which party to this assault (called, in typical fashion, a "fight," "scuffle," or "altercation," rather than by its proper name) is an "extreme danger," the public can watch the video. To use the proper legal expression, res ipsa loquitir.

Mr. White's calm, dignified resistance in the face of Martin's splenetic, adolescent rage was genuinely inspiring. His was the conduct of a citizen, rather than a "submitizen."

http://www.lewrockwell.com/blog/lewrw/archives/027574.html

"State Trooper Daniel Martin, whose foul-mouthed, petulant assault on paramedic Maurice White, Jr. was recorded and widely disseminated on the Web, "is an Iraq war veteran who returned from the Middle East about a month before the May 24 incident."



explains alot

there are going to be a lot of them too

Iraqis aren't black.  I think it is ironic that the black EMP has the last name of White.  Absolutely despicable behavior by this "Trooper".  He ought to be shot in the arm and fired.  The reason we have so much crime in this country, is precisely because the people don't trust the cops.  They don't trust them, because, in truth, many of them are simply trying to hide and catch you, or make something up.  It may be the exception, but bad press has always sold better than good press. 

Learned something interesting recently...in Israel, the cops always have their lights on.  They want you to know they are there, so that you won't do something illegal.  Sounds like a better way to me.

LOL, Jens, not so sure about the lights always on being such a good idea.  In South Korea, they do that too, but no one really pays any attentions to them.  The majority of cops there don't even carry a firearm, let alone a taser; they may have a club, but not sure.  Their lights are always going, but with the cutesy cars and uniforms, it is hard to take them seriously. 

The lights are on but nobody's home, eh?, Homey. :)

Just toying around or sadistic?   :-\

QuoteWaffle House waiter sues over Taser incident

A Waffle House employee is suing the Gwinnett County Police Department over what he says was an unprovoked encounter with an officer who stunned him with a Taser.

The department's internal investigation records reveal that the officer used the weapon like a toy with tacit approval from two superior officers.

Daniel Wilson, the 22-year-old waiter, spoke publicly about the encounter Wednesday at his attorney's office in Snellville. The incident has already resulted in the arrest of Cpl. Gary Miles, 33, and the resignations of Sgt. Christopher Parry and Sgt. Joey Parkerson. None of the officers could be reached for comment this week because their phone numbers are unlisted.

Wilson said all three officers were regular customers at the Waffle House at 2725 Grayson Highway in Loganville.

He said the restaurant provided police with free food.

Wilson said the officers often pointed the red laser from their Taser at him playfully. They would do so when Wilson picked a song they didn't like on the jukebox or when telling him not to mess up their order, Wilson said.

"It was uncomfortable, but they are my customers and they tip pretty well," Wilson said. "I just thought they were being foolish."

Then on Feb. 16, Wilson was chatting with Parry and Parkerson when Miles sidled up behind him. Without saying a word, Miles zapped him with the Taser, Wilson said.

"I remember feeling the pulse go through my body," Wilson said. "It hurt."

Taser stun guns deliver a 50,000-volt electrical current capable of incapacitating a person. The weapon can fire barbed probes a distance of up to 35 feet, or it can be used in "drive stun mode" when pressed directly against a suspect. Gwinnett police checked the data recording from Miles' Taser and found it was fired for one second at 2:48 a.m. on Feb. 16.

Miles told investigators that he only "spark tested" the Taser near the employee's back "just to scare him a little bit," according to the internal investigation file.

Parry, 41, and Parkerson, 39, witnessed the employee being shocked but did not report it. They laughed along with Miles, Wilson said. The sergeants later told investigators they didn't realize the Taser made contact with Wilson's body.

Wilson said he remembers telling Miles in the presence of the other officers, "Hey, you actually tased me."

Wilson again sought an apology from Miles a few days later for accidentally stunning him. He said Miles replied, "Who says I did it by accident?"

Miles was arrested June 18 on charges of misdemeanor battery and violating his oath as an officer. Parry and Parkerson resigned in lieu of termination June 19. Police are also investigating allegations that a fourth officer pointed a Taser at Wilson's groin during an earlier incident.

Gwinnett County District Attorney Danny Porter said he has not ruled out the possibility of charging the two sergeants.

"If the evidence shows there was an unprovoked use of the Taser, and if the evidence shows the sergeants had some criminal responsibility in the case, then they can expect to be prosecuted vigorously," Porter said.

Michael Puglise, who is representing Wilson in the lawsuit in Gwinnett County State Court, is seeking unspecified punitive damages. He also wants a judge to bar Gwinnett police from carrying Tasers until their policy and training is evaluated.

"What is so concerning to me is the fact that you have a corporal â€" a ranking officer â€" zapping a kid with a stun gun and you have two sergeants sitting there watching for their own amusement," Puglise said. "From their expressions and their actions, it is obvious that this is accepted."

Gwinnett's Police Department has had stun guns longer than any other force from the Atlanta area's largest counties. Currently, 222 of Gwinnett's 715 sworn officers are certified to carry Tasers, said Cpl. Illana Spellman, a department spokeswoman.

Spellman said using a Taser on innocent civilians is not acceptable. It is also against department policy for officers to accept free food from restaurants.

"It is clearly stated in training that the Taser will only be used to defend the officer or someone else," Spellman said. "[These officers] were completely wrong."

Police departments across the state have adopted widely different policies about the use of stun guns. Recently, the director of the Georgia Association of Chiefs of Police said the state needs to offer standardized training.

http://www.ajc.com/metro/content/metro/gwinnett/stories/2009/07/02/taser_waffle_house.html

They sound like a bunch of common bullies to me. Their deportment clearly falls disappointingly short of what we can rightfully expect and demand from peace officers, and they deserve prosecution.

Police State - The Militarization of the Police Force in USA

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5k5y3fBH9Og

The mindset that's drilled in the military is target and kill.  The law enforcement mindset is arrest and detain.  The melding of the two was inevitable with the inception of SWAT.  I don't think a soldier who's been to war belongs in law enforcement.   

Hooded men and no name or ID #?  Who are they accountable to? 

I figure I'll throw this in here too:  Did anyone NOT celebrate the 4th of July?  I stopped after the "Patriot" Act was passed. 

I did the same as you.  The country we would celebrate it for is no longer here.  I worked on the place - better than pretending our country is not being stolen and our Freedom destroyed.

Quote from: glenn kangiser on July 06, 2009, 12:05:31 AM
I did the same as you.  The country we would celebrate it for is no longer here.  I worked on the place - better than pretending our country is not being stolen and our Freedom destroyed.

Yup, that's how I see it too.  Pretending. 

I'm slowly getting through to a couple people.  It's taken years of conspiracy programming  :) convincing, but soon they'll believe.

That's what we did

went to the farm and worked

didn't even watch the fireworks this year

we can see them in town but this year for some reason they set them off on Sunday  ???

didn't really miss them.....

I didn't see one fireworks, although if I just went up on the hill I can see them in at least 13 cities in the valley as we counted a few years ago.

If I want to hear a loud bang now I just go shoot something.  Gotta stay in practice. [waiting]

"Store Video Catches Cop Bullying Woman"

http://www.philly.com/philly/news/20090720_Store_video_catches_cop_bullying_woman.html?viewAll=y

QuoteWHEN AGNES LAWLESS and three friends were inside a Lukoil convenience store in the Northeast at 3 a.m. last August, they'd all but forgotten the fender-bender in which they'd been involved moments earlier.

There was little damage, and the other driver had left the scene, near Northeast Philadelphia Airport.

What they didn't know was that they'd been rear-ended by the son of a police officer who was on duty, and dad was about to get involved.

Lawless was standing at the counter of the store, at Comly Road and Roosevelt Boulevard, smiling and chatting with the clerk, when she was grabbed from behind and violently pushed back with a police officer's gun in her face.

"He hit me with his left hand, and he had his gun in his right hand," Lawless said. "He pushed his gun into the left side of my neck. It caused a scrape-type bruise on my neck."

After a chaotic struggle, Lawless was arrested and charged with assaulting the officer.

Lawless and her three friends, all in their early 20s, filed complaints with the Police Department's Internal Affairs Bureau. But in cases in which it's a defendant's word against a police officer's, the benefit of doubt often falls to the cop.

Except when there's video.

Once surveillance video from the store's four security cameras was released, the case against Lawless collapsed, and disciplinary action commenced against the officer, Alberto Lopez Sr. A lawsuit against the city is likely.

The incident provides a vivid example of how the countless video recordings generated today by security cameras and cell phones are affecting police work.

Drexel Law School professor Donald Tibbs said that video recordings are capturing more criminal activity and assisting prosecutions, but they're also monitoring police conduct.

"Police are now aware they're more accountable for their actions, because these tapes may be used against them in misconduct cases or civil-rights lawsuits," Tibbs said.

And Tibbs said that there are numerous cases of police seeking to confiscate and destroy tapes that may have captured a police action.


Internal Affairs probe



The clerk on duty the night that Lopez confronted Lawless told investigators that three times after the incident, police officers spoke with him about the security tape and that two asked if he would erase it.

An Internal Affairs investigation found no misconduct among officers who spoke with the clerk about the tape. But it concluded that Lopez had verbally abused Lawless, had jammed his gun into her face and had violated departmental procedures that night.

A hearing to determine what discipline, if any, will be imposed on Lopez is still pending.

Lopez's attorney, Gerald Stanshine, declined to comment and said that Lopez couldn't discuss the incident. Lopez's son, Alberto Lopez Jr., didn't respond to messages seeking comment.

Although some details of what happened are in dispute, it's clear that the Lukoil encounter occurred a few minutes after the blue Mazda in which Lawless was riding was rear-ended at Decatur and Comly roads by a Buick Century driven at slow speed by Lopez Jr.

Lopez Jr. left the scene and drove to the Eighth District police station, at Academy and Red Lion roads, to report the incident to his father. Officer Lopez and his son then left in his patrol car and soon saw the blue Mazda in the Lukoil parking lot.

Officer Lopez entered the store with his son and got into a physical confrontation with Lawless. Lawless ended up in cuffs, charged with assaulting Lopez.

At a preliminary hearing four days later, Officer Lopez testified that he'd come into the store and ordered Lawless and the three young men with her to the floor, and that "she freaked out, started punching, slapping and kicking me multiple times."

Based on the officer's testimony, Judge Robert Blasi ordered that the case proceed to trial.

But four days later, investigators from Internal Affairs got the store's surveillance video of the incident, and things changed quickly.

Lopez was assigned to desk duty and his weapon was removed. He failed to show up at three trial dates for Lawless' assault charges, which then were dropped. Images from four security cameras at the store reveal an encounter consistent with the accounts of Lawless, her three friends and Carlos "Tito" Ruiz, the clerk on duty at the time.

There is no audio, and the video is not continuous, capturing images at intervals ranging from three per second to one every few seconds.

The images show that when Officer Lopez entered the store, Lawless was at the counter, smiling and apparently unaware of his presence behind her.

Lopez grabbed Lawless' neck from behind with his left hand, with his gun in his right hand. Lawless broke free and faced him.

"I was really confused," Lawless said in an interview. "I didn't know if we were getting robbed. I remember seeing his uniform on his arm, he swung me around and hit me with his arm. He hit me first with an open hand, then he hit me with his gun in the face."

The video shows Lopez's left arm extending toward Lawless' face, and then his right arm driving forcefully toward her, jamming the gun in her neck or jaw.

Lawless broke free again, and for several seconds the video shows the three young men sitting on the floor, while arguing occurs among all four and Officer Lopez and his son.

"I had noticed his son as the guy who had hit us," Lawless said, "and [Officer Lopez] was screaming, 'You think you can hit my son and get away with it, you think you can f--- with me?' "

The store clerk reported hearing similar comments from Officer Lopez.

Lawless said that she and her friends were yelling back that it was Lopez Jr. who had hit their car and left.


'I was really scared'



About a minute after the gun was in her neck, the video shows Officer Lopez on his cell phone, apparently calling for more police, when Lawless grabbed her bag and tried to walk out of the store.

"I remember stopping for a second, and thinking, like, 'This is out of control, I need to go get a real cop or something,' " Lawless said. "I was really scared."

Lopez Jr. intercepted Lawless and pushed her backward over the counter, with his right hand on her neck. Officer Lopez joined in and struggled with Lawless, who swung her arms at the two of them.

At that point, Lawless' friend Matthew Whatley came over and got between them, as did Ruiz, the store clerk. According to his statement to investigators, Ruiz managed to get Lawless and her friends to lie on the floor and wait for more police to arrive.

Then, according to the Internal Affairs report of Ruiz's statement, Officer Lopez told him to "do himself a favor and get rid of the camera tapes."

More officers soon arrived, and Lawless was cuffed and arrested. Her three friends were questioned and allowed to leave.

In his arrest report, Officer Lopez mentioned the auto accident that had initiated the events, but never mentioned that his son had been involved, referring to him in the report only as "the witness."

Ruiz told investigators that Lopez mentioned erasing the tape again after other officers arrived. He said that police visited him at the store twice the next day and asked him whether he would erase the tape. He also said that they had advised him to "help the cop out and testify for the cop."

Eventually, Lukoil turned the tapes over to Internal Affairs and to Whatley's family.

Although Officer Lopez and his son declined to discuss the incident with the Daily News, transcripts of their interviews with an Internal Affairs investigator provide their account of the events that night.

Lopez Jr. said that after the accident, the occupants of the blue Mazda got out of the car and began shouting, cursing and kicking his car.

He said that he left and drove to the Eighth District station, where he described the events to Officer William Forster in the operations room.

Forster put out a "flash" description on police radio of the car and its occupants. Forster told Internal Affairs that when Lopez Jr. described the incident, he never mentioned the possibility that any of the car's occupants might be armed.

But in his statement to Internal Affairs later, Lopez Jr. said that in the shouting at the accident scene, one of the occupants of the Mazda, a Hispanic male, "was reaching under his shirt and he was saying, 'Get him the f--- out of the car; I got something for him.' "

Ruiz, the Lukoil clerk, told investigators that after officers arrived following the altercation in the convenience store, he heard Officer Lopez give his son some instructions in Spanish, including, " 'Say he had a gun.' "

Lopez Sr. and Jr. both denied that, saying that the younger Lopez speaks almost no Spanish. Officer Lopez told investigators that his son had said from the beginning that a Hispanic man from the Mazda "lifted up his shirt and made a motion as if he had a gun."

The Internal Affairs report noted, however, that Officer Lopez's conduct inside the Lukoil store seemed inconsistent with a suspicion that he might be confronting armed suspects.

The video showed that he never frisked any of the young men, and at times left them unattended on the floor of the store while he went outside. When asked by Internal Affairs why he had allowed his son into the store if he thought someone had a gun and he was going to take police action, Lopez said: "I didn't even think about it. It happened so fast. It was bad judgment."

Ironically, Lopez Jr. had a .22-caliber Magnum revolver in his waistband during the accident and throughout the confrontation in the Lukoil, according to his statement to Internal Affairs. He had a permit to carry the weapon, he said in the statement.

The driver of the Mazda, Stephen Soda, also had a handgun in his glove compartment along with his carry permit, according to police. Police reviewed the permit and released Soda without charges. Neither weapon was drawn in the incident.

Officer Lopez said that before he grabbed Lawless in the store, he'd ordered her and her friends to the floor several times, and that the three men had complied.

But the video shows that Lopez grabbed Lawless' neck no more than five seconds after he entered the store, and that all three men were still standing.

He said that he had his gun in his hand with his finger outside the trigger, and "used three fingers of my gun hand and gripped her shirt to try to get her to the floor because she was still swinging at me."

The video doesn't show Lawless swinging at Lopez then. She does appear to swing at Lopez and his son later, after they stopped her from leaving the store, and Lopez Jr. appeared to push her back over the store counter by her neck.

Officer Lopez said that Lawless "told me I was a Mexican, I was here illegally, and that I should go back to Mexico." Lopez Jr. said she was "calling my father a f---ing s--c, a Mexican."

Lawless acknowledged in an interview that in her fury she "got racial."

Lawless wasn't seriously injured in the incident, but she said she had pain in her neck, back and jaw.


A night in jail



She spent the night in a jail cell, where she counted 23 mice and saw feces on the walls, she said.

"Somebody had probably had s--- on their hands and smudged it all over the wall," she said. "In the morning I threw up. It smelled so bad."

She said that she was emotionally traumatized for months, and afraid of the police. She moved to Florida earlier this year.

The District Attorney's Office reviewed the case and declined to prosecute Officer Lopez in December. Eight days later, he was reissued his weapon and returned to full duty.

But he may yet face discipline from the Police Department.

The Internal Affairs report concluded that Lopez had verbally abused Lawless and that he had pushed his gun into her neck.

Investigators did not sustain a charge of physical abuse based on Lawless' reported injuries. The report cited a lack of visible signs of injury on her arrest photograph, and said a "very minor scratch/abrasion to her left chin area . . . may have occurred at any point during Ms. Lawless' resistance to P/O Lopez's attempts to restrain Ms. Lawless or during her physical confrontation with Alberto Lopez Jr. when she tried to flee the store."

The report noted that Lawless was treated for bruises and abrasions at Frankford Hospital-Torresdale (now Aria Health's Torresdale Campus), two days after the incident, but that efforts to secure further medical records from her attorney had been unsuccessful.

The Internal Affairs report concluded that Lopez had committed "departmental violations," and it expressed skepticism about the claim that one of the four occupants of the Mazda appeared to have had a gun.

The report also noted that "by taking his son inside the Lukoil to confront the complainants, P/O Lopez made a dangerous situation even more volatile because of his close relationship with the alleged victim of the earlier attack."

Lawless' attorney, Alan Yatvin, said that he was exploring a civil suit on her behalf.

"I'm troubled by the conduct of the officer, about his telling a story that lacks credibility, and about the fact he thought he could get away with it," Yatvin said.

He said it's also troubling that so many officers apparently sought to dispose of the video, the key evidence in the case, and suffered no consequence after Internal Affairs investigated.

At the end of his interview with Internal Affairs, Lopez was asked if he would like to add anything that would assist the investigation.

"I would like to have used better judgment that night," the officer said.

Philadelphia is becoming known as one of the most corrupt police forces in the nation.  There have been literally dozens of articles of corruption this year alone.  Many of them have been caught on tape. Three defendants were acquitted of a shooting and attempted murder when on a news camera police were caught pulling them out of the car and nearly beating them to death when they were unarmed. Shake downs of immigrant store owners and the list goes on and on. There is currently a federal grand jury probe into corruption in the Philadelphia Police Department.  I hope that woman gets every penny.  They refuse to install camera's in Philadelphia patrol cars.

http://newsok.com/ohp-trooper-gets-5-day-suspension/article/3387383?custom_click=pod_headline_northeast-oklahoma-news

QuoteOHP trooper gets 5-day suspension

INVESTIGATION: OFFICER FACES ANGER ASSESSMENT AFTER VIDEOTAPED SCUFFLE WITH PARAMEDIC

Oklahoma Highway Patrol officials said trooper Daniel Martin, whose May 24 scuffle with paramedic Maurice White Jr. was caught on tape, will be suspended for five days without pay.

The suspension was effective immediately and runs through Tuesday, officials said during a press conference.

Martin also will be required to see a qualified medical expert for an "anger assessment," which may or may not result in further training or education by the agency.

The punishment was negotiated between the Highway Patrol, Martin and his attorney, Gary James, James said.

"I still stand by my belief that his actions do not warrant any suspension, but my client agreed to these terms for the betterment of the department and to put this behind him," James said.

White filed a lawsuit Tuesday in federal court, claiming his civil rights were violated by Martin.

His attorney was disappointed with the suspension Martin received.

"I think they might as well have said 'next time we'll get a rope,'" attorney Richard O'Carroll said. "They never spoke to an unreasonable use of force, so next time get a rope. That's my quote."

Martin was removed from patrol duty with pay on June 1 after a video that showed him with his hands on White's neck surfaced on the Internet. With a patient in the ambulance, Martin and White became engaged in a physical altercation that was captured on two videos and viewed nationwide on YouTube, receiving more than 1 million hits.

In a release distributed at the press conference Wednesday, the state Department of Public Safety determined that Martin did in fact possess probable cause to make the traffic stop and had justification to arrest the paramedic for obstructing a police officer. But the situation could have been handled differently, according to the release.

Martin was criticized for his demeanor and language, which was "contrary to what is expected of an Oklahoma Highway Patrol trooper." His actions were "conduct unbecoming an officer," the release said.

James said that within the OHP there was a "difference of opinion" as to Martin's actions that day on U.S. 62 in Okfuskee County near Paden.

James said "essentially my client has been exonerated. I have full confidence that the agency didn't feel any pressure from the media or the public to hand down a suspension."

White in his lawsuit is seeking in excess of $10,000 for compensatory and punitive damages from Martin, the only party listed on the lawsuit.

"Living in a Police State" - The Arrest of Professor Henry Gates

QuoteThe point about the arrest Monday by a Cambridge Police sergeant of Harvard Distinguished Professor Henry "Skip" Gates is not that the police initially thought the celebrated  public intellectual, PBS host and MacArthur Award winner might have been a crook who had broken into Gates' rented home.  Anyone capable of seeing a 58-year-old man with a cane accompanied by a man in a tux as a potential burglar might make the same mistake, given that a neighbor had allegedly called 911 to report seeing two black men she thought were breaking into the house.

But after Prof. Gates had shown the cops his faculty ID and his drivers' license, and had thus verified his identity, and after he had explained that he had just returned home on a flight from China and had been getting help from his limo driver in opening a stuck door, the cops should have been extremely polite and apologetic for having suspected him and for having insisted on checking him out.

After all, a man's home is supposed to be his castle. When you violate that sanctity, you should, as a police officer, appreciate that the owner might be upset.

But where it really goes wrong is what happened next.

Prof. Gates, who was understandably outraged at the whole situation, properly told the sergeant that he wanted his name and his badge number, because he intended to file a complaint. Whether or not the officer had done anything wrong by that point is not the issue. It was Gates' right as a citizen to file a complaint.  The officer's alleged refusal to provide his name and badge number was  improper and, if Gates' claim is correct, was a violation of the rules that are in force in every police department in the country.

But whatever the real story is regarding the showing of identification information by Gates and the officer, police misconduct in this incident went further.  Gates reportedly got understandably angry and frustrated at the officer for refusing to provide him with this identifying information and/or for refusing to accept his own identification documents, and at that point the officer abused his power by arresting Gates and charging him with disorderly conduct.

There's nothing unusual about this, sadly. It is common practice for police in America to abuse their authority and to arrest people on a charge of "disorderly conduct" when those people simply exercise their free speech rights and object strenuously to how they are being treated by an officer.  Try it out sometime. If you are given a ticket for going five miles an hour over the posted speed limit, tell the traffic officer he or she is a stupid moron, and see if you are left alone.  My bet is that you will find yourself either ticketed on another more serious charge, or even arrested for "disorderly conduct."  If you happen to be black or some other race than white, I'll even put money on that bet. (If you're stupid enough to go out and test this hypothesis, please don't expect me to post your bail!)

There is no suggestion by police that Gates physically threatened the arresting officer. His "crime" at the time was simply speaking out.

What is unusual is not that the officer arrested Gates for exercising his rights. That kind of thing happens all the time. What's unusual is that this time the police levied their false charge against a man who is among the best known academics in the country, who knows his rights, and who has access to the best legal talent in the nation to make his case (his colleagues at the Harvard Law School).

Very little of the mainstream reporting I've seen on this event makes the crucial point that it is not illegal to tell a police officer that he is a jerk, or that he has done something wrong, or that you are going to file charges against him.  And yet too many commentators, journalists and ordinary people seem to accept that if a citizen "mouths off" to a cop, or criticizes a cop, or threatens legal action against a cop, it's okay for that cop to cuff the person and charge him with "disorderly conduct."  Worse yet, if a cop makes such a bogus arrest, and the person gets upset, he's liable to get an added charge of "resisting arrest" or worse.

We have, as a nation, sunk to the level of a police state, when we grant our police the unfettered power to arrest honest, law-abiding citizens for simply stating their minds. And it's no consolation that someone like Gates can count on having such charges tossed out. It's the arrest, the cuffing, and the humiliating ride in the back of a cop squad car to be booked and held until bailed out that is the outrage.

I'm sure police take a lot of verbal abuse on the job, but given their inherent power—armed and with a license to arrest, to handcuff, and even to shoot and kill—they must be told by their superiors that they have no right to arrest people for simply expressing their views, even about those officers.

Insulting an officer of the law is not a crime. Telling an officer he or she is breaking the law is not a crime. Demanding that an officer identify him or herself is not a crime. And saying you are going to file a complaint against the officer is not a crime.

As someone who,  although white, spent his youth in the 1960s and early 1970s with long hair and a scraggly beard–both red flags to police back in the day–and who had his share of run-ins with police for that reason alone, I can understand to some extent what African-Americans, and especially African-American men, go through in dealing with white police officers. I used to be "profiled" as a druggie/lefty/hippy and was stopped regularly for no reason when I lived in Los Angeles and drove an 20-year-old pick-up truck. I'd be pushed up against the vehicle, frisked, shouted at, talked to threateningly. I'd have my vehicle searched (without a warrant). And if I objected, I'd be threatened with arrest, though I had done nothing.  Under those circumstances, you quickly learn to be very deferential around police.

Prof. Gates was simply experiencing the frustration that young black men feel routinely, and that I used to feel back when I had hair and chose to grow it long—the feeling of being at the mercy of lawless, power-tripping cops.

In a free country, we should not allow the police, who after all are supposed to be public servants, not centurions,  to behave in this manner. When we do, we do not have a free society. We have a police state.

Here's the police report.  I especially like "I'll speak with yo mama outside".  Upon that comment alone, I think the cop showed incredible constraint. 

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates1.html

If you are going to be a howling hypocrite and do your best to piss off a cop, don't be surprised if you get to go for a ride.

Here's a decent write up on the subject.  In the picture, note the stoic black cop.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2009/jul/22/henry-louis-gates-michael-white

Quote from: NM_Shooter on July 24, 2009, 11:46:11 AM
Here's the police report.  I especially like "I'll speak with yo mama outside".  Upon that comment alone, I think the cop showed incredible constraint. 

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates1.html

If you are going to be a howling hypocrite and do your best to piss off a cop, don't be surprised if you get to go for a ride.

Here's a decent write up on the subject.  In the picture, note the stoic black cop.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2009/jul/22/henry-louis-gates-michael-white

Yea, a black man in a tux with his limo driver trying to pry-open the front door's the perfect ploy for breaking and entering.  The neighbor called the cops?  The neighbor doesn't know that he's black or what his face looks like?

What about Gates asking for the cop's badge number and name?  Talk about disrespectful.

The point is the officer didn't answer a rightfully asked question. 

You and Gates can continue howling about race, I'll focus on that.

What tux... this one?  This is what he had on when he was arrested.  Are you saying that he was wearing a tux, and that sometime between when the confrontation started and the officer decided to arrest him, that the police allowed him to go get comfy clothes on?  Pretty nice of the police to let him change clothes like that.... you have to admit.

(https://i133.photobucket.com/albums/q46/nm_longshot/In-this-photo-taken-by-a--002.jpg)

Where have I ever said anything about race?  

You didn't read the report.  Read it and note that Crowley provided his identification multiple times.

Why did Gates become all unruly immediately?  Because he was pre-charged racially and loaded for bear.  The house had a history of a break in, the door was incapable of being locked, and a cop showed up asking for ID.  Gates wrongly assumed he was being profiled.  Had he just smiled, showed ID, the cop would have left.  But instead, he went berserk.

The ID he showed was a Harvard ID.  Hmmmm..... not a driver's license, which has an address on it, but a school ID.   

Gates had a bad attitude, and took a well deserved ride to get his picture taken.

We have lots of examples of bad cops.  I don't think this is one of them.  I think this is an example of how quickly and inappropriately the race card gets dealt.

I never thought that this story had anything to do with race.  (maybe the person calling the police ???)  I think that no matter what color skin the individual had, the cop would have entered without permission, and arrested a person that questioned him or got upset about that (and still would have been wrong).  The only reason the person got out of it was not because of his race either, but class.  He is a well published Harvard Professor.  He has considerable wealth and fame.  I here people cry racial bias everyday when they get arrested, but they are poor so no one listens.

That's a hard call. I did read the arrest report and a lot of other stories. I also know arrest reports written by seasoned officers are CYA essays.

The officer looks like a jerk but the Professor looks like a screamer too.

I think the bottom line is the situation. The neighbor made a call and the officer was dispatched. He found the Professor inside. Most people think that should be the end of the story. Wrong. As much as I hate and in fact refuse, to produce ID, the Cop had to get it. Had he just accepted his word and left, and the person in the house was burglarizing it, his career would be over.

OK, the Professor had a mouth on him. Many wealthy and otherwise intelligent people do. The charge was Micky Mouse and should not have happened. The cop should have walked away and later on, he could tell everyone what a jungle it is out there.

Bottom line. One person doing his job and not being mature enough to walk away from another immature person.

NO GOOD GUYS IN THIS STORY !

A really good cop should have been able to talk Gates down to where Gates would realize that a ride downtown was not a reasonable end to whatever was bothering him. That would then have been the end of it.

If any of my neighbors called the cops because they thought someone was breaking into my house I would fully expect the cops to ask for an ID with a picture and address on it. To expect the police to take anyone's word, or even a school ID as some sort of proof would be an act of behaving "stupidly", to use Obama's words.

I was driving back from my cabin site today, and was reminded of a genuine profiling case.  A friend of my family is attending school in PHX.  He's black, and he is dating another friend of our family, who is white.

He was driving her car through a neighborhood in PHX when he was stopped for no reason.  "Routine stop".  When asked for the registration, he pulled the papers which showed the car registered to his girlfriend's dad, a white guy in NM.  The cop did not believe the story, and started to be a jerk.  Luckily my friend kept his head about him even though he was scared.

So he took his ride to the office and went through the booking process.  He got his phone call which he used to call his mom back here in NM. 

Luckily, his mom happens to be a federal judge.

My friend was released within 30 minutes of his mom receiving his call.  Apparently she knew people who knew people.  The young man was escorted to his girlfriend's car, and received a hand delivered apology the next day.

Unfortunately, not everyone has a fed judge for a mom.

http://www.mikecann.net/2009/08/video-of-cookville-tn-police-planting.html

Sunday, August 2, 2009

Video of Cookville, TN Police Planting Cannabis on Man

http://www.mikecann.net/2009/08/video-of-cookville-tn-police-planting.html

80 year old woman with a cane gets slammed to the concrete

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ZJIhNzK85Q&feature=channel

Not the best way to handle the situation, but the lady with the cane DID have a knife in her hand and WAS walking TOWARDS the police...At some point, people have to be responsible for their actions.  She was lucky to only have a cracked skull and not a 9MM in her.

Is walking in a Wal Mart parking lot with a knife a crime ?

I'll just bet you have done this yourself fishing guy, walking out to the car with your new Rapala filleting knife 

The old woman was just walking and not bothering anyone -- did you see the two young women with the baby in the cart walk within a couple feet of her seconds before -- did they look scared of her ?

she calmly walked toward the 'officer' and then tried to walk around her, it was the 'officer' that closed in on the old woman.

was anyone pointing at her or acting afraid of her, was she acting irrational or threatening anyone ?

did you notice everyone coming to her aid ?

there are some very sick people in this country

Watch the footage on and about 1:15.  The female officer (after telling her to drop the knife) grabs the knife hand and doesn't let go until the knife is out of her hand.  I'm just saying that we don't know why the police were called, and what the mental state of the older lady was.

Too many questions, from the way the video was presented.

By the way:
1.  I don't walk around with weapons of any kind, unless you call a fishing pole a weapon.
2.  If an officer told me to drop the pole, I immediately would, and talk with the officer later.
3.  I use Uncle Henery Fillet knives.  So much better than Rapala.  I still use the set my wife got me for our first anniversery...25 years ago.

I think the Puma is a better knife


(http://www.german-knife.com/images/182001-puma-fish.jpg)

Unfortunately, the Uncle Henery Knives will never be the same:

http://www.knivesplus.com/UNCLE-HENRY-KNIVES.HTML

If money were no object, this would be my choice:

http://www.reedssports.com/Product/product.taf?_function=detail&_ID=3973&pc=1033

I've seen them, and yes, they will cut your fingers off...not a playtoy.

Cutco

(http://www.cutco.com/images/prod/product/5721.jpg)

Quote from: peternap on August 11, 2009, 10:26:54 PM
Cutco

(http://www.cutco.com/images/prod/product/5721.jpg)

Nice knives, but I don't do traveling salesmen...

I do have one of those from my daughter's previous boyfriend.  He was a salesman for them for a while.  When he ran out of friends, the job was over.

Unbelieveable !

never get out of your car

only roll the window down enough to pass your 'papers'

this sob needs some  'therapy'

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2009/08/mom_in_minivan_tasered_in_traf.html

This article needs to be read in its entirety.

http://carlosmiller.com/2009/10/09/cop-who-beat-student-for-untucked-shirt-jailed-on-rape-charges/


"Cop Who Beat Student for Untucked Shirt Jailed on Rape Charges"

QuoteThe suburban Chicago cop who was caught on video beating a 15-year-old student for refusing to tuck his shirt last May is being accused of raping a woman while holding a pillow over her face.

He also killed his ex-wife's new husband last year by shooting him 24 times in front of their children while he was a cop for another suburban police department.

He was suspended for that incident and eventually found work with the Dolton Police Department, where he ended up beating the special needs student who weighed only 140 pounds, breaking his nose and lacerating his face.

A few months later, he allegedly threatened an Indiana woman with a knife. Then later raped her with a pillow over her face on September 14, according to the Chicago Tribune.

It is no wonder why the Dolton Police Department refused to release his name this week when the video of the student beating emerged.

Christopher Lloyd, 38, has been incarcerated in Indiana on a $110,000 bond since last month. He faces 20 years in prison for the rape allegation.

His ex-wife has also filed a wrongful death suit against him and the Robbins Police Department for the killing of her new husband in February 2008.

Chicago police accepted his claims of self-defense even though he drove to the couple's home while off-duty and got into an argument with Cornell McKinney, before shooting him 24 times.

It is not clear whether he reloaded in that incident, but if he did, it would make it hard to believe he was acting in self-defense.

The suit claims the autopsy contradicts the police investigation. I'm sure it does. The Chicago Police Department should be sued as well.

A very good friend of mine grew up in Dolton a very nice middle clas Chicago suburb

he recently went back here -- he said he almost didn't recognize the place and didn't feel it was a safe place for him

Question:

With the number of violent incidents in this thugs past -- how did he get hired as a policeman


answer:


It is what they are looking for these days.

Quote from: IronRanger on October 10, 2009, 10:50:56 AM
This article needs to be read in its entirety.......

Quote from: Windpower on October 10, 2009, 11:16:21 AM
.....
It is what they are looking for these days.

Is there a real worthwhile point in making this type of post?  ???  Perhaps I don't understand and somebody could explain it to me?

Of course there is evil in the world, in our country, in our local towns, perhaps in our neighborhoods. There is also a lot of good. I do not see the point in simply posting a link to a negative article, with a comment that it's a "must read" unless the poster has some constructive comment to go along with it.

Quote from: MountainDon on October 13, 2009, 01:08:00 AM

Quote from: IronRanger on October 10, 2009, 10:50:56 AM
This article needs to be read in its entirety.......

Quote from: Windpower on October 10, 2009, 11:16:21 AM
.....
It is what they are looking for these days.

Is there a real worthwhile point in making this type of post?  ???  Perhaps I don't understand and somebody could explain it to me?

Of course there is evil in the world, in our country, in our local towns, perhaps in our neighborhoods. There is also a lot of good. I do not see the point in simply posting a link to a negative article, with a comment that it's a "must read" unless the poster has some constructive comment to go along with it.

I unlocked this topic.

I see nothing wrong with calling attention to the police brutality that is running rampant these days.  It may save one of our members from mouthing off and getting his head caved in with a billy club.

The police are plainly being militarized.

Are we a bunch of whiny sniveling little girly men that cannot decide for themselves that something is good or bad - or cannot we look the other way if we don't like it.

If we turn this forum into a worthless piece of crap with a bunch of censorship for every whiney little thing that does not tickle our ears then there will be no one interested in looking at the off topics and possibly helping someone in need on the general board.

Members cannot possibly know all of the things that may make one or another moderator happy.  

Lets limit our censorship to  TRUE REAL HATE rather than things that we do not personally like.

If there are major differences of opinion on this then PM me.  I am running short on time for the forum anyway.

I know that one helpful member at least is ticked off by this censorship.  Should we run them all off and just shut the forum down so we don't offend ourselves?  

Calling attention to the name of this board.

Off Topic - Ideas, politics, rants

If we can't stick with those topics and limit censorship then possibly we should change the name of the board?

I am not advocating going against John's wishes of no hate - but TRUE HATE, please.  

We should all be grown up enough to discuss the ugliness of the world that causes some of us to want to build a small home in the country. This off topic area is also for topics that influence decisions of small home builders --- community--- that want to get away from but be aware of the bad in the world to better take care of their families and friends.

This is a place for the idling engine.... a place to draw members to for their topics of interest so they will be there when a building question comes in.

True - some of it may be a bit ugly..... the world is sometimes ugly....toughen up so when reality sets in - we can face it.

1980 our Sheriff department snuffed one of their own as he wanted to straighten out the drug dealing.  Fire extinguisher and chains at the bottom of the lake and 10 years to be discovered.  Yeah - it's ugly.  Knowledge of that keeps me from casually talking to the wrong person.  Note that the family of the old chief still runs government here.

Seems to me this entire off topic area has become a sore spot. I think I'll steer clear of it from now on.

That is what I was afraid would happen once we started locking, censoring and deleting per our moods and whims.

Note that there is also NO RESTRICTION on posting nice uplifting pretty stories either.  Feel free to do that if you wish. :)

OKee Dokee Guys...

Let's not get our undies all in a bunch.

I had no intention of turning this Off Topic area into a place for only kittens and butterflies.

I agree with Glenn's point:

"We should all be grown up enough to discuss the ugliness of the world that causes some of us to want to build a small home in the country. This off topic area is also for topics that influence decisions of small home builders --- community--- that want to get away from but be aware of the bad in the world to better take care of their families and friends.

This is a place for the idling engine.... a place to draw members to for their topics of interest so they will be there when a building question comes in.

True - some of it may be a bit ugly..... the world is sometimes ugly....toughen up so when reality sets in - we can face it."

This can be and should be a place for voicing opinions and we should probably be clearer about pointing that out... An opinion, no matter how dearly held, is not a reality - especially not for someone else.

There is lots of brutal stuff (and lots of heroic stuff) that happens when police and military folks are doing their jobs. Even though they can be well trained and (hopefully) disciplined, things can and do go wrong, especially in life and death moments. And remember, we are still dealing with stressed out imperfect human beings. Just like you and me!

At times the system can be setup to make "wrong" happen more than it should. That needs to be corrected quickly! When it isn't, faith in the entire system of law and order is eroded.

But people can get themselves worked up. When a forum thread turns into a contest to see who can get the most worked up about (pick your topic: police, inspectors, politicians, government bureaucrats) then it has reached the point where we need to step back and take a deep breath.

I do not want us to become a vehicle for spreading distrust and disgust and giving members the impression that anyone building a cabin has to have a problem with authority figures. Most of us get along fine with inspectors, police and our neighbors. Most of us move to the country to get back into nature and to perhaps expand our peaceful view of the world, not to hole up in a fortress and have a gun ready to pick off anyone we think works for "the government".

So, I ask you, where do we want to draw the line?

Just because I feel more comfortable with the view of country living outlined by Thoreau or Ken Carey (http://www.amazon.com/Third-Millennium-Living-Posthistoric-World/dp/0062514083) than that of Ted Kaczynski (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theodore_Kaczynski), does that mean I should restrict the forum to just what fits my opinion?

As was pointed out earlier many forums have dropped all "off topic" discussions entirely as they too soon become toxic and potentially libelous. MountainDon has been willing to step in here and help out with our forum duties. His opinion on these issues is important to consider as is Glenn's as well.

Tricky problem. How to have free speech without being overwhelmed by the toxic stuff? The Enlightenment view of democracy is getting harder and harder to sustain. It helped, I suppose, when all the votes considered came from well educated white landed gentlemen. Even then tempers ran high on occasion.

So, are we doing a service here for our members or just providing a soapbox to stand on and rage at the world?

More wag, less bark --- at least, that is my hope. I know I don't plan to follow the Chinese model.

OK, John.  Just yanked my panties out of my crack and will enlarge on my thoughts.

A line seems to be a hard thing to draw without destroying the forum in my opinion.

If we are constantly walking on egg shells the forum will lose posters who visit off topics for their topics or others they are interested in.  I think that ones who are offended by the off topics will limit themselves to the safe topics.

True, we don't need catfights, but to prevent others from posting because we don't like their input is wrong also.  

Yes - we need to be decent to each other but we must also respect others interests or they will leave.  My above action was in response to a member complaint when this topic was abruptly closed with no possibility of alternate explanation or opposing view.  That is abuse of power rivaling dictatorship.

I believe that we just need to be decent to each other when discussing sensitive subjects, and I think the report to moderator is sufficient law regarding offensive postings.  I do not see the need to lock topics or censor things that don't pertain to true hate.

Pretending that something is hate speech because we don't like it is the in thing now.  

I would like to leave much of the decisions of what is offensive to the members via the report to moderator button, with the moderators removing only obviously bad stuff automatically.  I personally will not remove every cuss word unless I receive a complaint about it however I do not advocate it's use on the forum... leave me room at home though... [waiting]

I don't like lines... makes me want to cross them.

I can list a long line of officials I do like... many building inspectors, highay patrols who have helped me, the Health Department official who fought the Scam California Water Resources Board on the septic issues.  Yes, lots of them.

The issue here is not the good ones.  The issue here that is commonly covered is to watch your back.... we are looking out for our fellow members - warning them that the whole world is not a nice pink fuzzy place.  If they do not look out for themselves - get some street smarts - they may be run over by the bad ones.  That is the point.

One of our Sheriffs here (yes most seem to be good at this point - at least on the surface) was afraid that the High School kids here may be killed for fighting with some valley gang members who had no second thoughts about ganging up on them and shooting them.  These kids were naive.  The Sheriff was not.  Only through education about the outside world can some of us back woods hicks hope to survive. :)

Yes... lets counter the bad news with more good news stories - that could be a start.

With your permission, I will now reinsert my panties. [waiting]

Members, could you please comment on this topic - or topic hijack as you may view it-- :)

I feel it is your forum and I would like to know what you think.

My goal is to keep as many members fairly happy here and feeling good about the forum as possible,  but to do that we need to know your thoughts. My goal is also to keep members interested in the forum without fear that they may be saying the wrong thing or get jumped on by a moderator. 

I don't want to see intimidation limiting our think tank.

Obviously we can't keep everyone totally happy all of the time but with tolerance of others feelings and views I think we may find the middle road, and possibly learn something we didn't know or wouldn't have considered in the process.

Thank you

I don't always make my point clear, but on this topic here it is:

I figure if the mainstream media won't do it (we all see/hear stories about heroic cops), then I'll help disseminate the info on the bad ones.  My hope is that public outrage will steer the bad ones away.  I don't believe I've posted a blanket story about LEOs, in general, as being "unworthy scum".  It's been directed at bad individuals.  They exist and they need to be exposed.  A criminal's a criminal.

If I need to, I'll post a disclaimer before each of my new posts to this topic, so it remains clear what the goal is.

Well, you know me.  I am intimidated easily  :D

I guess I am one of those people who are going to call this 1-800 number just to say "undecided".  

This is the section for "rants".  I am a little uncomfortable if it becomes the section for "attacks".  In this instance, I think that maybe this thread is primarily being used to propagate dislike for law enforcement.  I even posted an unsavory story that I had.  It is sort of moving in the "many cops are thugs" direction.  

Many cops are thugs.  I think that more are really good folks.  I know I've been assisted a few times in my life by kind law enforcement people.  I think many bosses are thugs too.

I also think that there is nothing really inappropriate in this thread though.  Allowing a person to express negative biases that they may hold is probably a free speech appropriate behavior.  (Yes, I know that this forum is private domain).

Do some of our threads here get out of hand?  I think so.  But I also don't think that is the norm.  We also have the ability to ignore a thread that we don't want to read.

Does this forum provide the ability for any user to filter out another user's posts?   Some forums allow a person to strip out another user's comments.  That might be a way to appease.

(did I miss something here, did my above comment get this thread locked ?)


This forum is a favorite because the users are inteligent and not afraid to voice opinions

There is a lot of good dicussion here

Censorship sucks !

I have left lots of forums because of mods abusing their power

I agree whole-heartedly with Glenn

Thanks, Ironranger.  If we have to sit and guess if we will offend someone with reasonable material then even I will stop participating in the forum.  This is the only group or club I have not quit because of whiners or intimidation by so called authority figures.  I see men as being created equal and not even BO or GWB are better than you or I.  

Yes - I am a bit of an authority figure as John has given me permission to volunteer to help make this forum possible by limiting spam, hate speech, personal attacks and removing members who break those rules.  I remove a few a week usually.  You do not notice because they are advertisers, porn posters or spammers.  

I do not feel it is fair for me to abuse that power by removing or blocking things that I just plain don't care for or I disagree with.  I feel it is also my right and goal to protect the rights of legitimate members who do not cross the guidelines set by John, even if I do not like or agree with what they are saying.

I feel you have the right to talk about things that bother you or your family and that others should watch for or learn from.  

I feel I have the right to not read it.  I see no need for a disclaimer that doesn't pass John's limit on TRUE HATE speech.  If there must be line I will settle for it being there.  I could see an exception if something was way out of line and unreasonable but, our forum does not draw members who post such material for the most part.

Information in case anyone does not know:  Members should remember that John's limits on the postings in the disclaimer at the top of the forum are to help prevent lawsuits and since a members postings are copyrighted as they are posted, they could be subject to be included in those lawsuits also.  That should limit members  idea of what is appropriate.  

Nobody is unable to be located.  IP addresses are recorded and your internet service provider has record of when you were on .  Even if you use a screen name, NSA has access to your identity.

That said, I still don't see that we have slipped far enough into a dictatorship that we are not able to discuss problems with the system.

Frank, you and I have not had a good difference of opinion in a while.  Even when we did, I did not trample on your right to have that difference of opinion with me by deleting, blocking or removing your postings.

I felt that would be an abuse of my administrator's power.  I feel that you needed to get out your view on a point also so that others could consider your views.  You are free to say things I don't like.  I am not terminally and irrecoverably harmed.  It has been a pleasure differing in opinion with you in the past. :)  

I feel it is important to state our views and read others views without getting butt hurt over them (sorry - I couldn't think of a better term for that).  I am saying we should be able to make our point and read others views without harboring any animosity or ill will toward each other.

There is no way that I know of to block a members postings on an individual basis.  I think we are limited to not reading that members postings or not reading a topic if it offends us personally.  At least member names are prominently placed on each posting if we want to ignore them.

Also remember that if a member says something they feel is inappropriate when they review their posting, then they are able to delete or edit their own posting.  I delete myself nearly every day.  d*

I want to see our members participate in open free discussion without worrying about every little detail.  No whining.  :)

Quote from: Windpower on October 15, 2009, 10:28:32 AM

(did I miss something here, did my above comment get this thread locked ?)


This forum is a favorite because the users are inteligent and not afraid to voice opinions

There is a lot of good dicussion here

Censorship sucks !

I have left lots of forums because of mods abusing their power

I agree whole-heartedly with Glenn

Windpower, I see you view it the same as I do.  If it gets to be a whiny, abusive, picky little useless forum, then you and I will likely both be leaving.

I don't think it was your comment, but actually a misinterpretation of John's guidelines and member's desires that got it locked.  I will not participate in a whiny, abusive, power trip strangled group.  I even limit my own abuse of power.  I am not exempt from that.

To all, I enjoy our discussions and difference of opinions here and hope we can find middle ground where we can all continue to enjoy it here.  I will fight to keep it the way it has been and remain within John's guidelines, however I will not let those guidelines be stretched to more than they are at the minimum or I just will not participate.

It is my view that moderator abuse of the forum will kill it by attrition, just as you have stated, Windpower.

I feel our group is in the top 5% of the total population as far as sense and intelligence regarding views is concerned.  We need to act that way and educate each other.  We need to act like grown up's (except me).  We can handle it. :)

As as the "cop-bashing", I don't understand what's wrong with exposing bad cops.  Too many walk-away without charges being pressed or "paid admin leave".

I am deeply confounded by those people who protect authority even when they commit disgusting criminal acts. 

Perhaps someone who has this viewpoint can explain it to me?   ??? 

Exposing bad cops is fine, good and necessary. It would mean more to me, be more effective, to see the exposé on a local level as I believe there's little I can do about something that occurs at a small town police force several states away.  ??? 

I actually expressed my disgust at this type of behavior on the title article directly to the police department in Oklahoma.  I requested that he be fired before I travel in their state.  You might be surprised at what the internet can do.

I mentioned our health official who fought the State for us regarding the septic law.  It was passed yet we were able to get it rewritten and back to the drawing board by dissent and email by the citizens including outsiders.  This was plainly a grab for money at around $40000.00 a pop by vested interests and corrupt state officials trying to make thier investments pay off.

Knowledge is power.

QuoteExposing bad cops is fine, good and necessary. It would mean more to me, be more effective, to see the exposé on a local level as I believe there's little I can do about something that occurs at a small town police force several states away.  Huh?

Raising the level of awareness is necessary too;  Distancing ourselves from it isn't patriotic either-  I care what happens in Washington, D.C.- it all has a trickle-down effect.  Do I worry about every detail and every event around me?  Absolutely not, but this particular issue gnaws at me.  

Just in case anyone cares, I am in general agreement on the evolution of the discussion here. I think we are doing a pretty good job of keeping ourselves free while barking down (when needed) the abuses.

I am not worried we are showing up on any Homeland Security screens and hope that any postings that might foster terrorism or a Timothy McVeigh (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timothy_McVeigh) type call to destructive action will be reported quickly and blocked by the watchful eyes of our volunteer moderators. Those guys we don't want on board and, because this is a free and open forum, they won't join up wearing signs. We will have to get to know them by their posts.

The fact is not every member who signs up to this forum will be worthy of membership. Most will be helpful and post interesting topics. We may at times have to be cops ourselves.

One comment on the video Iron Ranger linked to... that video exists only because cop cars are now fitted with video cams and recorders that can't be tampered with. This is to record and document arrests and catch abuses of police powers as well. There will always be "bad cop" videos that are leaked... the "good cop" videos go directly to Fox's "Cops" show. :D

When we need to worry is when the police departments start taking out the cameras! That's when the way will be clear for the police state fears to really get rolling. Until then the videos will help keep the cops clean and protect the public from a climate of abuse (but not all individual abuses, of course).

Of course we care, John.  It is a special event for us when you take time from your busy schedule to check in on us and make sure we are playing nicely. [waiting]

You of course are the ultimate "Decider" for the major issues of the forum you let us play in so freely, so we always strive to earn your blessing. ::)

Seriously now, Thanks for being fair about this and I think you will be well rewarded with an ever expanding forum with great members for the most part.  

Allowing topics of interest to continue in the off topics relatively free of censorship will assure a steady supply of members who will also be perusing the other boards to help members in need.  

During the last year of work, I was so busy that if it were not for the off topics, I would have had little reason to show up here, as Sassy can tell you.... I did very little on the place.

We have many members who alert us when things have to be looked at so while a problem may creep up for a short time, I don't think it will remain there for long.  :)

I don't think that there is any doubt that the media is even lower.

I'm trying to figure out what this story is all about.  It appears that a Heene family neighbor was pissed that the media was blocking the road.  He got out of his truck to yell at a reporter, and apparently got jumped on from behind by someone else... a news related person maybe?

Note that he gets thrown on his head, and that the news folks only really get excited when it appears that one of their own is about to get his butt kicked. 

I do hope the bald guy is successful in his lawsuit.

http://www.knx1070.com/Fight-Erupts-Outside-Heene-Home/5474241

To borrow a phrase from IronRanger..  

Quote...issue gnaws at me.

I spent the past three days and nights in the mountains, felling trees, bucking them into manageable sizes, rolling them down the hill, etc. My mind was rolling around thoughts from this topic, mainly thoughts about how wrong I was, how stupidly I acted. It gnawed.

IronRanger I apologize for allowing a personal feeling get in the way of my better side and totally obscuring my moderator duties. I should not have locked this thread. (Note to the readers, I never deleted so much as a period, I did lock the topic. That was wrong.)

A also apologize to John for stirring up a hornet's nest when no stirring was required or necessary. I was over zealous in my interpretation of "I would like us to focus here more on helping each other (which we do a very good job of) and less on trying to vent frustrations on real or imagined enemies."

I do not expect anyone to give me kudos for owning up to my lapse in judgment any more than I expect any continuing rehashing of my error. What's done is done, and I'm sorry. Let's all move onward.

QuoteIronRanger I apologize for allowing a personal feeling get in the way of my better side and totally obscuring my moderator duties.

Thanks, MtnDon. 

QuoteLet's all move onward.

Agreed.  I was one step ahead of ya.   :D

No problem with me, Don. 

It did lead to a further refining, simplification and clarification of the boards mission as well as an aim toward more goodwill without limiting those who just need to get it off of their chest much, if any.

Sorry if I was overly colorful.  I was just in a writing mood. [crz] :)

There's nothing "alleged" about this video.  The guy's skippin' down the sidewalk and the cops start beating the s*** out of him.  They claimed he struck the officers and horses, then the horses caused his injuries.

__________________________________________


"Video Allegedly Shows Md. Police Beating Student"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TAPwyodTkYA

 The only punishment the cop received is a 5 day suspension.
Call OK Commissioner of Public Safety Kevin Ward at 405-425-2001 and tell him to fire Trooper Martin.

Quote from: NM_Shooter on July 24, 2009, 11:46:11 AM
Here's the police report.  I especially like "I'll speak with yo mama outside".  Upon that comment alone, I think the cop showed incredible constraint. 

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/years/2009/0723092gates1.html

If you are going to be a howling hypocrite and do your best to piss off a cop, don't be surprised if you get to go for a ride.

Here's a decent write up on the subject.  In the picture, note the stoic black cop.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2009/jul/22/henry-louis-gates-michael-white

What makes you think cops have the right to "give us a ride" because we make them angry?

You're right.  Just pissing off a cop is not reason enough.

Acting in an unstable fashion, refusing to show identification when a neighbor calls in a breaking and entering concern, that is reason enough. 

Acting like an ass just didn't help him out any. 

to be honest, I dont really like cops.  I have seen more bad cops than good cops.  The few people I have known since high school that went into law enforecement; 1 went on to leave it for the crruption and another fell right in line.  I do not have alot of respect for them overall.

But, everyone needs to understand something about cops.  They spend their entire day dealing with the bottom 10% of the populace.  They routinely deal with the crack addicts, the wife and kid beaters, the drunks, the dealers and theives whatever.  What is an appropriate response when dealing with those people are generally not the most appropriate response when dealing with the other 90% of the population.  But I do understand stress.  I do understand a breach of trust.  I do understand when a cop is confronted by an angry agressor and the cop makes the situation out to be worse than it is.  I am not saying it's right.  I am not saying its the proper way to respond, I am only saying I understand why some would confuse a non-violent situation with a violent situation if they had been exposed to enough of it.  (veterans will understand this as well for all the wrong reasons). 

Anyway, even if your in "the right", dont confront the police.  save it for the judge.  You wont win against the gun and the badge. 

I think that the camera surveillance of both suspects and the police response is a very, very good thing.  You don't have to watch too many episodes of "COPS" to see that arrests are often accompanied by what appears to be overly aggressive behavior on the part of the law enforcement officials. 

The police make me nervous because of the human waste they have to deal with on a regular basis.  This clearly affects their response to everyone; I suspect that no cop ever believes any story unless it is a confession. 

I think the best approach to dealing with the police is to speak little and be nice.  At best, a bad attitude is going to delay you due to a field interrogation.  If you act hostile or unstable, you may be arrested and held until you are deemed to be sober or otherwise determined to be no threat.

Yeah... I think video is a good thing  ;D

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1qdWExQGiA

I've been slacking on this thread, so here's a heartwarming story.  It brings new meaning to "stand by your man":

QuotePolice Sergeant Doubled as Serial Rapist

Wife Stands by Illinois Policeman Jeff Pelo, Sentenced to More Than 400 Years in Prison

http://abcnews.go.com/TheLaw/story?id=6467266&page=1

Some stories on Policing the Pervs, err, rather Perv Police.

Former Police Captain Admits to Child Sex Abuse

http://ozarksfirst.com/fulltext?nxd_id=358816

Former sheriff's deputy pleads guilty to child porn charges

http://www.argusleader.com/article/20101119/UPDATES/101119028/1003/BUSINESS

Former trooper unable to get name off sex offender list

http://www.herald-mail.com/?cmd=displaystory&story_id=256997&format=html

Website tracking abuse.

http://www.injusticeeverywhere.com/

http://www.nypost.com/p/news/local/manhattan/kiddie_pawn_shock_KnKyQ0JfMITAIqGawRJf8J
A group of old men busted for playing chess in an area where adults must be accompanied by a kid under 12.

Problem with this is that a pedophile with ....say a six year old, would have been legal there.

Quotemust be accompanied by a kid under 12.

Wow.   >:(

Thanks for the injusticeeverywhere.com link, Glenn.

Thought you might like it - had to look it up as I saw it yesterday.

Warning for language.  The guy in the car told the cop to "Shut up." 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qyZHWtcooJI&has_verified=1

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/metro/article_61a185db-74b7-541b-a5ab-88476fc95124.html


cop was off duty

has previous record of excessive force

Here's an interesting tidbit:

QuotePlatke, 49, the owner of the Shell station on Arsenal Street, claimed the man seen being hit by Ries was being disruptive that night and was struggling with the officer.

Platke said he was not at the station that night but had spoken to two employees and had viewed security camera footage. He later provided footage to the Post-Dispatch, but it was grainy and the view of the altercation was largely obstructed.

"The guy was plainly drunk," Platke said. "Inebriated." He said the man's friends got him outside but he continued to cause problems, struggling with his friends. That's when Ries intervened, according to Platke.

"The officer grabbed him and tried to get him to come out of the car. The guy fell onto his chest and locked his arms around this officer's ankles and would not let go," Platke said. Ries "was there with his feet locked together, screaming at this guy to let go. He used his baton to try to hit him to get him to let go. He finally had to use (pepper spray) and the guy finally let go."

Blaine Thompson, 21, of south St. Louis County, said he was the designated driver for the man who was beaten and two friends. He would not identify his friends but said they were cooperating with the police investigation.

Thompson said Ries had been justified to "take action." As for the use of force, he said, "It's not really my call."

He agreed with Platke that the man who was beaten had been grabbing the officer's legs. He declined to say more, saying officers had asked him not to speak to the media.

So the guy who got beat's designated driver says the officer was justified to "take action" and backs up the officer's statement that the guy grabbed the officers legs and would not let go.

But on the other hand, this is the third complaint against that officer for using baton and pepper spray.

I don't think being an a**hole and holding on to a police officer's ankles justifies baton and pepper spray.  He could have subdued him some other way.

QuoteThe guy fell onto his chest and locked his arms around this officer's ankles and would not let go...

To me, this is the crux of an argument against pepper spraying and a beating.  The guy falls out of the car on to his chest (whilst being yanked from the car by the officer) and grabs the cop's ankles.  It seems, to me, that the guy was just grabbing whatever was in-front of him because he was drunk and scared.  If he was trying to wrestle the officer to the ground, fine, pepper spray and/or give him a wonk or two.  But seven times and pepper sprayed while hanging on to his ankles?  Pffffftttttt.  In the video, it didn't look like the cop was struggling to maintain his footing.

Fell asleep at Denny's?  You're gettin' tased.

http://www.nwcn.com/home/?fId=115247239&fPath=/news/local&fDomain=10202

QuotePORTLAND, Ore. -- A jury has awarded $30,500 in economic damages to a man who was tased by a Portland police officer inside a Denny's restaurant.

The city of Portland was found liable for battery, but not liable for false arrest or malicious prosecution in the case.  Jurors determined that Officer Kevin Tully had a right to arrest Jason Elgin after he fell asleep at a Southeast Portland Denny's.  However, they also believed Tully went to far when he tased Elgin 2 times on the floor during the arrest.

"I'm happy with how it turned out," said Elgin. "I really wanted to speak on behalf of the public that the force was not needed." 

"I'm gratified the jury found no force was required, because a hell of a lot of force was used," said Greg Kafoury, the plaintiff's attorney.

Elgin's civil claim against the city for false arrest, battery and malicious prosecution originally asked for $300,000 for pain and suffering and legal fees.

While officer Tully declined to comment, his attorney did.  "Mr Tully's actions were a reaction to what Mr. Elgin was doing and they were proportional, including the use of the taser," said Bill Manlove, Tully's Attorney. 

Security video from two different camera angles showed 32-year-old Jason Elgin and a fellow student from Portland Community College at the restaurant in 2009, where they appeared to be asleep.

The two went to the Denny's in Southeast Portland at about 2 a.m. Elgin claimed they were exhausted after celebrating the end of midterms.

The manager at Denny's called police to see if they could help wake them up.

Officer Kevin Tully can be seen approaching the students. The video does not show Elgin being tased. There is a gap during the actual tasing and take-down.  "The tape really upsets me, because honestly you can't really see what's going on," said Elgin. "It was the independent witnesses that made the difference in this case."

From another angle, Elgin can be seen on the floor. His classmate testified she woke up to hear Elgin screaming.

The city's attorney said the video shows that Elgin provoked the arrest by resisting.

Several witnesses who were inside have testified that virtually everything officer Tully said was faulty.

Elgin was tased by officer Tully two times and was charged with trespass, disorderly conduct, resisting arrest, harassment and interfering with a police officer.

All the charges were dropped.

Just a note of confidence to the way the thread issues were addressed
by Glenn and others. I for one think that they are all doing a superlative job so that we can enjoy this great and unusual site.

Oh yes, and if anyone disagrees with what I have said, you're wrong.

;D
Bruce

Quote from: firefox on February 08, 2011, 03:21:39 PM

Oh yes, and if anyone disagrees with what I have said, you're wrong.

;D
Bruce

[rofl2]

They just took you off of the list Bruce! You're free to fly again.

Ex-Police Officer Now Convicted Sex Offender

Quote"...A Channel 2 Investigation last year revealed Palmarini had a history of questionable sexual behavior on the job, with multiple allegations of sexual assaults while he worked for several police departments."

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/27364378/detail.html