Cop gone wild---lying and making threats
0
-
As to BarkingDog's comment. Laredo is correct.
You can resist an unlawful arrest but not to the point of deadly force. That is another law.0 -
what an azzhat!
I wish him a bar encounter with angry drunk Marines [:D]
like a whole platoon0 -
quote:Originally posted by GUNFUNCO
First of all, I'm not making any excuses for the cop. I already stated my position as far as his actions.
BUT
As far as making a terrorist threat, I don't know what the exact elements of that would be since that would generally be charged by the feds. I highly doubt that this would qualify. And you guys are usually the ones screaming BS when the government overcharges anybody for a crime. Get real on that one.
nope, no terrorist threats here
There was no false imprisonment because he was never imprisoned. He was never even arrested. The kid would have had a valid defense for resisting an arrest IF he was arrested, but since that didn't happen, it isn't an issue.
nope, no false imprisonment here
As far as the numerous civil rights violations, you would have to name them before I could respond. Since you haven't named them, I cannot respond nor am I any kind of expert in that area. Since you all seem to be, I guess that would be up to you to know. Name em if you got 'em.
no actions were taken, so whatever civil rights violations would have to be concerning the threats
Lt496-(and I say this respectfully)-Maybe you could elaborate on what civil right violation occurred here. No arrest, No imprisonment. Threats (only) under the color of authority. I did not even see him search the vehicle.
nothing happened, but it's obvious the cop was an inch away from carrying out some of those threats. what would you say then? if he got busted on tape this time, do you suppose he has in fact done such a thing to somebody at least once before? those would have been serious civil rights violations. and, what do you think about the disappearing video from the cop car? do you suppose that is a civil rights violation? derelection of duty? something criminal was done there, possibly with the knowledge of other cops or even the police cheif himself.
A pat down-probably reasonable given the circumstances- (without the threats). So what is your take?
no. not reasonable.
A reasonable person could not have faulted the cop for merely checking out the vehicle in a public place at 2 in the morning in an area where numerous crimes had taken place so the contact was legitimate. It was his actions during the investigative stop that were improper. He accused him of not using a turn signal which was incorrect. (a civil infraction)
a lie, isn't it?
He spoke in a threatening manner but never carried out the threat. He MAY be able to be charged with an assualt but that would be up to the local prosecutor.
Police ARE held to a higher standard.
no they aren't
Any citizen could have said that and nobody would have made a big issue of it.
"You want to try me? You want to try me tonight? You think you have a bad night? I will ruin your night. . Do you want to try me tonight, young boy?" disturbing the peace, disorderly conduct, ...
I have seen citizens make far worse threats and no charges were ever filed.
how so? the victim decided not to file charges? the prosecutor refused? the cops were too lazy to do anything?
A citizen once threatened to kill the judge, the prosecutor and me on a case I once worked on. He was never charged. And the guys own attorney was the witness.
riiiiiight
Another guy threatened to kill my family. He spent exactly one night in jail. And this was after he pulled a gun on 3 cops and then barricaded himself with his SKS. He got probation and credit for the one night in jail. This cop basically threatened to take him to jail.
riiiiiight, uh huh
As far as to testimony, each juror has the right to determine how much weight to give to the testimony by any person including the police. Police generally get more credibility because most times the people they are dealing with on an arrest either have little or none. If a police officers testimony is unbelieveable, then it should be disregarded. If the suspects is so, same for that.
...if and when the problem gets that far. between here and there, ain't nobody going to listen to what Joe Citizen has to say. they just get swept under the rug and ignored.
People need to remember that cops are ordinary people. They have good days and bad. There are good and bad ones.
then why do they have to go through a psychological evaluation to get hired? why are they trained how to deal with situations and do their job correctly? so they can act like an 'ordinary person' on the job?
They also have the same rights as anybody else when suspected (and charged) with a crime.
on paper. in reality, they get all the protection they can get from their buddies, the cheif of po-lice (see the disappearing tape) and "the system".
Some of you guys are waaaay outta line when it come to that.
not really.
You guys can flame me if you want. What is reasonable works both ways.
except out of the public eye or outside the courts, Joe Public gets the shaft, as you can see in this videotape. why don't you cross-check it with the videotape from the cop car. wait, where did it go?0 -
I would make that guy retarded for life.....................ok a little more retarded than he already is. I know their are good cops and bad cops (I'm from Chicago) but its good to get stuff like this on film to flush out the bad. 0 -
buschmaster,
You obviously don't understand.
How long have you worked in law enforcement?
How much law school have you had?
How long have you served on the bench?
Now you say "riiight" when I tell you that cops and judges often get threats of harm to them and their families. Why don't you get some guts and go ask a few. It is not uncommon at all. In fact, I would venture to say that most have had that happen quite often and very few people are ever prosecuted for it. You know why? Most cops know that most of the ones with the biggest mouths are not the ones you gotta worry about. And most are not going to be intimidated by some POS anyway.
I see the intelligence level has dropped off here. I'll check back in the morning.[;)]0 -
quote:Originally posted by GUNFUNCO
First of all, I'm not making any excuses for the cop. I already stated my position as far as his actions.
BUT
As far as making a terrorist threat, I don't know what the exact elements of that would be since that would generally be charged by the feds. I highly doubt that this would qualify. And you guys are usually the ones screaming BS when the government overcharges anybody for a crime. Get real on that one.
There was no false imprisonment because he was never imprisoned. He was never even arrested. The kid would have had a valid defense for resisting an arrest IF he was arrested, but since that didn't happen, it isn't an issue.
As far as the numerous civil rights violations, you would have to name them before I could respond. Since you haven't named them, I cannot respond nor am I any kind of expert in that area. Since you all seem to be, I guess that would be up to you to know. Name em if you got 'em.
Lt496-(and I say this respectfully)-Maybe you could elaborate on what civil right violation occurred here. No arrest, No imprisonment. Threats (only) under the color of authority. I did not even see him search the vehicle. A pat down-probably reasonable given the circumstances- (without the threats). So what is your take?
A reasonable person could not have faulted the cop for merely checking out the vehicle in a public place at 2 in the morning in an area where numerous crimes had taken place so the contact was legitimate. It was his actions during the investigative stop that were improper. He accused him of not using a turn signal which was incorrect. (a civil infraction) He spoke in a threatening manner but never carried out the threat. He MAY be able to be charged with an assualt but that would be up to the local prosecutor.
Police ARE held to a higher standard. Any citizen could have said that and nobody would have made a big issue of it. I have seen citizens make far worse threats and no charges were ever filed. A citizen once threatened to kill the judge, the prosecutor and me on a case I once worked on. He was never charged. And the guys own attorney was the witness. Another guy threatened to kill my family. He spent exactly one night in jail. And this was after he pulled a gun on 3 cops and then barricaded himself with his SKS. He got probation and credit for the one night in jail. This cop basically threatened to take him to jail.
As far as to testimony, each juror has the right to determine how much weight to give to the testimony by any person including the police. Police generally get more credibility because most times the people they are dealing with on an arrest either have little or none. If a police officers testimony is unbelieveable, then it should be disregarded. If the suspects is so, same for that.
People need to remember that cops are ordinary people. They have good days and bad. There are good and bad ones. They also have the same rights as anybody else when suspected (and charged) with a crime.
Some of you guys are waaaay outta line when it come to that.
You guys can flame me if you want. What is reasonable works both ways.
GUNFUNCO,
No need to be respectful with me "young boy".[:o)]
My comments about the "officer" are based on the actions I saw. He lied about and/or manufactured the violations that he used as a pretense to stop/make contact with the young man.
The cops demeanor is a huge issue, but not the main basis for my comments.
Clearly the officer was purporting to act under the color of his "lawful" and "legal" authority. His problem came when, as an agent of the government, he had no legal authority to commit some of the acts that he did in fact commit.
As to the initial contact, I have nothing on which to base the legitimacy of that contact except the veracity of the officer. He demonstrated, rather quickly, that he is a liar and willing to lie about material things to bolster a potential case against the citizen. Huge problem.
I would argue that there was no suspicious circumstance or behavior that justified his actions AFTER the young man questioned why he was being questioned/contacted for doing nothing wrong. I will further question the officers veracity as to the area being frequently used by persons to commit suicide and or the occurrence of other crimes. It may be true, it may be bullsnit.
As to your comment on the "pat down" being reasonable under the circumstances, I totally disagree. A "pat down" is a search and as defined in Terry -vs- Ohio, an officer can conduct a terry search, or pat down when the following circumstances apply.
*The subject is lawfully detained.
*The officer can articulate that the subject is involved in, was involved in, or may be involved in criminal activity.
*The officer can articulate a specific threat to his safety and can articulate that the subject is likely armed e.g. sees a bulge that he reasonably believes to be a weapon, or the subject is making furtive movements towards what may be a weapon etc.
*The officer can then only search (pat) the suspicious area where a weapon may be immediately available and accessible to the subject. This is a pat of the outer clothing only and unless an object feels like a weapon, or is immediately identifiable as contraband by feel, you can not remove, or reach in to retrieve anything, period.
You can NOT routinely pat down people, period. The elements of Terry must be present before a pat down/search of someone is legal, barring of course the persons consent and/or a warrant or other exception to the warrant rule.
He made the young man exit the vehicle and prevented him from leaving, all because he lost his temper and got pissed off. Sorry, but that does not equal legal authority to restrict the free movement of a citizen, or detain the citizen while threatening to "F" up his life, arrest him to teach him a lesson, ruin him, or otherwise cause the citizen to fear for his safety, his personal freedom or an unjustified future criminal record.
As to the Unlawful Imprisonment issue. In my state unlawful imprisonment occurs when you unlawfully restrain (read definition) another person without legal authority. In the actual statute, it is a defense if the restraining person is a peace officer, acting in good faith and with legal authority.
Officer numbnuts had none of these justifications/defenses going on, period.
2. "Restrain" means to restrict a person's movements without consent, without legal authority, and in a manner which interferes substantially with such person's liberty, by either moving such person from one place to another or by confining such person. Restraint is without consent if it is accomplished by:
(a) Physical force, intimidation or deception; or
13-1303. Unlawful imprisonment; classification
A. A person commits unlawful imprisonment by knowingly restraining another person.
B. In any prosecution for unlawful imprisonment, it is a defense that:
1. The restraint was accomplished by a peace officer acting in good faith in the lawful performance of his duty;
Rather than my hastily written post on this issue claiming Threatening and Intimidating, the cop more properly violated the statute in my state for "Simple Assault" e.g. knowingly touching another person with the intent to injure, insult or provoke.
It seemed as if the officer made contact with the citizen at several points, particularly after 10-12 minutes had passed and the citizen mentioned the 4th Amendment and his rights. It seemed as if the cop turned him around to potentially cuff him, but may not have done so. A possible violation of my states statute on "Disorderly Conduct" also occurred e.g. intentionally or knowingly disturbing a person with seriously disruptive behavior and using abusive and/or offensive language in a manner likely to provoke another to retaliate.
This names a few potential criminal violations and being a cop does not give one immunity to prosecution. Of course a thorough investigation to establish all the facts would need to be done. Realistically criminal charges would not be filed, but should be in my opinion.
Cops like this are a cancer and need to be removed from office when discovered. He took an oath to support and defend the constitution and he wilfully violated that oath.
My professional opinion.0 -
Lt496-
(Per Criminal Law and Procedure-Fall 2000-published by the state of Michigan for police)
In my state, Terry merely requires 2 things
that there is reasonable suspicion that crime is afoot=stop
and Reasonable suspicion to believe person is armed=frisk
Those are the only 2 elements.
When I went to the academy, I recall that there was a 3rd element and there must also be fear on the part of the officer, but that is not in the manual (2000 edition) that my state puts out.
My book here even states as case law that an officer ordered a driver out of the vehicle before noticing a bulge in a guys coat. The driver was frisked and found to have a gun. The court found that ordering the guy out was a minimal intrusion and did not violate 4th amendment. (case-Pennsylvania v Mimms 98 S.Ct. 330-1977)
As far as manufacturing the information to conduct the stop, (I'm referring to the high crime area, etc-not the weaving or use of turn signals) that would have to be proven. I realize that the cops credibility is down the tube, but the justification may not be.
(I have thought that a far better approach would have been a walk up contact without emergency lights to establish what is going on or pull alongside the vehicle and make contact with the driver to engage in a conversation. That being said, I'll give a little leeway on the way the contact was made specifically because I DON"T know the area and wouldn't normally second guess a cop when making decisions that might directly affect his safety, like driving alongside a vehicle to make contact and taking a blast in the face from a shotgun. (A friend of mine was recently walking up to the car when the driver poked out a shotgun and shot him in the midsection.)
________________________________________________________
As far as Unlawful imprisonment, I think the police officer did not have a serious problem with his "original" contact being reasonable. It was not until he became abusive that most would have had a problem with his actions, IF he could substantiate that it was a high crime area or (other facts existed) but that is not known to either of us but doesn't diminish the actual facts if they are true. Neither of us know that yet. A 12 minute stop, if the officer had articuable(sp) suspicions do not seam unreasonable. It was his comments that were.
You eluded to the fact that that your comments might have been "hastily written". So we kind of agree on the above.
_________________________________________________________________
Now I will agree with you that a "simple assualt" charge would probably be a valid charge in this case (and stated so myself earlier) as well as "disturbing the peace" both of which are simple misdemeanors in my state. (90 day) Hardly the punishment most here want to inflict on the officer like shoooting him or sending him away on a felony.
As you said "of course a thorough investigation would have to be completed..." That is the point I was trying to make to some of the people here. You don't just charge the cop (just like he can't charge the public) without a solid knowledge of all the facts of a case.
____________________________________________
AGAIN AND AGAIN AND AGAIN! I am not making excuses for the cop. Just trying to use reasonable judgement in judging his actions.
_________________________________________
ALSO, Maybe you would like to elaborate to buschmaster how many times cops and judges are threatened by suspects. He doesn't seem to believe me.0 -
quote:okay after watching the entire video i will say this...i believe the motorist would have been within his rights to shoot and kill the officer. the officer was armed with a handgun and making threats to illegally kidnap and assualt an innocent civilian. therefore, the civilian would have been within his rights to use deadly force to protect his own life. i wish he had.
DOO-doo-doo-doo-DOO-doo-doo-doo. (Twilight Zone tune)
quote:typical...
Typical of what? If it were "typical" police behavior, it would not be remarkable, it would not be newsworthy, and we would not be discussing it here.
I don't see criminal behavior, but it is definitely bad police behavior, and should be addressed. It apparently is being addressed.0 -
screw it, I'm going to bail out of this conversation. I can see what's up with gunfunco, that's all I need to know. 0 -
I have never had any LEO issues, but I do have a question that I would like to find out what is, and is not true.
I have been told that if you are stopped, and are in the process of, lets says, being ticketed for a traffic infraction.
Lets say the LEO is a "jerk", and trips your trigger.
NO physical violence involved, but you start using foul language towards the LEO.
I have been told that you can be arrested for "verbal assault",......is that true?
If it is, would not the same apply to the officer using the same behaviour towards a citizen?
This is a real question, not being anti-leo.0 -
quote:I'm just glad the kid had a recording of what happened...????????????????????????????????????
I for one am wondering WHY and what this guy was recording to start with. Raise your hand if you drive around with a video camera on in your car!! The camera appeared to be on before he had any kind of contact with the officer. Makes me wonder if it isn't either a fake or a setup (does not excuse the officer).0 -
Marc-Not true in my state, if that is all that occurred. 0 -
Its guys like this that make us look bad, please dont look on other Offficers badly because of the actions of one. 0 -
buschmaster-trying to make me lose my cool?[}:)]
Kinda like the cop, aren't you?[:D]
I made statements. You refuted mine with yours. I did the same to yours.0 -
I was talking in reference to a scenario like,..........I know I deserve a ticket, I'm in a hurry, the cop wants to keep me sitting there lecturing me.
I say, just give me the f****ng ticket you f****ng blowhard!
I had been told that was what would happen,......in Florida anyway.
Doesn't matter to me, as I have never had any problems, and haven't even been stopped or gotten a ticket, for over 20 years.
Even if that scenario happened, I would just say,.....excuse me, I know what I did was wrong, and I deserve a ticket, but I am in a hurry. I know you are telling me what to do to avoid problems, and you are right, but I really need to get on my way. Simple!
After watching the vid,......yes the cop is a jerk, and should be disciplined, but I also believe the kid was baiting him too. He needs to find something better to do with his life IMHO.[;)]0 -
In my state, a simple assualt has 2 elements.
1-a threat of force or violence
and
2-an attempt to carry it out or an act in furtherance of
So, If someone says "I'm going to beat the crap out of you" but does nothing further-no crime has been committed.
If someone says the above and then clenches their fist or raises their hands in a fighting gesture and comes at you, an assualt has occurred even though no contact was made.
I know of no charge of "verbal assualt". It is either an assualt or it is not.
If someone walks up and strikes you, the threat is presumed.0 -
Re: Conspiracy, there was another officer present, and the officer made comments that the other officer would back him up.
He was conspiring to commit crimes,
Re: assault, there appeared to be times where the cop started to handcuff the guy, this is the attempt to carry out said threats.
People like this are enemies of liberty, the ones who commit atrocities when allowed to under rulers like Hitler or Saddam, mini-tyrants abusing their power.
As Jefferson said the "Tree of Liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of Patriots and Tyrants".
Regardless of the laws, I would like to see him killed or seriously injured for his actions, he should be made into an example for other would-be local tyrants who call themselves cops.
*Disclaimer: This is not a threat, I have no plans or intentions to cause this officer harm or give aid to anyone involved in causing this officer harm. This is merely a statement of opinion- But if I heard right now someone had killed that cop, I would be happy*0 -
Was it something I said?[}:)]
CA sucks-You have a right to your opinion. I never saw the cop attempt to handcuff anyone. I HEARD something to that effect. And I already stated an assualt charge may be appropriate. See my above posts.
As far as a conspiracy-why don't we wait and see what the legal "experts" come up with. With all the uproar, I'm sure they will try to make an example of the cop. We'll see what is charged and what he is convicted of. The old American way.0 -
"During the meeting Darrow asked to see the videotape from Kuehnlein's police car. But according to Uhrig, that footage, inexplicably, is nowhere to be found."
Sound like Theft of city property might come in play here.0 -
Maybe if the tape is actually missing. If it has been erased but the tape is still there, a simple dept policy violation. Which could be grounds for dismissal depending on their policy.
Maybe destruction of evidence? Again, that would be up to the local prosecutor and that state's laws.
Michigan probably has a law on that but is is not addressed in my book-soI don't know what the elements of that crime would be.0 -
Also sounds like a cover up, which could add to more conspiracy charges, obstruction of justice, etc.
To those saying the cop was rude but didn't break any laws, pull your head out of your rectum, there is a plethora of valid charges that could be brought against this disgrace to society.
The kid was not out of line, and nothing he did can definitively be called baiting the officer. He's had run ins with the cops before, I would like to know the veracity of his statements about being paid to drop charges against some other cop (mentioned in the video).
From what I have read on-line, this place is renowned for bad cops, "speed traps", etc. Having a video of your speedometer (it was plainly visible) sounds like a good idea if cops in that town are as bad as they appear to be.
I think this guy was smart and morally justified, not some stupid punk kid looking for trouble.
Also, with camera phones, small electronics, etc, videos like this are just what society needs, "little brother" may always be watching- how many cops get in trouble because they were caught on camera- as cameras become more widespread and less noticeable, cops might just start following the law they are charged with enforcing in case they are being watched (similar to more CCW making criminals more timid).
Of course, this positive effect will only happen if those caught on video are punished accordingly. If he gets off with just a slap on the wrist after such clear evidence, what do you think other cops will do once they are sure they aren't being recorded?0 -
quote:Originally posted by nunn
quote:typical...
Typical of what? If it were "typical" police behavior, it would not be remarkable, it would not be newsworthy, and we would not be discussing it here.
Typical police attitude. I've seen this enough times for it to be seen as norm rather than an exception, most cops are smart enough not to be obvious with it.0 -
It must be awful tough living in some of your worlds sometimes.
Can YOU read? I never said he was innocent or that he didn't break any laws! I cited a couple he may be able to be charged with.
However, most of what you guys are looking for is a crucifiction(sp).
The prosecutor has to look at the totality of the circumstances. I'm not saying it is so, but maybe the guy just got back from Iraq and is suffering from PTSD or maybe he just watched a baby die in a car crash.
He screwed up, nobody is disputing that. It is the measure of justice you wish rationed out that I have an issue with. You should be so hard on yourselves or your kids when you screw up.0 -
quote:Originally posted by nunn
I don't see criminal behavior, but it is definitely bad police behavior, and should be addressed. It apparently is being addressed.
If it's up to a cop to punish a cop, he'll walk. The video clearly indicates the 'boy' signaling. The chief flatfoot saw the video yet takes the junior flatfoot's assertion that he had reasonable cause to stop the taxpayer. Both a liars and perjured themselves. Doin' what comes natually.
Clouder..
Clouder..0 -
quote:Originally posted by thesneakyrussian
quote:Originally posted by nunn
quote:typical...
Typical of what? If it were "typical" police behavior, it would not be remarkable, it would not be newsworthy, and we would not be discussing it here.
Typical police attitude. I've seen this enough times for it to be seen as norm rather than an exception, most cops are smart enough not to be obvious with it.
Guess most of that comes down to where you live.
I honestly have never experienced any kind of police behaviour like that myself.
Actually, when I was younger, I was let off from a lot of stuff, that could have caused me grief, by an "understanding" cop.
I am sure that it does exist though, and the cop in the video was a HUGE jerk***.
What started it all in my opinion, was when the 20 year old responded to the question of what was he parking here for,......with "nothing".
How many folks pull into an empty parking lot at 2 AM, to just sit there and do "nothing".
Just answer the friggin question!
I'm tired,..........I'm bummed out, and want to sit and think,........or, I'm meeting my girlfriend here to get my cell phone that my dumbass left at her place.
Probably would have been no further issue.
Yeah,.........I know, why should he have to explain what he was doing if he wasn't breaking a law.0 -
quote:Originally posted by Marc1301
Yeah,.........I know, why should he have to explain what he was doing if he wasn't breaking a law.
exactly,why?to avoid trouble with police? what's next? let them search your car, home, detain you for a few hours without cause which they can do already just to avoid the trouble, right?0 -
quote:Originally posted by Marc1301
quote:Originally posted by thesneakyrussian
quote:Originally posted by nunn
quote:typical...
Typical of what? If it were "typical" police behavior, it would not be remarkable, it would not be newsworthy, and we would not be discussing it here.
Typical police attitude. I've seen this enough times for it to be seen as norm rather than an exception, most cops are smart enough not to be obvious with it.
Guess most of that comes down to where you live.
I honestly have never experienced any kind of police behaviour like that myself.
Actually, when I was younger, I was let off from a lot of stuff, that could have caused me grief, by an "understanding" cop.
I am sure that it does exist though, and the cop in the video was a HUGE jerk***.
What started it all in my opinion, was when the 20 year old responded to the question of what was he parking here for,......with "nothing".
How many folks pull into an empty parking lot at 2 AM, to just sit there and do "nothing".
Just answer the friggin question!
I'm tired,..........I'm bummed out, and want to sit and think,........or, I'm meeting my girlfriend here to get my cell phone that my dumbass left at her place.
Probably would have been no further issue.
Yeah,.........I know, why should he have to explain what he was doing if he wasn't breaking a law.
How 'bout. "Yas'ir masser, I wuz jist restin' my tarred ol' bones fer a spell. I don' mean t' cause yu'ns no grief, masser poleeseman, no sir. I jis be gittin' on home now, if' you's done wid my sorry ass, yas'ir, I's be beggin' yer pardon. Um-ummm."
Clouder..0 -
quote:most of what you guys are looking for is a crucifiction(sp)
-This would suitably appease me.
But I'll settle for criminal charges for:
Obstruction of justice
Conspiracy to commit kidnapping
Assault
Unlawful arrest/detainment
Disorderly conduct
Making a terrorist threat*
Conspiracy to commit destruction of property
Conspiracy to commit perjury
-Give me more time and I'll think of even more, except unlike the cop I won't be making up false charges, they will be things he actually did.
Not to mention monetary lawsuits to violating his rights, mental anguish, etc.
If I were the prosecutor, I would do to the cop what he threatened to do to the guy he stopped, F*@k up his life.
He would be bankrupt, serving several years in jail (I'm sure being a cop would make him real popular with the large inmates in prison)
If he ever makes it out of prison he will never be able to work as a cop again.
My goal would be to screw up his life so bad that he decides to take his own life.
* -Making a terrorist threat:
"574.115. 1. A person commits the crime of making a terrorist threat if such person communicates a threat to cause an incident or condition involving danger to life, communicates a knowingly false report of an incident or condition involving danger to life, or knowingly causes a false belief or fear that an incident has occurred or that a condition exists involving danger to life: "
How does "I will F*@K up your life" sound for making a threat of danger to someones life0 -
Clouder-How in your infinite wisdom did you find out the chief helped him destroy the tape.
Oh, you're just assuming because he wears a badge? 'Nuff said.
I think I'll just sit and watch a while.
Have at it, clouder.0 -
Nope,.....no need for the "massa" speech.
I guess I have a different life than some of you guys.
I don't have the urge to park in empty lots at 2 AM, or to attempt to play amateur constitutional attorney, as I am NOT one.
A lot of "parking lots", have no parking after XX hour posted, and whether, or not, you want to consider that YOUR property, it isn't, and you certainly can be forced to move.
Once again,.......I will say, the cop is a nutcase, and deserves punishment, but some of the dream worlds, you guys live in, is not realistic.
What if every citizen set out to "test" their rights, by setting up situations?
Is that what you really want your law enforcement tax dollars spent on?
Or would you rather have criminals, and drunk drivers taken off the streets, before they get a chance to kill one of your family members, or yourself?
Maybe I live in a very "fortunate" place concerning cop "nazi's".0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
93 comments