Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

73 year old LEO mistakes pistol for a taser. You know the rest of the story.

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Combat Engineer
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    Where's the rest of the document? Normally they end in a conclusion or summary section.

    Captain Huckleby seems to be the chief culprit in what was provided; it looks like he was playing a lot of favorites.

    Even though this is six years old, it should help the deputy,. If the agency skimped on his in-service training, that's not his fault.
    Page 11 is the beginning of the conclusion.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Where's the rest of the document? Normally they end in a conclusion or summary section.

    Captain Huckleby seems to be the chief culprit in what was provided; it looks like he was playing a lot of favorites.

    Even though this is six years old, it should help the deputy,. If the agency skimped on his in-service training, that's not his fault.

    Leave a comment:


  • Combat Engineer
    replied
    The Sheriff Departments own internal investigation, in 2009, states that Robert Bates very well may have been shown favorable treatment and not conducted all the training his records show.

    The document:

    http://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townn...510547.pdf.pdf

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Originally posted by holly6 View Post
    Good post. Wish I could rep you. Hope those time are behind us, but I seriously doubt they are.
    I wish AJ Rimmer would stop putting me on his ignore list, I respect his opinion very much, I fear he takes my posts to personal.
    I understand that wearing a badge makes you a target. I meant no insult to him, but was trying to start a conversation.
    Last edited by Urban hermit; 17 Apr 15, 22:49.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    I was raised by a cop, who worked his way up the ranks to chief then became a Marshall, over 30 years in law enforcement.
    His respect for good cops was endless, his hatred of bad cops was also endless.
    He arrested a lot of people in his career, investigated some high profile cases.
    Believe it or not, he once busted a mayor and his brother who operated a prostitution and drug ring, and the doctor who supplied the drugs, the same mayor who hired him as chief!
    As a Marshall he ran a sting operation and busted 4 sheriff deputies that ran a burglary ring, the sheriff ( an elected position ) was furious that he had not informed him of the sting, his reply was, "if I had, there wouldn't have been any arrest, would there?" This disput was very public, carried out in the local newspapers.
    I was in high school at the time, always looking over my shoulder.
    So I was raised to be a skeptic, it is one of my flaws.
    You are not a skeptic.

    You leap to unwarranted conclusions, you remain willfully ignorant of legal rights, procedures, and practices, and you stubbornly ignore all facts that do not support your baseless assumptions.

    Its just like the mental health thread. A lawyer, police officers, and medical professionals all tried to explain to you that you can't lock people up for being mentally ill. Statute was quoted. Examples were given. And through it all you stubbornly stayed with an infantile 'but somebody is going to get hurt' argument.

    In short, you aren't interested in learning the facts of any given matter, you just want to endlessly repeat your misconceptions.

    This is why you spend more time on my Ignore List than not: life is not simple, but all you have to offer is simplistic nonsense.

    I'll believe the officer is guilty when I read the court transcripts (which I will). I held that opinion through Ferguson, and the officer was cleared; what the media 'reported' was established to be untrue at best.

    Meanwhile, time to move you back to the IL.

    Leave a comment:


  • holly6
    replied
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    I was raised by a cop, who worked his way up the ranks to chief then became a Marshall, over 30 years in law enforcement.
    His respect for good cops was endless, his hatred of bad cops was also endless.
    He arrested a lot of people in his career, investigated some high profile cases.
    Believe it or not, he once busted a mayor and his brother who operated a prostitution and drug ring, and the doctor who supplied the drugs, the same mayor who hired him as chief!
    As a Marshall he ran a sting operation and busted 4 sheriff deputies that ran a burglary ring, the sheriff ( an elected position ) was furious that he had not informed him of the sting, his reply was, "if I had, there wouldn't have been any arrest, would there?" This disput was very public, carried out in the local newspapers.
    I was in high school at the time, always looking over my shoulder.
    So I was raised to be a skeptic, it is one of my flaws.
    Good post. Wish I could rep you. Hope those time are behind us, but I seriously doubt they are.

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Originally posted by holly6 View Post
    If we wait for the due process to finalize, I feel we can have a free discussion upon the results from our LEO's. Remember this is their livelihood,
    don't expect them to go public with their true feelings.
    I was raised by a cop, who worked his way up the ranks to chief then became a Marshall, over 30 years in law enforcement.
    His respect for good cops was endless, his hatred of bad cops was also endless.
    He arrested a lot of people in his career, investigated some high profile cases.
    Believe it or not, he once busted a mayor and his brother who operated a prostitution and drug ring, and the doctor who supplied the drugs, the same mayor who hired him as chief!
    As a Marshall he ran a sting operation and busted 4 sheriff deputies that ran a burglary ring, the sheriff ( an elected position ) was furious that he had not informed him of the sting, his reply was, "if I had, there wouldn't have been any arrest, would there?" This disput was very public, carried out in the local newspapers.
    I was in high school at the time, always looking over my shoulder.
    So I was raised to be a skeptic, it is one of my flaws.

    Leave a comment:


  • holly6
    replied
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    I also value their input, which is why I asked them if there has ever been a situation they thought the officer was wrong. I realize they must feel like the press is always out to get them, I get that.
    No doubt the good video is never shown.
    If we wait for the due process to finalize, I feel we can have a free discussion upon the results from our LEO's. Remember this is their livelihood,
    don't expect them to go public with their true feelings.

    Leave a comment:


  • Delenda estRoma
    replied
    http://thefreethoughtproject.com/civ...s-cop-defense/

    What about a case like this that hermit is talking about?


    Or this law passed in Indiana?

    http://thefreethoughtproject.com/sta...efense-police/
    Last edited by Delenda estRoma; 16 Apr 15, 23:10.

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Originally posted by holly6 View Post
    Haven't really seen that. During the threads that broach on recent events, the LEO's have been consistent with giving their experience and ending with "let the facts come out". The problem seems to be that when the event happens, everybody rushes to judgement and then lose interest as the months that go by. Personally, I value their impute to the forums and would not paint them with a "license to kill". I feel it is undeserved.
    I also value their input, which is why I asked them if there has ever been a situation they thought the officer was wrong. I realize they must feel like the press is always out to get them, I get that.
    No doubt the good video is never shown.

    Leave a comment:


  • holly6
    replied
    Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
    Cops have a license to kill apparently, at least it seems that way with every LEO on the forum.
    I do not recall a single case in which any have crossed the "Blue Line."

    So I would ask is there any case in which an officer would be guilty?
    I do believe this reserve officer did not intentionally kill the man, but I wonder if any LEO would be as understanding if a citizen unintentionally killed an officer?
    Haven't really seen that. During the threads that broach on recent events, the LEO's have been consistent with giving their experience and ending with "let the facts come out". The problem seems to be that when the event happens, everybody rushes to judgement and then lose interest as the months that go by. Personally, I value their impute to the forums and would not paint them with a "license to kill". I feel it is undeserved.

    Leave a comment:


  • Urban hermit
    replied
    Cops have a license to kill apparently, at least it seems that way with every LEO on the forum.
    I do not recall a single case in which any have crossed the "Blue Line."

    So I would ask is there any case in which an officer would be guilty?
    I do believe this reserve officer did not intentionally kill the man, but I wonder if any LEO would be as understanding if a citizen unintentionally killed an officer?

    Leave a comment:


  • Pirateship1982
    replied
    Originally posted by Surrey View Post
    I can't see why he has even been charged.

    He made a mistake in a high stress situation that he shouldn't have been in.

    Could the Agency/ senior officers be trying to protect themselves by charging him?
    The fact that he chose to be in this situation despite that is what shuts the door for me. I tend to be pretty hard on old timers who get themselves in over their heads. When you know that your wits and your reflexes are failing and you choose to continue driving/engaging in police work/insert activity that requires mental acuity and is dangerous to bystanders when you lack it, just because you're too prideful to hang up your spurs, as far as I'm concerned that's no different than choosing to drive when intoxicated. Throw the book at him. I have no tolerance for that sort of behavior. I respect my elders but when they're too old for these sorts of things they need to man up and accept it and not go endangering people just so they can pretend they still got it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Arnold J Rimmer
    replied
    Originally posted by Surrey View Post
    I can't see why he has even been charged.

    He made a mistake in a high stress situation that he shouldn't have been in.

    Could the Agency/ senior officers be trying to protect themselves by charging him?
    I think the prosecutor is trying to help him.

    I believe the prosecutor charged him with the lowest charge possible so that media pressure could not get a higher charge applied.

    And charged him with a charge which will be less likely to stick, as well.

    I noted some posts back links showing where there are already case law and experts willing to testify as to how this sort of thing occurs-its certainly far from the first incident.

    Leave a comment:


  • Surrey
    replied
    Originally posted by Arnold J Rimmer View Post
    These are questions which will haunt the agency and help the deputy.

    Lucky for them the guy involved was a dedicated felon.
    I can't see why he has even been charged.

    He made a mistake in a high stress situation that he shouldn't have been in.

    Could the Agency/ senior officers be trying to protect themselves by charging him?

    Leave a comment:

Latest Topics

Collapse

Working...
X