I agree, that or he is too old. Like the person who shouldn't be driving anymore who confuses the brake and the gas.
73 Year Old Police Reservist Accidentally Shoots and Kills Suspect
- Thread starter Mocking You
- Start date
I agree, that or he is too old. Like the person who shouldn't be driving anymore who confuses the brake and the gas.
Mocking You
New member
I can read just fine. The USA Today article is quoting Bates' lawyer who says the Tulsa World reports that his client had no police training is false. Nowhere did the USA Today article say that he had training, only Bates' lawyer is saying that.
Well, apparently you believe the guy's lawyer. As you know, lawyers are paragons of truth tellers. Meanwhile the sheriff that Bates helped get elected admitted to a radio station that Bates' certification papers were lost. And the Tulsa World reports that three supervisors that refused to certify Bates' training were transferred. Isn't it likely the unnamed sources are the supervisors that lost their jobs?
No, i believe the sheriffs department who claims he was trained, untill there is real evidence to show otherwise, and even you can admit he was an officer at one point, something anyone can look up on him, which means at one point, he was trained, plain and simple.
Its ok with me really, if you are the kind who follow rumors and unsubstantiated claims.
Mocking You
New member
There's no real evidence he was trained; the certification paperwork is "lost".
Yes, FIFTY YEARS AGO. You gonna tell me he was trained in how to use a Taser in 1965?
As it stands we have Bates, his lawyer, and the sheriff (whom Bates ran his reelection campaign) saying he had training. But there is no paperwork to prove it.
Meanwhile, you have three supervisors that (allegedly) refused to certify Bates and they lost their jobs.
So it's a he said, she said situation. Since the GUY SHOT AND KILLED SOMEONE BY MISTAKE I think that's a pretty clear indication his training is wanting.
Or that he is just too old to be doing anything that requires dexterity.
Would you claim someone who became to old to drive, was never trained to drive because they mistook the brake for the gas?
Mocking You
New member
Of course not. Your analogy is flawed. Police procedures have changed a lot since 1965, driving a care has too, but not very much. Put that person in a Chevrolet Volt or a Nissan Leaf, both electric cars, and let's see him drive it.
Believing rumors without substantiation is what is flawed. I wouldn't want you on a jury.
Mocking You
New member
Bates said he received his firearm training from the Maricopa County Sheriff's office (Maricopa, Arizona).
Lisa Allen, chief media relations office for the sheriff's office there, said they had no record of Bates attending their training.
In fact, Allen said, that training is only available to members of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, meaning Bates would not have been eligible. The class, Allen said, has only been offered three times.
"We don't allow out-of-state people to take the class," she said. "I'm only surmising, and I can't confirm this because this would not have been our class, but our active shooter instructor did travel to Dallas once to teach a class.
"Maybe he took that class and is saying he took it through us, but again, that would not have been our class, so we have no way to verify if he attended it or not."
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/cour...cle_a6330f10-a9fb-51e3-ab5e-4d97b03c6c04.html
Lisa Allen, chief media relations office for the sheriff's office there, said they had no record of Bates attending their training.
In fact, Allen said, that training is only available to members of the Maricopa County Sheriff's Office, meaning Bates would not have been eligible. The class, Allen said, has only been offered three times.
"We don't allow out-of-state people to take the class," she said. "I'm only surmising, and I can't confirm this because this would not have been our class, but our active shooter instructor did travel to Dallas once to teach a class.
"Maybe he took that class and is saying he took it through us, but again, that would not have been our class, so we have no way to verify if he attended it or not."
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/cour...cle_a6330f10-a9fb-51e3-ab5e-4d97b03c6c04.html
Mocking You
New member
Ah, an ad hominem attack. How sweet.
You admit you believe rumors.
Mocking You
New member
1. The sheriff admits they have no paperwork proving Bates' was certified.
2. The Maricopa County Sheriff's department denies Bates ever took firearm training.
3. Bates accidentally shot and killed someone with a firearm.
These are not rumors.
#2 is impossible, since he used to be a police officer.
The others do not prove he never had training and those who claim he didnt, are not willing to be named.
How many other people would you hang without evidence?
Keep pushing the rumor is evidence theory, its amusing. Ill wait for substantiated facts.
Mocking you, i could call a newspaper tommorrow and claim that you are a cross dresser and cite that i wanted to be unnamed.
Would it be true because i said so?
Would it be true because people wanted to believe it was true?
Would it be true because i said so?
Would it be true because people wanted to believe it was true?
Mocking You
New member
Oh puh-leeze....
2. Bates claims he took firearm training from the Maricopa County Sheriff's department, however the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department denies Bates ever took firearm training FROM THEM.
Mocking You
New member
First of all, it wouldn't be news.
Now, if you called and said I was a cross-dresser and then another person called in and said I was also, and then another, and no one could find clothes meant for my gender in my possession and I was seen shopping for clothes of the opposite gender, well that's pretty good circumstantial evidence.
Actually the department is challenging the tulsa reporters claims:
And here is what the sheriffs department said:
Mocking You
New member
Well, you're misreading it again. The Tulsa sheriff's department, via Shannon Clark are disputing the three supervisors story that they were reassigned for not falsifying Bates training. She's not remotely addressing the Maricopa County Sheriff's office.
Clark addressed the Tulsa World's story in which sources said sheriff's office supervisors were reassigned for not falsifying Bates' training documents, telling NBC News: "The media outlet that is putting that information out is using unconfirmed sources and also relying on anonymity.
http://www.tulsaworld.com/news/cour...cle_a6330f10-a9fb-51e3-ab5e-4d97b03c6c04.html
The newspaper's story does not say who allegedly asked the supervisors to falsify the training records or why. But the orders apparently started years ago, before Harris' death, "back when (Bates) was trying to get on as a deputy," reporter Ziva Branstetter told CNN's "New Day."
The Sheriff's Office denied the allegations in the Tulsa World's report. It also declined a CNN interview to respond to the claims. In an email to CNN, the department's Maj. Shannon Clark said the lack of named sources in the newspaper's report leaves him dubious. "Just keep in mind that the Tulsa World reporter cannot validate her sources and claims anonymity, which leaves us skeptical that her claims are unsubstantiated and deceptive," Clark wrote.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/16/us/tulsa-shooting-robert-bates-training/
Mocking You
New member
Tulsa Sheriff's Department now says some training requirements might have been waived in the Robert Bates case.
But Clark did say it's possible that some training requirements may have been waived.
Sheriff Stanley Glanz has the authority to waive any department policies, Clark said.
"The policies within our organization are signed off by the sheriff, but there are also policies that give the sheriff the ability to waive any policy within our organization. That's part of being a sheriff's office," Clark told the newspaper.
Glanz told KFAQ radio this week that officials can't find records of Bates' firearms certification.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/17/us/tulsa-shooting-robert-bates/index.html
But Clark did say it's possible that some training requirements may have been waived.
Sheriff Stanley Glanz has the authority to waive any department policies, Clark said.
"The policies within our organization are signed off by the sheriff, but there are also policies that give the sheriff the ability to waive any policy within our organization. That's part of being a sheriff's office," Clark told the newspaper.
Glanz told KFAQ radio this week that officials can't find records of Bates' firearms certification.
http://www.cnn.com/2015/04/17/us/tulsa-shooting-robert-bates/index.html
Its irrelevant to me what Tulsa world has to say, the sources are unnamed and unsubstantiated. So yes, they are dubious claims.
Do you think that repeating the unnamed sources over and over will make it the truth?
Mocking You
New member
What about the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department? Is their statement that Bates never took firearm training from them unsubstantiated and dubious?
I'm not repeating it over and over again. I'm trying to clarify your confusion over all the statements flying around about Bates training. Interesting that now that the heat is on, the Sheriff's Department admits some training requirements might have been waived in Bates' instance.
Here's what we know:
1. Bates says he took firearm training from the Maricopa County Sheriff's Department. Maricopa County Sheriff's Department denies this.
2. The certification papers showing Bates has firearm training can't be found.
3. The Tulsa Sheriff's Department admits that training requirements are sometimes waived.
Give this another day or two and it will all come out.