This woman needed statistics too
according to the moron you.
http://www.infowars.com/cop-thrashes-mother-in-front-of-8-year-old-son-after-yelling-incident/
And the list keeps growing.
Militarized Police
- Thread starter Christ's Word
- Start date
This woman needed statistics too
according to the moron you.
http://www.infowars.com/cop-thrashes-mother-in-front-of-8-year-old-son-after-yelling-incident/
And the list keeps growing.
Daniel1611
New member
"All police aren't bad police. Just like 90% of them." -Dr. Dre
You need a statistical model that you can use to verify your impression, not a lot of anecdotes whose numbers would be dwarfed by the daily operation of well over a hundred thousand police officers.
No rational human being will deny there have been and are and will be abuses of power, both in law enforcement and other seats of power. The existence of that very thing is one reason for the establishment of internal affairs operations. But it's one thing to note that and quite another to attempt to paint most officers with that absurd brush.
I liked that you rhymed though. How long did it take you?
oly:This just proves how
out of touch you are
with the Law Enforcement
community. The 1970's called
they want their lawyer back.
In the modern world, it is called
the 'Division of Professional Standards"
not internal affairs, duh. Stop pretending
to know about things you know
absolutely nothing about.
Your statistical models won't help
the victims and your lying and denial
won't change the fact that the ongoing
code of silence culture that punishes any
officer that reports another officer's crimes
will never allow statistics to reflect or support reality.
Grow up and face the music.:cigar:
Well, I was speaking to the establishment, but my understanding is that Professional Standards houses, among other things, Internal Affairs. In fact, I know that's often the case.
http://www.vsp.state.va.us/Professional_Standards.shtm
http://www.njsp.org/about/ops.html
http://durhamnc.gov/ich/op/DPD/Pages/IAD.aspx
Just to provide a few examples. From the last one:
The Internal Affairs Unit, which is part of the Professional Standards Division, investigates resident complaints and administrative rule violations alleged against police personnel and reports the results of such investigations to the Chief of Police; and advocates resident and administrative complaints at department hearings and boards.
So I'll have to assume it's simply different where you live and you're once again mistaking your personal experience for the rule.
(mic drop):mock: THall inadvertently mocking THall.
Well, yes, they would. They'd identify where a problem is and isn't allowing for a more intelligent allocation of resources to combat what needs to be and to the extent it requires.
Last edited:
That's peanuts compared to Stalin's police force. And about as relevant regarding our own.
Christ's Word
New member
Because police don't abuse power anywhere, especially in the U.S.........yep you are still clueless punk. But wait........more evidence that Theretic is an immoral tard......
http://www.wusa9.com/story/news/loc...ced-for-shooting-handcuffed-suspect/18915647/
Of course some do, as I noted in discussing Internal Affairs. And some buildings catch on fire and require fire departments. But if you want to allege that the majority of buildings are doing that you have a job to do that can't be done by the way THall and I suppose you in support are attempting it.
You're still a messenger obsessed doofus who needs to understand where the solution/answer to the proffer is found and where it isn't.
And get a little therapy while you're taking a course in statistical methodology.
IMJerusha
New member
Just a brief mention:
Possession of a loaded rifle or shotgun in a vehicle is generally illegal. N.Y. Envtl. Conserv. Law § 11-0931(2) (permit may be issued to any person who is non-ambulatory to possess a loaded firearm in or on a motor vehicle for hunting).
Considering the visible weapon in the back seat of the car in addition to the suspicious behavior report, the officer in question had probable cause to search the vehicle and did not require a warrant or permission of the vehicle occupants.
"In 2009, the Supreme Court handed down a decision that clarified somewhat how far a police officer can go in searching a vehicle after pulling it over. Essentially, the scope of the search depends on the reason the police stopped the car.
In general, there are three types of vehicle searches:
-- a “search incident to arrest,” which allows a search of the immediate vicinity of the driver (in other words, where he can reach inside the car) when the police have grounds to place the driver under arrest
-- an inventory search, which is allowed when the police arrest a driver and impound the car (to list the items in the car in order to avoid civil liability for the loss or damage of the car owner’s property), and
-- a probable cause search, which is allowed where the police have a reasonable suspicion that a weapon or evidence of the crime for which they stopped the driver may be found (this search would include a pat-down of the driver for weapons or contraband)." -- From Criminal Defense Lawyer.com
There seems to be some details regarding this case that are unclear or yet to be uncovered. I think it's interesting and a bit suspicious that Adam Roberts, the man who taped the encounter is/was a law student at Fordham University whose attorney is handling six other alleged police misconduct cases. Even more suspicious is the fact that Roberts is employed by QBE, handling management liability and professional lines insurance. There's a story in this somewhere, I'm sure.
Last edited:
While the stupid morons
in the above posts ignore
reality, 5 officers involved
in this criminal activity:
https://news.vice.com/article/five-...eported-sex-crimes?utm_source=vicenewstwitter
Yet the nutter IMJ continues
to claim the police actually
are effective policing their own.
Not in this case and in
fact, rarely, it is the exception
not the rule.
The evidence continues to mount.
in the above posts ignore
reality, 5 officers involved
in this criminal activity:
https://news.vice.com/article/five-...eported-sex-crimes?utm_source=vicenewstwitter
Yet the nutter IMJ continues
to claim the police actually
are effective policing their own.
Not in this case and in
fact, rarely, it is the exception
not the rule.
The evidence continues to mount.
You do know that for anyone who set the newest post to appear at the top of the page there's nothing "above" this post, right?
You just keep stumbling over the same problem like a drunk running hurdles.
Unless you can demonstrate that you're just making it up, again. No corroboration, just a few anecdotes set against the daily work of well over a hundred thousand officers.
So five officers appear to have been grossly negligent in their duty in New Orleans, a city with over twelve hundred officers carrying out a tough job description, under staffed, every day of the week.
Not exactly approaching that fifty percent you think don't care about Constitutional rights, etc.
I suppose if you found a hair in a Happy Meal you'd want every McDonald's closed for health code violations.
Rather, you still don't know how to compile data and run analysis. So it was a fait accompli for you the moment you had a personal experience to couple with that exaggerated sense of authority you wear like a badge pulled out of a Cracker Jack box.
Then all hunters would be in big trouble, nice try but doesnt apply here.
This is false. the officer resigned, before he was fired, and he faces charges for violating the law. There was no suspicious behavior, unless you think walking to your car from walmarts door is suspicious. The man who was being harrassed also told the cop to get a warrant to search and the cop then slapped him and demanded the keys, they werent pulled over, they werent in the car when police came up and the car was locked.
All irrelevant to this situation. They were not pulled over at all. This cop also resigned and is facing charges for breaking the law himself, and he also has a history of issues with anger:
Here is another article about the officer having broken the law
And another: (in spoiler due to language from the cop)
Spoiler
IMJerusha
New member
The only evidence that is mounting is the fact that you don't know what you're talking about. The OIG is part of the PD, overseeing the Internal Investigations Division. The OIG is designed to catch what Internal misses so this article isn't reporting anything unusual.
Have you figured out yet that the likelihood you train Police Officers is next to nil and apparent to all?
Last edited:
IMJerusha
New member
Since when does New York law not apply in New York?
When the officer resigned is immaterial to the probable cause for search. A previous call had gone out regarding the vehicle and its occupants behaving suspiciously in a residential area. By the time the Police reached the area, the vehicle was gone but later located in the Wal Mart parking lot, the reason the occupants were questioned while leaving the Wal Mart, the rifle having been sighted in the back seat by the officers just prior.
They didn't have to be "pulled over" literally. The officers were working a call involving a motor vehicle previously identified.
You misunderstand, Angel, I'm not defending his alleged behavior, just that I believe there is more to this story than is known or being reported.
I will say this, however. The same lack of information is evident in the Daily Gazette's report:
"On March 28, 1996, while patrolling on Smith Bridge Road in the town of Wilton at about 10 p.m., Glans lost control of his cruiser and crashed head-on into a vehicle driven by 45-year-old Douglas McEachron, leaving the father of six paralyzed. Glans was traveling at least double or possibly three times the speed limit of 20 mph when he crossed into the westbound lane and hit McEachron’s 1989 Chevrolet, according to court records.
Saratoga County and the town of Wilton were held responsible in 1999 for the crash in a $60 million federal lawsuit filed by McEachron, but terms of a settlement reached after the verdict were not released, though sources said McEachron would receive millions of dollars."
I don't know too many Police Officers who "patrol" at 40 to 60mph. Considering that the lawsuit was filed against the County and town of Wilton, not the officer personally, I would say that there are facts that the Gazette purposely omitted to serve an agenda such as the fact that Glans was responding to a 911 call. In other words, the officer was engaged in an emergency operation and it was not deemed as reckless op by the court.
Last edited:
IMJerusha
New member
That sounds about right!
You are misinterpreting the law and adding to it. Real attorneys and even the police department in charge of this officer said HE is who broke the law, i think they know their own laws better than you.
The police officer, if he had ordered the driver to stay there, and had gotten a warrant, would not have been in trouble. Obviously, slapping the driver, grabbing his keys from him, and conducting an illegal search was criminal behavior.
And so he got nailed. Notice that he would have denied it all, if the driver's friend had not secretly recorded him.
The question as to why someone was worried enough to call an officer is relevant only in that it required the officer to make an investigation. I don't know the law about having a rifle in the car in that jurisdiction, but since there wasn't an arrest, I assume it was legal.
And so he got nailed. Notice that he would have denied it all, if the driver's friend had not secretly recorded him.
The question as to why someone was worried enough to call an officer is relevant only in that it required the officer to make an investigation. I don't know the law about having a rifle in the car in that jurisdiction, but since there wasn't an arrest, I assume it was legal.
IMJerusha
New member
Why?...because I'm applying the law as it applies and you don't like it? Come on! And in regard to hunters, the key word is "loaded."
Yes, he's been charged with an official misconduct misdemeanor and a second-degree harassment violation, both of which will be answered in court. That speaks to his foul language usage and alleged DiNozzo of Fitch, not to whether he had probable cause to search Fitch's vehicle.
I'm not the only one who has thoughts regarding the suspicious behavior of Fitch and his friend, Roberts.
http://www.cbs6albany.com/news/feat...viral-video-claims-deputy-charged-20868.shtml
"Asked whether his friend was hoping for such interaction in order to create this type of video, Fitch said, 'No he was definitely not trying to - he was just trying to capture, you know, the moment because he did not have it in mind he was going to put it on the internet.' Fitch says as he and his friend were driving away from the store, his friend told him, 'Oh, my God, I just got that on video. We can do something about this.' "
After reviewing the video, this is not believable, as well as some other comments Fitch made such as that he went into shock after Glans hit him. Roberts knew he was recording the incident as evidenced by his cutsie face at the end of it. It is quite possible that Fitch and Roberts were hoping to record such an incident and Glans played right into their hands.
Last edited:
IMJerusha
New member
Glans and the officers with him have not been charged with illegal search so it is safe to assume they had probable cause.