To Protect and to Serve II

This is totally true. I know some really good police officers. I know some really bad ones. Most are in the middle.

The problem is the culture of brotherhood and righteous justification that causes the good ones to stay silent and the ones in the middle to circle the wagons when one of the bad ones gets outed.

JMO, and not sure how to change it.
I am friends with several cops. I have a hard time believing they'd cover up something or look the other way for a dirty cop. Could be wrong though. Was disappointed with one friend this year. Not from anything dirty other than he lied to me. It was over politics though.

Anyway, I wouldn't place the label of good cop on someone that looks away to protect a brother. I would at best place them in the meh category.
 
I love it when you tell me that a wealthy celebrity bankrupting himself to discredit a police force for planting evidence, in one of the most notorious instances of investigative misconduct in recent memory, is indicative of a typical defendant’s advantages in the American criminal court system.

Also, I may very well be a terrible attorney, but Tennessee courts have held that a few hours was enough time for a defense attorney to review discovery, and have held that matters concerning the timely production of discovery are subject to a highly deferential standard of review. It’s not an issue that has any appellate merit. Trial judges have no incentive to set or enforce discovery deadlines.
OJ was innocent and is once again searching for the real killer
 
I had to google him. Is this the San Francisco mayor case?
The assassination of Harvey Milk and George Moscone, defense based on diminished capacity due to alteration of diet due to severe depression.
 
Last edited:
I love it when you tell me that a wealthy celebrity bankrupting himself to discredit a police force for planting evidence, in one of the most notorious instances of investigative misconduct in recent memory, is indicative of a typical defendant’s advantages in the American criminal court system.

Also, I may very well be a terrible attorney, but Tennessee courts have held that a few hours was enough time for a defense attorney to review discovery, and have held that matters concerning the timely production of discovery are subject to a highly deferential standard of review. It’s not an issue that has any appellate merit. Trial judges have no incentive to set or enforce discovery deadlines.
Sorry about what I said. You are most likely a great attorney practicing in a backwards location. I have never been in a trial where the defense was not provided everything months or up to a year in advance. I have never seen a USA or a state prosecutor withhold discovery, ever.
 
  • Like
Reactions: RockyTop85
RIP Sgt. Ron Helus, a 29-year veteran
ron-helus.jpg
 
Because cops are people to. Cops are a microcosm of society in general. There are great, good, meh, bad, very bad people in society. Some cops will inevitably be bad and very bad. Some will be good to great. The vast majority are probably meh. Hopefully the bad to very bad get rooted out and are served with the appropriate punishment they deserve. Also, hopefullythe good ones and great ones get the appropriate praise and rewards they deserve and inspire the meh ones to be good and great.

What I'm asking is how he behaves like this and gets to be a cop for so long?
 
What I'm asking is how he behaves like this and gets to be a cop for so long?
I find it hard to believe that this guy has been a good cop all these years and then just snaps although I've said and done things I later wished I hadn't and really didn't reflect on my true feelings, especially when I was younger. It's hard to say this was a pattern for him without knowing his history.
 



Just curious, but what if a liberal sheriff in NY/CA/MASS decided to do the same with the names and addresses of concealed carry owners?

Let's see, one is disgusting and illegal. The other is a lawful practice.

Want to play this game?

I'm sure I can find plenty of liberals out here that would consider gun ownership disgusting and needing to be outlawed.

Look, I'm not saying, necessarily, that what this sheriff did is wrong. I'm just saying that we need to be very careful doing things like this because the sword can cut both ways.

Not even 2 weeks after I warn Grand about this...
 
Not even remotely the same.

Just curious but, other than the degree to which you support the government action involved (which seemed like the initial point being made), what other differences do you see here that makes them not even remotely the same?
 
Just curious but, other than the degree to which you support the government action involved (which seemed like the initial point being made), what other differences do you see here that makes them not even remotely the same?

Let's see...

The original post was made about the Sheriff putting up warning signs for known sexual predators on Halloween.

Ras is attempting to compare that with two cops going to enforce a court ruling that the person voluntarily give up their firearms. Said gun owner met the police with a gun in hand, put it down at the start, got irate, attempting to retrieve said firearm, fired at least one shot, was killed in a line of duty shooting.

As stated in the other thread, the law may suck bigly, but in this case, it seems the man in question had legitimate mental or anger issues and made stupid choices leading to his death.

Now, to what extent do I support the law? I would tend to think if a person shows themselves to be a legitimate threat to themselves or others (which appears to be apparent in this case) and after the protection order is signed (as I'm assuming all are signed by judges) then yes, the police did the right thing in attempting to confiscate the firearm in question.

What Ras was originally suggesting was that if we allowed the warning signs to be put up, why wouldn't we allow it for CCW holders or gun owners. An absurd argument.
 
What Ras was originally suggesting was that if we allowed the warning signs to be put up, why wouldn't we allow it for CCW holders or gun owners. An absurd argument.
No, you missed the point entirely... as usual.
First, let me again repeat what I said in the original thread... I didn't necessarily have an issue with the sheriff doing what he did with regards to sexual predators on Halloween. I'm not really a big fan of "scarlet letters" being placed on people that have served their time in prison, but in this particular case, I can stomach an exception to that. What I was trying to make you aware of, however, is that this is a very slippery slope. And it doesn't take much of a leap to go from that incident to something far more sinister that the left wing SJWs would want to do to gun owners.
 
Shhhh.... I was hoping to see Grand wiggle his way out of the box he so arrogantly wanted to run into.

So, you're using a one time occurrence from a third party (the press) that obtained the information via another law (Freedom of Information Request) and published that list without the government's approval (not like they can control the press, that 1st Amendment thing) as proof of your "slippery slope?"

Did you wake up this morning and eat your retarded pill or are you just in your old form that likes to argue?
 

VN Store



Back
Top