To Protect and to Serve II

Same deputy...
Yes and he and the other idiot is this latest one are accused of cavity searching a guy on the side of the road for weed. I don’t understand how people like this are passing the psych exams. If Joe Q Citizen held minors against their will and sexually assaulted them they’d be under the jail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: marcusluvsvols
Yes and he and the other idiot is this latest one are accused of cavity searching a guy on the side of the road for weed. I don’t understand how people like this are passing the psych exams. If Joe Q Citizen held minors against their will and sexually assaulted them they’d be under the jail.
This is allowed to go on because we allow this fake ass war on reefer/drugs to continue. May was well throw in war on terror, also. This gives these cops the ability to circumvent your rights and dignity in order to get some grass off the streets.
 
I had a run in with the Interstate rest area police today in Chattanooga as I was driving through. Apparently I wasn't allowed to let my dog get within a thousand feet of any building on the property before I was given a verbal warning and when I ignored that I was chased down and threatened by a Gomer/Goober type wearing an "official" looking "police" uniform. He was on a power trip as he was given the authoritie to enforce the rest area rules. He's the type that graduates to the little side of the road hick town speed traps.
 


The "hero" would have been better off just killing the guy instead of subduing him. That way, there would have been no need for him to have to hold him down on the neck.

Oh, and since when is going above and beyond state of an immediate threat a bad thing? Cops over do it all the time where they have numbers and a person on the ground and they still are allowed to kick and punch the guy or let the K-9 unit chew the hell out of the guy.

Cops have one set of rules. Civilians have another.
 
I think I’d have gone to jail here too.... I’d have said enough to get the cop pissed off for sure. That school administrator acted like a gutless poon.... cop did too.... but the admin should have stepped up and said knock that sh** off right now.

 
This one seems to be a bit more complicated IMO. Dispatch received a fake call, officers didnt know it was fake and see man in window with a gun.

Person that placed call should be charged.
They dropped the charges against her. Nothing to see.
 
They dropped the charges against her. Nothing to see.
I agree, but I was just saying that IMO, that would not be a good example of a cop getting preferential treatment because of everything else involved that made it more than just a cut and dry case of wrong doing.
 

They have a dumb lawyer, unfortunately. I never would have used the 5th Amendment/eminent domain argument.

Police blew up an innocent man’s house in search of an armed shoplifter. Too bad, court rules.

The Lechs had sued under the Fifth Amendment’s Takings Clause, which guarantees citizens compensation if their property is seized by the government for public use. But the court said that Greenwood Village was acting within its “police power” when it damaged the house, which the court said doesn’t qualify as a “taking” under the Fifth Amendment. The court acknowledged that this may seem “unfair,” but when police have to protect the public, they can’t be “burdened with the condition” that they compensate whomever is damaged by their actions along the way.
 
In a statement to The Post, a spokeswoman for Greenwood Village said the city never refused to help the Lechs, saying the family was “very well insured” and refused the $5,000 assistance for out-of-pocket expenses before insurance kicked in. The spokeswoman, Melissa Gallegos, applauded the 10th Circuit’s ruling.

John Lech, his girlfriend and her son moved in with Leo Lech and his wife, who lived 30 miles away, requiring John to change jobs. The $5,000 offered by the city “was insulting,” Leo Lech said.

His expenses to rebuild the house and replace all its contents cost him nearly $400,000, he said. While insurance did cover structural damage initially, his son did not have renter’s insurance and so insurance did not cover replacement of the home’s contents, and he says he is still in debt today from loans he took out.
 
Advertisement





Back
Top