To Protect and to Serve II

#2,251
#2,251
Glad I don't live there. I would have been in jail. When I totaled my vehicle and had a concussion, I stumbled for 9 days after that. I didn't even know where I was until hours later.
 
#2,252
#2,252
Rasputin_Vol said:
Which leads to another question, why she placed under arrest?

So you're saying that it is common practice to go up to an accident, arrest a party in the accident (keep in mind she was the person that called the police), and THEN pat them down and search them with no probable cause?
Click to expand...

It's standard procedure to investigate all aspects of a wreck, including the well-being of all parties involved, specifically the drivers. You develop a very keen eye on this job, but it doesn't mean you're always right. Keeping in mind the video very rarely tells the entire story, this officer performed a perfectly legal search upon arrest. Like I said before, assuming a female officer is available, procedure dictates a female searches a female but that's not always feasible.

I've arrested people who called US. You would think that implies some sort of innocence but, alas, people aren't the brightest sometimes.

I wasn't on the scene so I can't speak to what this officer saw that lead to him conducting FST's (which she failed and led to this officer arresting her) but, that being said, I have arrested people involved in a wreck who were impaired...they just happened to be responsible for the wreck. However, just because you were the person that was hit doesn't give you a free pass from driving impaired, you're subject to the same investigation.
 
Last edited:
#2,253
#2,253
RollinVol said:
Glad I don't live there. I would have been in jail. When I totaled my vehicle and had a concussion, I stumbled for 9 days after that. I didn't even know where I was until hours later.
Click to expand...

You would think that the fact that she was injured would have been taken into account...
 
#2,255
#2,255
n_huffhines said:
Good news



FBI Stats Show ?War on Police? Claim Still Not Accurate - Hit & Run : Reason.com
Click to expand...

I'll let others argue whether there's a "War on Police" but the statistics show an increase of assaults on police from 2014-2016 and I'd wager 2017 will continue that trend.

I will say that tensions are higher, especially when there's an officer involved shooting. It's noticeable. Hopefully the ambushes in Dallas and Baton Rouge are anomalies and not a sign of things to come.
 
Last edited:
#2,257
#2,257
orangeblood79 said:
I'll let others argue whether there's a "War on Police" but the statistics show an increase of assaults on police from 2014-2016 and I'd wager 2017 will continue that trend.

I will say that tensions are higher, especially when there's an officer involved shooting. It's noticeable. Hopefully the ambushes in Dallas and Baton Rouge are anomalies and not a sign of things to come.
Click to expand...

Fair point, and yeah war on police is a completely subjective perception.

That being said, are these reported assaults or convictions? Body count is a reliable measurement, whereas reported numbers can be fudged and convictions can be wrong (tho I would put more faith in convictions than reports).
 
#2,258
#2,258
n_huffhines said:
Fair point, and yeah war on police is a completely subjective perception.

That being said, are these reported assaults or convictions? Body count is a reliable measurement, whereas reported numbers can be fudged and convictions can be wrong (tho I would put more faith in convictions than reports).
Click to expand...

Id say any that have been reported but I'm not 100% sure. It looks as though they get the same stats as the Officer Down Memorial page and they keep a pretty accurate count.

And the thing about non-convictions is that it doesn't necessarily mean it didn't happen. Domestics are the poster child for that, the victim FREQUENTLY drops the charges or testifies in favor of the offender.

Literally had a guy use his g/f's head as a battering ram through a window, a wall, then lock her in a head lock and choke/drag her down a hallway...all in front of their 5 year old son. Took warrants out, checked on her multiple times over the next week...only to have him back a week and a half later and then PROTECTED him while we tried to apprehend. He's still on the run.

Sorry...ranting...

Anyway...the thing about crime statistics are how they're classified, as events or individual crimes. For example, the FBI categorizes stats by events, such as a Strong Armed Robbery that, while getting away, results in a wreck with injuries or even a fatality. IIRC, they only classify that event by the crime that set the wheel in motion, Strong Armed Robbery, a Class C Felony...even though it could result in a conviction of vehicular homicide. So, in other words, the only statistic that would be recorded for that entire event would be a robbery, nothing more.

Now that I've thoroughly muddied the waters...
 
Last edited:
#2,262
#2,262
Grand Vol said:
While I thought the case should have gone to trial originally, doesn't this seem like since the DOJ isn't getting the outcome they wanted, so they replace the investigators and prosecutors?
Click to expand...

Possibly right. The objective of the DoJ should be to seek justice. Justice has not been served in the Garner case.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#2,269
#2,269
Grand Vol said:
While I thought the case should have gone to trial originally, doesn't this seem like since the DOJ isn't getting the outcome they wanted, so they replace the investigators and prosecutors?
Click to expand...

Looks like this country is finally moving towards serving justice instead of focusing on enforcing laws... whether the laws are unjust or not. Eric Garner died because the NYPD was enforcing an unjust law.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top