Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Do you think these cops could have been a little nicer?

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • NextGenOfc
    replied
    the first officer should have just did this..


    Leave a comment:


  • Monty Ealerman
    replied
    Originally posted by jessjones17 View Post
    @Dingo990
    I don't think gatecrashing the royal wedding would really pass for a crime that you might potentially be arrested for. We don't really know many lunatics down here that would do that anyway. However, if we do have someone wandering into the royal wedding, I think the British police would not scream across at them to get out, they would probably promptly walk them out and maybe laugh about it later. UK police are patient and tactful people.
    In 1973 I was a teenager in London and I was standing near Buckingham Palace as the Queen's Carriage, preceded by the Life Guard on horseback, was rolling up. There was a guy in front shouting "make way for the Queen" repeatedly. Anyone who had failed to do so would have been first glared at, then sternly confronted at point of sword, by a Life Guard member.

    Leave a comment:


  • jessjones17
    replied
    Originally posted by HotSoup View Post
    The Royal Wedding wasn't a crime scene...two totally different things.
    Never said it was a crime scene..But the dingo guy thinks it was one. If you look at his post, he says, "I wonder how the UK police would react if someone wandered into the royal wedding." And I told him what you're telling me now - that it wasn't crime scene so the UK police wouldn't flip out over it.

    Leave a comment:


  • Street_Cop50
    replied
    Originally posted by IndianaGuy
    She was LOOKING at her car. Yea stupid, but I dont think hardly criminal.

    IndianaGuy

    Actually... in the Commonwealth of Virginia, it is criminal.


    § 18.2-414.2. Crossing established police lines, perimeters or barricades.

    It shall be unlawful for any person to cross or remain within police lines or barricades which have been established pursuant to § 15.2-1714 without proper authorization.

    Any person violating the provisions of this section shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.

    (1984, c. 533; 1990, c. 327.)



    But thanks for playing Indianaguy, better luck next time!
    Last edited by Street_Cop50; 05-01-2011, 05:31 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • HotSoup
    replied
    Originally posted by jessjones17 View Post
    @Dingo990
    I don't think gatecrashing the royal wedding would really pass for a crime that you might potentially be arrested for. We don't really know many lunatics down here that would do that anyway. However, if we do have someone wandering into the royal wedding, I think the British police would not scream across at them to get out, they would probably promptly walk them out and maybe laugh about it later. UK police are patient and tactful people.
    The Royal Wedding wasn't a crime scene...two totally different things.

    Leave a comment:


  • jessjones17
    replied
    @Dingo990
    I don't think gatecrashing the royal wedding would really pass for a crime that you might potentially be arrested for. We don't really know many lunatics down here that would do that anyway. However, if we do have someone wandering into the royal wedding, I think the British police would not scream across at them to get out, they would probably promptly walk them out and maybe laugh about it later. UK police are patient and tactful people.

    Leave a comment:


  • DeputySC
    replied
    I relize we are in the 'hug a thug' era. But I dont feel the cops were rude...

    The idiot went inside a crime scene and started tampering with stuff! I dont know what type of crime scene it was. But her bone headed move could be the the reason a criminal gets his/her charges dismissed. Keep in mind it could be a murder investigation, rape, or both. The woman should get charged with something...
    Last edited by DeputySC; 05-01-2011, 01:45 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • Aerohead
    replied
    Originally posted by IndianaGuy
    I have to disagree with your thought process on making stupid decisions. Bad people are going to be bad because they WANT to do wrong. We as normal people think they may have made a stupid decision, but the bad guy didnt care one way or an other about the decisions they have made.

    Do people NOT commit robbery because of a law forbidding it? Nope, they dont because they are inherently a good person. There has NEVER been a single law created that has ever reduced crime based on a person deciding to not commit a crime because of the repercussions of committing that crime.

    Now yes, the woman was in the wrong, and stupid and should have known better, BUT she also shouldnt have to deal with a record that will follow her around the rest of her life because she was stupid. Should my medical insurance not pay for my broken leg because I was stupid and kicked a football all jacked up and broke it? I think not.

    IndianaGuy
    Ignorance is not an excuse for breaking the law. That's why I said what I said about your comment. People use ignorance as an excuse for anything and everything - even when they know they weren't supposed to do something. I have no sympathy for her if she is charged with a crime and has to live with her stupid decision being on her record. Oh well. Now she'll know better next time not to ignore yellow taped off areas. It's called common sense. Use it. Someone like yourself who supposedly has common sense defending her actions is not needed. There are thousands of morons out there with zero common sense who will be on her side if/when she needs it; she doesn't need you in her corner. And the complete lack of common sense coupled with the complete lack of personal responsibility is what's ruining this country.

    Leave a comment:


  • OneAdam12
    replied
    Originally posted by IndianaGuy
    OK I GUESS I HAVE TO MAKE THIS IN ALL CAPS ALSO, I NEVER AND I REPEAT NEVER SAID ANYTHING TO THE CONTRARY ABOUT HER BEING DETAINED OR ARRESTED I NEVER SAID SHE WAS, WHY DO YOU WANT TO PUT WORDS IN MY POSTS?
    I think you need to go back and re-read the thread before you make another uninformed statement about what I did or didnt say or state.
    Look as I have said in NUMEROUS posts I agreed with the police in this case, I agreed that she should have been processed, she should have been detained and questioned all I stated was an opinion about putting a record on someone for the rest of their lives for doing a stupid and boneheaded move.
    I think you people need to step back, take a deep breath, and drink a beer or two and chill out. Lord you are NOT at work, all you are doing is sitting in front of a computer and communicating via a online forum.

    IndianaGuy
    Jeeze
    I didn't say in this thread or any other thread anything about how you felt about her being arrested or not. Others may have, I have not.

    All you said and have repeated ad nauseum is having a criminal record for being stupid is harsh. Calm down, you are the one putting words in my posts.
    Re-read my posts.

    Weak point number 1

    Originally posted by IndianaGuy
    Any why would that be? Only because she upset you by crossing the crime scene tape? And yea IMHO it is a little much to put a record on someone because all they wanted to do was check on their personal property. Yes we all know she was a dips*** by crossing, and she should have asked someone instead of just crossing, BUT, and I have watched the video some more, I dont see ANYWHERE where it states CRIME SCENE, STAY OUT, FIRE SCENE, or anything at all, nothing more than just some yellow tape strung up. How could one reasonably be expected to know it is a police crime scene unless it is clearly marked. I am not saying she didnt screw up, I agree she did, but how was she to know it was a crime scene without there being any markings?

    IndianaGuy
    What do you think the yellow tape was for?

    She didn't just stumble upon the tape while walking back to her car. H'mmm what is this tape doing here?

    She was outside of the beauty shop in the middle of her treatment. She knew exactly there were police cars and police, and police yellow tape there. The commotion interupted her hair appointment. She crossed the damn yellow tape because the law did not apply to her. She was going to get her car and that was it.

    Leave a comment:


  • OneAdam12
    replied
    Indianaguy,
    Let me attempt once more.
    She was not arrested.
    She had to be processed for prints, shoe prints, personal identifiers, etc.
    She had to be included in the case being investigated because according to law she had entered a clearly marked crime scene complete with cops, cop cars, Flashy lighty thingies on top of the cop cars, yellow tape, (with or without printing on it) establishing the perimeter of the no badgy no crossy. The perimeter is usually greater than the perceived crime scene at the time but who knows, she could have been standing, waddling, on the only peice of evidence connecting someone to the scene.

    However doubtful, she could have been asked, paid, etc to distract, contaminate, disrupt, the officers and the scene. As stated, the defense attorneys will have a field day because some officer was not watching a clearly defined area complete with cops, cop cars, Flashy lighty thingies on top of the cop cars, yellow tape, (with or without printing on it).

    Your weak point of she didn't know it was crime scene tape because it had nothing printed on it was just that, weak.

    Your point of criminal record because of being stupid was just that, stupid. SHE WAS NOT ARRESTED. She has no criminal record. If she was arrested for contaminating the scene, she will have a record, period.

    Now, if you want to continue to be slammed because of your defending the weak points in your posts, be my guest. Don't expect anything but what you are getting now as far as responses.

    Have a nice day.

    Leave a comment:


  • ACrowley
    replied
    Originally posted by pujolsfan146 View Post
    In any event she does not seem to care about what is going on. She is standing around talking on the phone like it is no big deal. If she does not care about what is going on why should I care about her having a criminal history over this?
    +1

    Leave a comment:


  • pujolsfan146
    replied
    In any event she does not seem to care about what is going on. She is standing around talking on the phone like it is no big deal. If she does not care about what is going on why should I care about her having a criminal history over this?

    Leave a comment:


  • pujolsfan146
    replied
    Originally posted by Fëanor View Post
    It's not about "letting it go." He didn't arrest her because he was upset, he arrested her because she contaminated a crime scene and she needed to be processed. She could have either accidentally messed up a crime scene or intentionally been there to hide something. Either way she made herself part of the crime scene.

    The officers' fingerprints are already on file for comparison against those found at the scene. They needed to take similar actions for her.
    What? He didn't arrest her period. She was brought back in because they had to process her. She stepped in the crime scene therefor it was contaminated. There is a good chance her *** would be in a jam if she wasn't processed. If the lab results came back with her dna or prints and she wasn't listed as being in the crime scene she could have been screwed and would have been screaming about how the department tried to frame her.

    She should get of her freaking cell and listen to the officers so she can understand how important it is that she be processed so she does not end up having to explain why her nasty mojo is in the crime scene. But this murder or whatever the crime is does not involve her so she doesn't give two ****z.

    And to the op, the officers handled themselves very well. I don't even see why that is a question.

    Leave a comment:


  • ACrowley
    replied
    Originally posted by IndianaGuy
    What that i stated that you and no one else on this particular thread was investigating the crime scene. I completely understand the issues at hand, and understand that what the woman did was boneheaded and stupid, but I also stated that I IMHO didnt think that she deserved a record for the rest of her life because of a stupid boneheaded move.

    IndianaGuy
    I would've charged her with obstruction and possibly tampering with evidence....... If you are soooooo stupid that you dont blatently disregard the yellow tape that undoubtedly states something to the effect of POLICE LINE DO NOT CROSS or CRIME SCENE DO NOT CROSS because you are that ghetto, then you need to be delt with accordingly.......

    Indiana Guy, you can't just go around doing whatever you want to and not expect any consequences for your actions...... The funny thing is, that most of the people you see in these situations have directly placed themselves in that position with disregard for what may happen........

    Even if I didn't charge her, I would still be motivating her in a voice loud enough that everyone can hear........

    Leave a comment:


  • ACrowley
    replied
    Originally posted by jessjones17 View Post
    Look at the link below.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lJYOumvG5BM

    I know they had every right to be mad because the lady was being really stupid and ignorant to trudge a crime scene. But still, I found it a bit rude when the officer shouts across the yard at her. He could have politely walked up to her and sent her on her way. The second cop was being a little too serious and even said that he would arrest her when clearly she was complying with him. She was just concerned about her personal property and was only a few feet into the crime scene. I know a lot of you are cops here so I want to know what you think about this.
    As far as Indiana Guy goes, there is a reason people are, "lobbing insults," your way.

    Yes we should be nice to everyone and overly worry about everyone's feelings as to be modest and politically correct at all times...............or maybe people shouldn't do stupid **** and they won't have to worry about getting educated by the police......... She may have just contaminated the crap out that crime scene and now vital evidence may be lost causing the police not to be able to find a murder suspect, or someone else who is very important to take off the streets........but then again we could be nice so people might think we are more caring and sensitive...........GEEZE...............
    Last edited by ACrowley; 04-30-2011, 11:31 AM.

    Leave a comment:

MR300x250 Tablet

Collapse

What's Going On

Collapse

There are currently 3153 users online. 188 members and 2965 guests.

Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

Welcome Ad

Collapse
Working...
X