Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Now that it is over.

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

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

  • Now that it is over.

    I wanted to give my thoughts on the whole Ferguson debacle because I am sick and tired of the lies being spewed by the media, with the assistance of many talking heads who claim to be lawyers, many of whom probably never tried a case in front of a jury. You can read this, take it for what it's worth or not read it at all. You don't have to believe a word I say, but I am eminently qualified to speak on this subject. I carried a weapon as an enlisted MP for seven years, and have done two tours overseas, where I carried a weapon(s) 24/7. I have taught the use of force to college students and also to deploying Soldiers. I have defended a Soldier accused of causing the death of another and in my civilian capacity, I have presented hundreds of cases to the grand jury. I have lost some "friends" recently over this garbage, because they simply refuse to hear anything I have to say. Rather they hear only what they want to hear. So allow me to clear up some of the bull sh#t that is being thrown out there.

    1. One of the biggest lies that is being told is that it is unheard of for a police officer, who could be a potential defendant, to testify in front of a grand jury. This would be true if an officer was charged and the DA was seeking an indictment, but many jurisdictions allow grand juries to be used as an investigatory body. So if a cop is not a suspect and can exonerate himself, I don't see a problem with an attorney allowing his client to testify. The best man at my wedding is a Houston cop and had shot an unarmed suspect 20 years ago after the suspect grab his flashlight and began beating him over the head with it. He was NOT indicted.

    2. The next big lie is that the " fix was in". Many of the talking heads kept saying that the DA wasn't seeking an indictment. But why does he need to seek an indictment of his own investigation determined that he shouldn't move forward? I am surprised he even presented it to the grand jury but he was smart to do so. I mean, he had three options really. The first was just file himself but again, that would have been unethical if he truly believed there was no PC. He could have done nothing at all but then folks would have been saying he should have gone to a grand jury and let them make the call. This is why he did what he did.

    3. There have been folks saying that the prosecutor actually presented the defense's case and that this is never done. Bull. In most cases, I will admit that indictments are pretty easy in the sense that you put everything on from the State's perspective. However, a prosecutor MUST present evidence that is clearly exculpatory. By this I do not mean that if the defendant told the cop he didn't do it that the officer must say this on the stand. If this is his defense, let him put it on at trial. But when there is store video showing that the alleged victim is the initial aggressor and evidence that there was self defense, a prosecutor would be unethical for not putting this evidence on.

    4. The next piece of nonsense is that everyone says that if it were a civilian who shot a cop, he would be treated differently, and that the cop should have been arrest. Well, no kidding that they would be treated differently. There is almost no scenario where a civilian would be justified in using deadly force against a police officer. However, in the vast majority of cases of deadly force by cops against civilians, it is totally justified because they are permitted by law to use deadly force against civilians if necessary. Besides, who in his right mind would sign on to be a police officer if told that whenever he shoots someone, no matter what the circumstances, he would be arrested and remain in jail until trial? This is insane.

    5. The last one that makes me want to throat punch someone is people saying that the cop could have shot him in the leg. And yes, some of them are lawyers. But anyone who knows anything about the use of force knows that there is no such use of force that permits an officer to do this. It is completely unauthorized because a firearm can only be used to kill. If used for anything else, it means you had authority to use it in the first place. Imagine the lawsuit if you gave a guy a limp for the rest of his life after you put in a police report that you knew you had no authority to kill but was just trying to incapacitate him with a deadly weapon.

    Anyway, I am done with the conversation, particularly because this whole damn thing was news media and social media driven for the sole reason that Wilson was white and Brown was black. This kind of nonsense is going to get an innocent person killed one day and the media will have blood on their hands. They don't want a national conversation about race either. They want a politically correct conversation where any mention of what people in the hood could do to ameliorate the situation will automatically get you labelled a racist. There have been almost 800 police officers killed in the line of duty since BHO became President and nobody from the White House was at any of their funerals. Yet a thug robs a convenience store and assaults a cop and three people from the White House attend his funeral. What an absolute embarrassment.


    "Jerry, just remember, it’s not a lie if you believe it". George Constanza.


  • #2
    Originally posted by Ex Army MP View Post
    The last one that makes me want to throat punch someone is people saying that the cop could have shot him in the leg.
    I doubt if it'll ever happen, but anyone who spouts that BS should be challenged to put on RedMan gear and go toe-to-toe with an opponent who outweighs them by at least 50 lbs. After they pick their aching carcass up off the mats, they should be surrounded by people yelling "You should have shot him in the leg!"

    Maybe that and the "shoot the gun/knife/bat out of his hand" crap should be discussed if SLPOA (or any agency/association) ever does another "training day" for local and state politicians. St. Louis police union shows politicians the stress of the job. But as with that event, probably less than half of those who were invited will actually attend, and most of those won't be cop-critics anyway.
    Last edited by RR_Security; 11-27-2014, 05:29 PM.
    --
    Capital Punishment means never having to say "you again?"

    Comment


    • #3
      I agree---------------------with everything you said and a few points you probably should have said too
      Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

      My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

      Comment


      • #4
        I can't say that I am shocked over 'certain' people's (certain does NOT mean black!) reaction to the no true bill.

        What I am shocked by is the utter, complete ignorance of our fear, and what it means to be THE police.

        I have read several and somewhat reputable, people saying if the officer was afraid, he shouldn't be a cop.I have heard and read the same people say the officer should never have chased the offender and that he should've ran/drove away.

        If you are not 'afraid' at times on this job, that is when you should not be the police. If you run from a confrontation or choose not pursue a criminal, then you should not be the police.

        Brave men and women are faced with these facts and decisions everyday on this job. We are supposed to win. We don't and shouldn't have to fight 'fair.' We are supposed to be tough. (at times) We are normal people who are tasked with an extraordinary, often un-winnable job. Yet we go out everyday and still do it.

        Why?

        Because WE are the Police.

        This is why I love you, this is why I grieve when you are murdered, and this is why I will bleed blue until the day I die.

        Stay safe brothers.
        Last edited by 143a; 11-27-2014, 06:29 PM.
        Hey man, how much the 25cent bag of Flamin' Hots cost?

        Comment


        • #5
          In concurrence I would like to add something about your grand jury comments. As you stated, it is fairly easy to get an indictment and I can't count the number of times I have read 'being able to indict a ham sandwich' since the decision was announced. The question I keep asking is this. How many times have Grand Juries returned an indictment in a (point #1) homicide when there is a question or a defense (point #2) asserting self-defense? Those two points are very specific items and are not the run of the mill, ho-hum type of cases which a Grand Jury hears.

          To roll on into another controversial topic, Treyvon Martin. Back then when a Special Prosecutor was named, I was certain that the Special Prosecutor would roll the whole thing into the Grand Jury and when the Grand Jury didn't indict George Zimmerman it would give the Special Prosecutor the political cover they needed because with what was known I couldn't see how a prosecutor felt they could get over the beyond a reasonable doubt threshold. It shocked me even more when the Special Prosecutor skipped the Grand Jury and I wondered if the Prosecutor was worried about being able to obtain an indictment.

          Finally I have to keep telling people that the judicial system is not about justice but rather is a system to protect the rights of the accused. The same people who are crying over the decision in regards to Officer Wilson are most likely the same people screaming for all kinds of change to the system when Project Innocence frees someone.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by JonathanE View Post
            Finally I have to keep telling people that the judicial system is not about justice but rather is a system to protect the rights of the accused. The same people who are crying over the decision in regards to Officer Wilson are most likely the same people screaming for all kinds of change to the system when Project Innocence frees someone.
            After almost 40 yrs of dealing with the criminal justice system in nearly every aspect (from arrest to jail to prison & halfway house to parole, etc) I have found that the system USUALLY gets it right.

            I now deal with juries in the court security aspect. I get to see how they are picked, handled, and how they work once seated. I have yet to see a jury (mostly petit jurors, but yes I have seen grand juries work) not work hard on its jobs.

            Yes there are hiccups, there are just plain "got it wrong" and there are bald face injustices-------------but they are usually right the first time unless there is serious malpractice (which is extremely rare).

            The "high profile" cases normally get special attention. Sometimes to placate the accused supporters, sometimes to placate the victims and/or survivors, and sometimes for political purposes. Sometimes it is to placate all three, but the fact is that it gets the handling in order to try to prevent trouble down the line

            Most of the time the handling backfires in some way, shape or from and there are still unhappy people.


            Anyone who is familiar with the Grand Jury system knows that this was conducted way differently than most and in the end there was more "transparency" in that the evidence was released afterwards. It was a good plan-----------unfortunately I don't think anything other than a guilty of murder would have made this crowd happy.

            It is what it is.
            Since some people need to be told by notes in crayon .......Don't PM me with without prior permission. If you can't discuss the situation in the open forum ----it must not be that important

            My new word for the day is FOCUS, when someone irritates you tell them to FOCUS

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by JonathanE View Post
              The same people who are crying over the decision in regards to Officer Wilson are most likely the same people screaming for all kinds of change to the system when Project Innocence frees someone.
              Really? The only people crying over the Officer Wilson decision are criminal sympathizers, phony "reverends", failed government "leaders" and morons. They are not typically "screaming" for change to release people from prison. Oh, and BTW, for the record it is the Innocence Project (I know Barry Scheck) and they provide a valuable service to those people that have been wrongfully accused.
              Last edited by So Fla Cop; 11-27-2014, 07:24 PM.
              September 11, 2001 - All gave some, some gave all. Never forget -- Never forgive.......... RIP Brothers and Sisters.

              Comment


              • #8
                Well said. Well said across the board. I'll add this, not the original and subsequent posts really need addenda. In terms of assessing blame for the death of "Mr. Brown", a good deal of responsibility goes to the two "Reverends" Jessie and Al. Add to them, such moral and ethical stalwarts as Barack Hussein Obama, Eric Holder, and an insipid, corrupt, sensation seeking corps of overpaid, arrogant, uniformed, talking heads, aka the media.

                Entitlement, retribution, denial of responsibility, unreasoning racism and hatred are but surface symptoms of the "new slavery" I've referenced in previous posts. Perhaps the once great, thriving, prosperous city of Detroit would should as an example of what this new slavery is all about.

                I believe it can be argued that this nation hasn't been more divided since the Civil War. A good deal of the responsibility and blame for that falls directly on the shoulders of moral, and ethical midgets represented by the likes of Barack Obama, Eric Holder, Al Sharpton, Jeremiah ("God damn America") Wright, and others of similar ilk.

                Well, I've ranted enough for one night. Sincerely hope all you Guys had a good Thanksgiving.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I think the biggest thing is that the media and activists have constantly pounded it into the mindless masses that the police have one purpose and one purpose alone: Not to enforce laws, but to ensure that racism is upheld. We are told by the "experts" that our entire nation is built, brick by brick, by racism and exploitation. You can't argue that Officer Wilson didn't, or even might not have based his actions on his burning hatred of black people, because there is no other explanation. The media and the activists will tell you it's just not logically possible. How are they 100% sure that this wasn't a racially driven murder of an innocent man? Because you can't prove 100% beyond the shadow of a doubt that it wasn't. Even if you did, they can easily turn around and say that the fact that you proved your case shows that you are racist and covering up the truth.
                  "If the police have to come get you, they're bringing an @$$ kicking with them!"
                  -Chris Rock

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    What are the chances that the federal government could step in and try Officer Wilson on civil rights related charges?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Iowa #1603 View Post
                      After almost 40 yrs of dealing with the criminal justice system in nearly every aspect (from arrest to jail to prison & halfway house to parole, etc) I have found that the system USUALLY gets it right.

                      I now deal with juries in the court security aspect. I get to see how they are picked, handled, and how they work once seated. I have yet to see a jury (mostly petit jurors, but yes I have seen grand juries work) not work hard on its jobs.
                      One thing that I have noticed with juries is that the citizens who actually show up to do their duty tend to take the responsibilities seriously. There are many diligent and responsible citizens left in this country and those are the ones I pin my hopes on.

                      I will also say that I hope to God that we never see a day in this country where citizens cannot protest (peacefully) ANY actions taken in their name; but lets face it, not one thing going on in Ferguson is about that. It is about a group of race baiting bastards exerting their influence within a segment of society so that they can further extort the funds necessary to continue their ill-earned lifestyles coupled with an opportunity for their followers to continue to perpetuate a stereotype by acting like uncivilized savages. That is not protesting, that is rioting.
                      In God We Trust
                      Everyone else we run local and NCIC

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Mulgrave600 View Post
                        What are the chances that the federal government could step in and try Officer Wilson on civil rights related charges?
                        It could definitely happen if certain parties push for it hard enough, but given the evidence that we've seen so far, it wouldn't go anywhere. All that it would accomplish is to incite another set of riots when it inevitably failed.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          What gets me is them playing up the whole idea of Michael Brown being "unarmed" like that somehow makes someone immune from deadly force. Have these people ever been in a fist fight? Have they ever seen a fight? A person can kill another person with their bare hands and in this case he is only unarmed until he gets his "opponents" gun. An opponent that looked to be 5-7 inches shorter and close to 100 pounds lighter.

                          The liberals and bleeding hearts just don't get it. Cops are not super human MMA fighters. They are run of the mill men and women. If you suggested to a liberal that all woman cops be fired and banned from further work in LE as well as any male cops that can not win a fight against a 6 foot 5, 290 pound man they would burn you at the stake.

                          My blood boils when I hear people cite the fact that he was unarmed as if that makes any real difference at the end of the day. The thug robbed a store and assaulted a cop. He made his own bed. It is frustrating that so many people cannot see that.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            These idiots in the media are not journalists. They are sensationalists practicing yellow journalism.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Maybe this grand jury was handled the way it was meant to be handled. Maybe prosecutors aren't supposed to lead Grand juries to one side or the other.

                              Comment

                              MR300x250 Tablet

                              Collapse

                              What's Going On

                              Collapse

                              There are currently 3445 users online. 207 members and 3238 guests.

                              Most users ever online was 158,966 at 05:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                              Welcome Ad

                              Collapse
                              Working...
                              X