Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
April 24, 2014, 12:07:25 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
 
   Home   Help Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 47 48 [49] 50 51 ... 64   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Police State - Official Thread  (Read 58385 times)
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18141


Team Nurse Bangers


View Profile
« Reply #1200 on: June 06, 2013, 08:01:24 AM »

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-administration-defends-phone-records-113329195.html

In its first semi-official comment from the White House about The Guardian's Verizon/NSA phone-snooping scoop, the administration didn't admit to collecting the telephone records of millions of Americans. But they didn't say they wouldn't do that either. An anonymous "senior administration official" would not confirm that the newspaper story was true or that the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court order was legitimate  but they did tell media outlets on Thursday that the requests are "a critical tool in protecting the nation from terrorist threats."

RELATED: The NSA Is Collecting Phone Records in Bulk

The order in question, which was issued in April, compelled Verizon to give the National Secuirty Agency information on all phone calls that were routed through its network over a period of three months. The classified order was published in The Guardian on Wednesday, and though it doesn't mention any other telephone companies, it's possible that similar orders were issued to them as well.

RELATED: Raytheon's 'Google for Spies' Tracks You from Social-Media Sharing — and Fast

The same administration official also reiterated to the AP that while the information collected includes phone numbers, location data, and call times, it doesn't include the contents of any phone conversation. 


After overnight silence, Obama admin finally responds to Guardian report. Won't confirm specifics but defends the practice.
— Chuck Todd (@chucktodd) June 6, 2013

NBC News's Chuck Todd also reported that administration official (presumably the same person) told him that "all branches of government are aware" when orders like this are issued, implying that members of Congress, as well as the President, were likely briefed on the matter when it happened. We'll have to see if President Obama comes forward to discuss this soon, but it looks the government's defense is going to take the usual path when it comes to Patriot Act-style suveillance: This is normal behavior, it's for our own safety, and there's nothing to see here.

People need to start waking up to the reality that big brother does not have their beat interests at heart, and that they could, and WOULD, turn on their citizens in a heartbeat if they thought tjeu could get away with it. (And by they, I mean most politicians and high ranking government officials, and by turn on, I mean turn this country into a totalitarian state because they believe they know whats best for us, and they have next to no respect for their citizens)
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1201 on: June 06, 2013, 02:17:30 PM »

Welcome to the Bush-Obama White House: They're Spying on Us

The "Bush-Obama era" will be long remembered for curbing the Constitution.

By Ron Fournier


Updated: June 6, 2013 | 9:27 a.m.
 June 6, 2013 | 8:33 a.m.

 (AP Photo/Carolyn Kaster)


Welcome to the era of Bush-Obama, a 16-year span of U.S. history that will be remembered for an unprecedented erosion of civil liberties and a disregard for transparency. On the war against a tactic—terrorism—and its insidious fallout, the United States could have skipped the 2008 election.

It made little difference.

Despite his clear and popular promises to the contrary, President Obama has not shifted the balance between security and freedom to a more
natural state—one not blinded by worst fears and tarred by power grabs. If anything, things have gotten worse.

Killing civilians and U.S. citizens via drone.

Seizing telephone records at the Associated Press in violation of Justice Department guidelines.

Accusing a respected Fox News reporter of engaging in a conspiracy to commit treason for doing his job.
Detaining terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay, despite promises to end the ill-considered Bush policy.

Even the IRS scandal, while not a matter of foreign policy, strikes at the heart of growing concerns among Americans that their privacy is government's playpen.

And now this: The Guardian newspaper reports that the National Security Agency is collecting telephone records of tens of millions of customers of one of the nation's largest phone companies, Verizon.

If the story is accurate, the action appears to be legal. The order was signed by a judge from a secret court that oversees domestic surveillance. It may also be necessary; U.S. intelligence needs every advantage it can get over the nation's enemies.

But for several reasons the news is chilling.
1.Verizon probably isn't the only company coughing up its documents. Odds are incredibly strong that the government is prying into your telephone records today.
2.Issued in April, the NSA order "could represent the broadest surveillance order known to have been issued," according to The Washington Post. "It also would confirm long-standing suspicions of civil liberties advocates about the sweeping nature of U.S. surveillance through commercial carries under laws passed after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks."
3.This appears to be a "rubber stamp," order, reissued every few months since 2001. As is the case with all government programs, the systematic snooping into your telephone records is unlikely to ever expire without public outcry.
4.Congress is full of hypocrites. Liberals who criticized Bush are less incensed with Obama. Republicans who bowed to Bush are now blasting Obama. The next time your congressional representative criticizes Obama for curbing civil liberties, ask if he or she would vote to repeal the Patriot Act, the post-911 law that handed unfettered power to the intelligence and military bureaucracies. Most won't.
5.The Bush-Obama White House hates transparency. President George W. Bush and his vice president, Dick Cheney, were justifiably criticized by Democrats (none more successfully so than Obama himself) for their penchant for secrecy. Obama promised that he would run history's most transparent administration. By almost any measure, on domestic and well as foreign policies, Obama has broken that promise.

It is the lack of transparency that is most galling about the security versus civil liberties debate under Obama, because it shows his lack of faith in the public. Americans know a high level of secrecy and dirty work is needed to keep them safe. Most trust their president. Many approve of his job performance.

Still, they expect and deserve an open discussion about how to fight terrorism without undermining the Constitution.

Obama started that conversation with a recent address on the drone program, media leaks and the need to move American off a constant war footing. It was a compelling and well-considered argument for the balance he is claiming to strike.

But he made the speech under pressure, and reluctantly. It only came amid new revelations about the drone program and the disclosure of newsroom spying (the Guardian may well be in Obama's sights next). Under Bush, the warrantless-wiretap program only stopped after it was publicly disclosed. In that way, the Guardian story is not a surprise, so why didn't Obama long ago acknowledge, explain, and justify such an intrusion into privacy?

Obama has promised to adjust the drone and leaks investigation policies, essentially acknowledging that his administration had gone too far in the name of security. Do you believe him?

One thing we've learned about the Bush-Obama White House is that words don't matter. Watch what they do.

Get the latest news and analysis delivered to your inbox. Sign up for National Journal's morning alert, Wake-Up Call, and afternoon newsletter, The Edge. Subscribe here.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1202 on: June 06, 2013, 03:40:35 PM »

U.S. intelligence mining data from nine U.S. Internet companies in broad secret program

By Barton Gellman and Laura Poitras, Thursday, June 6, 5:43 PM


http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-intelligence-mining-data-from-nine-us-internet-companies-in-broad-secret-program/2013/06/06/3a0c0da8-cebf-11e2-8845-d970ccb04497_print.html


The National Security Agency and the FBI are tapping directly into the central servers of nine leading U.S. Internet companies, extracting audio, video, photographs, e-mails, documents and connection logs that enable analysts to track a person’s movements and contacts over time.

The highly classified program, code-named PRISM, has not been disclosed publicly before. Its establishment in 2007 and six years of exponential growth took place beneath the surface of a roiling debate over the boundaries of surveillance and privacy. Even late last year, when critics of the foreign intelligence statute argued for changes, the only members of Congress who know about PRISM were bound by oaths of office to hold their tongues.

An internal presentation on the Silicon Valley operation, intended for senior analysts in the NSA’s Signals Intelligence Directorate, described the new tool as the most prolific contributor to the President’s Daily Brief, which cited PRISM data in 1,477 articles last year. According to the briefing slides, obtained by The Washington Post, “NSA reporting increasingly relies on PRISM” as its leading source of raw material, accounting for nearly 1 in 7 intelligence reports.

That is a remarkable figure in an agency that measures annual intake in the trillions of communications. It is all the more striking because the NSA, whose lawful mission is foreign intelligence, is reaching deep inside the machinery of American companies that host hundreds of millions of American-held accounts on American soil.

The technology companies, which participate knowingly in PRISM operations, include most of the dominant global players of Silicon Valley. They are listed on a roster that bears their logos in order of entry into the program: “Microsoft, Yahoo, Google, Facebook, PalTalk, AOL, Skype, YouTube, Apple.” PalTalk, although much smaller, has hosted significant traffic during the Arab Spring and in the ongoing Syrian civil war.

Dropbox , the cloud storage and synchronization service, is described as “coming soon.”

Government officials declined to comment for this story.

Roots in the ’70s

PRISM is an heir, in one sense, to a history of intelligence alliances with as many as 100 trusted U.S. companies since the 1970s. The NSA calls these Special Source Operations, and PRISM falls under that rubric.

The Silicon Valley operation works alongside a parallel program, code-named BLARNEY, that gathers up “metadata” — address packets, device signatures and the like — as it streams past choke points along the backbone of the Internet. BLARNEY’s top-secret program summary, set down alongside a cartoon insignia of a shamrock and a leprechaun hat, describes it as “an ongoing collection program that leverages IC [intelligence community] and commercial partnerships to gain access and exploit foreign intelligence obtained from global networks.”

But the PRISM program appears more nearly to resemble the most controversial of the warrantless surveillance orders issued by President George W. Bush after the al-Qaeda attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. Its history, in which President Obama presided over “exponential growth” in a program that candidate Obama criticized, shows how fundamentally surveillance law and practice have shifted away from individual suspicion in favor of systematic, mass collection techniques.

The PRISM program is not a dragnet, exactly. From inside a company’s data stream the NSA is capable of pulling out anything it likes, but under current rules the agency does not try to collect it all.

Analysts who use the system from a Web portal at Fort Meade key in “selectors,” or search terms, that are designed to produce at least 51 percent confidence in a target’s “foreignness.” That is not a very stringent test. Training materials obtained by the Post instruct new analysts to submit accidentally collected U.S. content for a quarterly report, “but it’s nothing to worry about.”

Even when the system works just as advertised, with no American singled out for targeting, the NSA routinely collects a great deal of American content. That is described as “incidental,” and it is inherent in contact chaining, one of the basic tools of the trade. To collect on a suspected spy or foreign terrorist means, at minimum, that everyone in the suspect’s inbox or outbox is swept in. Intelligence analysts are typically taught to chain through contacts two “hops” out from their target, which increases “incidental collection” exponentially. The same math explains the aphorism, from the John Guare play, that no one is more than “six degrees of separation” from Kevin Bacon.

A ‘directive’

Formally, in exchange for immunity from lawsuits, companies like Yahoo and AOL are obliged to accept a “directive” from the attorney general and the director of national intelligence to open their servers to the FBI’s Data Intercept Technology Unit, which handles liaison to U.S. companies from the NSA. In 2008, Congress gave the Justice Department authority to for a secret order from the Foreign Surveillance Intelligence Court to compel a reluctant company “to comply.”

In practice, there is room for a company to maneuver, delay or resist. When a clandestine intelligence program meets a highly regulated industry, said a lawyer with experience in bridging the gaps, neither side wants to risk a public fight. The engineering problems are so immense, in systems of such complexity and frequent change, that the FBI and NSA would be hard pressed to build in back doors without active help from each company.

Apple demonstrated that resistance is possible, for reasons unknown, when it held out for more than five years after Microsoft became PRISM’s first corporate partner in May 2007. Twitter, which has cultivated a reputation for aggressive defense of its users’ privacy, is still conspicuous by its absence from the list of “private sector partners.”

“Google cares deeply about the security of our users’ data,” a company spokesman said. “We disclose user data to government in accordance with the law, and we review all such requests carefully. From time to time, people allege that we have created a government ‘back door’ into our systems, but Google does not have a ‘back door’ for the government to access private user data.”

Like market researchers, but with far more privileged access, collection managers in the NSA’s Special Source Operations group, which oversees the PRISM program, are drawn to the wealth of information about their subjects in online accounts. For much the same reason, civil libertarians and some ordinary users may be troubled by the menu available to analysts who hold the required clearances to “task” the PRISM system.

There has been “continued exponential growth in tasking to Facebook and Skype,” according to the 41 PRISM slides. With a few clicks and an affirmation that the subject is believed to be engaged in terrorism, espionage or nuclear proliferation, an analyst obtains full access to Facebook’s “extensive search and surveillance capabilities against the variety of online social networking services.”

According to a separate “User’s Guide for PRISM Skype Collection,” that service can be monitored for audio when one end of the call is a conventional telephone and for any combination of “audio, video, chat, and file transfers” when Skype users connect by computer alone. Google’s offerings include Gmail, voice and video chat, Google Drive files, photo libraries, and live surveillance of search terms.

Firsthand experience with these systems, and horror at their capabilities, is what drove a career intelligence officer to provide PowerPoint slides about PRISM and supporting materials to The Washington Post in order to expose what he believes to be a gross intrusion on privacy. “They quite literally can watch your ideas form as you type,” the officer said.

 

Julie Tate and Robert O’Harrow Jr. contributed to this report.

Graphic: NSA slides explain the PRISM data-collection program
Report to moderator   Logged
poldaktalos
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3581


You boob!


View Profile
« Reply #1203 on: June 09, 2013, 08:37:31 PM »

Sober driver charged with DUI in Arizona after police said they could tell ‘by looking at him’

An Ohio man was charged with DUI after her was pulled over by the police, despite the fact that a breathalyzer test showed he had a blood-alcohol content of 0.000.

64-year-old Jessie Thornton who now lives in Surprise, Arizona said cops told him that they could tell he was drunk simply by looking at him.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2338471/Sober-driver-charged-DUI-Arizona-police-said-tell-looking-him.html
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1204 on: June 09, 2013, 08:41:16 PM »

Sober driver charged with DUI in Arizona after police said they could tell ‘by looking at him’

An Ohio man was charged with DUI after her was pulled over by the police, despite the fact that a breathalyzer test showed he had a blood-alcohol content of 0.000.

64-year-old Jessie Thornton who now lives in Surprise, Arizona said cops told him that they could tell he was drunk simply by looking at him.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2338471/Sober-driver-charged-DUI-Arizona-police-said-tell-looking-him.html


Always foreign papers reporting the truth lately.
Report to moderator   Logged
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18141


Team Nurse Bangers


View Profile
« Reply #1205 on: June 09, 2013, 08:42:06 PM »

Sober driver charged with DUI in Arizona after police said they could tell ‘by looking at him’

An Ohio man was charged with DUI after her was pulled over by the police, despite the fact that a breathalyzer test showed he had a blood-alcohol content of 0.000.

64-year-old Jessie Thornton who now lives in Surprise, Arizona said cops told him that they could tell he was drunk simply by looking at him.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2338471/Sober-driver-charged-DUI-Arizona-police-said-tell-looking-him.html
Huh? How can they charge you if they have no way of proving that you are drunk?
Report to moderator   Logged
avxo
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3431


I'm about to froth at the mouth!


View Profile
« Reply #1206 on: June 09, 2013, 10:30:59 PM »

Sober driver charged with DUI in Arizona after police said they could tell ‘by looking at him’

An Ohio man was charged with DUI after her was pulled over by the police, despite the fact that a breathalyzer test showed he had a blood-alcohol content of 0.000.

64-year-old Jessie Thornton who now lives in Surprise, Arizona said cops told him that they could tell he was drunk simply by looking at him.


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2338471/Sober-driver-charged-DUI-Arizona-police-said-tell-looking-him.html

Crazy... Those cops need to be sued in their individual capacities in addition to their official capacity for abuse under color of authority.
Report to moderator   Logged
Agnostic007
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3613



View Profile
« Reply #1207 on: June 10, 2013, 06:26:16 AM »

I read the article and could only see a glimpse of the actual report so it's all speculation at this point. Couple things could have happened.

1. Officer arrested the person without any cause, disregarding need for probable cause and knowing his case is jacked and he will get hammered in court

2. Officer observed poor driving and suspected the driver of DUI. BAC test showed he was not impared by alcohol. DRE officer arrived as the article indicated and he was tested to see if he was under the influence of another drug and there was evidence he was and was charged with it. He says the officer made that statement but I haven't read the officers side of it at this point. That he was having medical issues may indicate he was taking a prescription drug that may have impaired his driving ability.

We'll find out which is true soon enough I would imagine. 

Report to moderator   Logged
avxo
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3431


I'm about to froth at the mouth!


View Profile
« Reply #1208 on: June 10, 2013, 02:59:04 PM »

I read the article and could only see a glimpse of the actual report so it's all speculation at this point. Couple things could have happened.

1. Officer arrested the person without any cause, disregarding need for probable cause and knowing his case is jacked and he will get hammered in court

2. Officer observed poor driving and suspected the driver of DUI. BAC test showed he was not impared by alcohol. DRE officer arrived as the article indicated and he was tested to see if he was under the influence of another drug and there was evidence he was and was charged with it. He says the officer made that statement but I haven't read the officers side of it at this point. That he was having medical issues may indicate he was taking a prescription drug that may have impaired his driving ability.

We'll find out which is true soon enough I would imagine. 

The problem is that "I observed poor driving" is something that cannot be disproven; it's the sort of ridiculous excuse that Officers routinely use exactly because it's a lie that will (almost) never come back to bite him.

Even if the person here is never charged (or he is found not liable/not guilty) the Officer is unlikely to face any consequences at all.
Report to moderator   Logged
Skip8282
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 6291



View Profile
« Reply #1209 on: June 10, 2013, 05:44:33 PM »

I read the article and could only see a glimpse of the actual report so it's all speculation at this point. Couple things could have happened.

1. Officer arrested the person without any cause, disregarding need for probable cause and knowing his case is jacked and he will get hammered in court

2. Officer observed poor driving and suspected the driver of DUI. BAC test showed he was not impared by alcohol. DRE officer arrived as the article indicated and he was tested to see if he was under the influence of another drug and there was evidence he was and was charged with it. He says the officer made that statement but I haven't read the officers side of it at this point. That he was having medical issues may indicate he was taking a prescription drug that may have impaired his driving ability.

We'll find out which is true soon enough I would imagine. 





With regards to the first, just getting hammered in court is not acceptable.

If people are arrested without cause, the officer needs to be terminated, charged with civil rights violations, fined, and spend some time in jail.


 
Report to moderator   Logged
Shockwave
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 18141


Team Nurse Bangers


View Profile
« Reply #1210 on: June 10, 2013, 06:37:25 PM »

The problem is that "I observed poor driving" is something that cannot be disproven; it's the sort of ridiculous excuse that Officers routinely use exactly because it's a lie that will (almost) never come back to bite him.

Even if the person here is never charged (or he is found not liable/not guilty) the Officer is unlikely to face any consequences at all.
Not to mention the cost involved to take this to court, lawyer fees, time off work, etc... basically he's innocent and going to have to shell out several thousand dollars for no fucking reason except some dickhead cops decided to abuse their authority.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1211 on: June 10, 2013, 06:47:17 PM »

most "life on the line" testilies
Report to moderator   Logged
Agnostic007
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3613



View Profile
« Reply #1212 on: June 10, 2013, 07:51:21 PM »



With regards to the first, just getting hammered in court is not acceptable.

If people are arrested without cause, the officer needs to be terminated, charged with civil rights violations, fined, and spend some time in jail.


 

Agreed, if that is the case
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1213 on: June 14, 2013, 05:51:44 AM »

Dozens of convictions in question as NYPD detective said to have falsified murder confessions



Get short URL
  Published time: June 14, 2013 03:41   

AFP Photo / Spencer Platt/
AFP Photo / Spencer Platt/


 


   
 
 

 Share on tumblr
 



Tags
Corruption, Court, Crime, Law, Police, USA
Brooklyn prosecutors are examining 50 homicide convictions involving a retired police detective who may have intimidated suspects into confessing to crimes they never committed – with words he chose.

Louis Scarcella was a celebrated member of the Brooklyn North Homicide squad through the crack-cocaine epidemic of the 1980s and 1990s, when he gained a reputation for his unusual ability to draw out confessions. He investigated about 175 murders alone and helped with almost 200 more, but questions have been raised on whether Scarcella coerced, or even entirely fabricated, the admissions of guilt. 

The inquiries began after David Ranta was released from prison earlier this year. Ranta, once a drug addict and petty criminal, spent nearly 23 years in prison for the 1990 murder of a Brooklyn rabbi, despite no physical evidence linking him to the crime other than a confession statement he maintains he didn't write. The investigating detective was Louis Scarcella. 

Upon reviewing the cases Scarcella was involved in throughout his 29-year career with the NYPD, The New York Times discovered some alarming coincidences among the confessions. In at least five, the suspects begin their statement with the phrases “You got it right” or “I was there.” Ranta’s statement, which he has always denied delivering, begins, “I was there.” 

Scarcella relied on a drug addicted prostitute to act as a witness in at least six different, unconnected murder trials. Teresa Gomez has since died, but lawyers said she was “Louie’s go-to witness,” despite major credibility issues. One prosecutor wrote, according to New York news and culture blog Gothamist, that “It was a near folly to even think that anyone would believe Gomez about anything.” 

The Conviction Integrity Unit, a section of the Brooklyn district attorney’s office, refused to identify the 50 cases under inspection, though observers to the investigation fear dozens of innocent men may have been imprisoned only because they were investigated by a corrupt NYPD detective. 

Lawyers for other defendants, almost all of whom are still behind bars, said the confessions' similarities prove the trend was deliberate.   

“It’s sort of beyond belief that it would be coincidental,” Stephen Banks, the chief lawyer for the Legal Aid Society, which is reviewing 20 of Scarcella’s cases, told the Times.

Law experts admitted that a detective’s speech is often incorporated into the phraseology of a confession, although the likelihood that so many suspects would use the same pattern remains minimal. 

“It’s hard to imagine all five people used the same exact words,” said University of San Francisco law professor Richard Leo, a confessions specialist, as quoted by the Times. “It almost sounds like a template.” 

Jabbar Washington is among those who claim Scarcella put them in prison without sufficient proof. Washington was implicated in a 1995 home invasion that left one man dead and two other people in comas. 

“You got it right,” Washington supposedly wrote just minutes after he was brought in for questioning. “I was there.” 

Washington testified at his own trial that Scarcella grabbed him by the neck and testicles before giving Washington a script for the confession, according to the Times. 

“He always said the cop fed him what to say,” said Mark Pollard, Washington’s lawyer at the time. 

Scarcella, for his part, has denied any wrongdoing, at one point appearing on the Dr. Phil show to discuss falsified confessions. The former detective was approached by the New York Post after the Brooklyn DA asked a judge to vacate Ranta’s conviction. 

“They threw me under the bus,” he said. “I was appalled when I got the news. I stand by the confession 100 per cent. I never framed anyone in my life. You have to be a low devil to frame someone. I sleep well at night.”


http://rt.com/usa/nypd-detective-falsified-murder-confessions-680

Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1214 on: June 17, 2013, 02:36:46 AM »

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2342786/Man-charged-counts-endangering-children-locking-boys-closet-vandalizing-home.html


Really screwed up.   
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1215 on: June 18, 2013, 08:16:30 PM »

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/19/us/in-150-shootings-the-fbi-deemed-agents-faultless.html?_r=1&



Unreal.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1216 on: June 19, 2013, 04:45:50 AM »

http://www.krmg.com/news/news/local/man-found-decapitated-police-suspect-suicide/nYNZh


 Roll Eyes  Roll Eyes
Report to moderator   Logged
Agnostic007
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3613



View Profile
« Reply #1217 on: June 19, 2013, 05:31:26 AM »



The incident happened near 46th and Sheridan.

Police say a woman who lives in the home found her husband dead in the garage.

His hands and feet were tied and the body had been decapitated.

Tulsa police told KRMG news the death was due to suicide.

Cops gave no other details at the time but continue to investigate the matter


Couple thoughts here...

1. Just no way officers would determine suicide so soon with the way the body was found. Even if they suspected it, they would not announce their suspicion to the press because the chance of looking stupid if they are wrong is just too great. Typically officers seal off the crime scene and homicide detectives and crime scene specialists arrive. Eventually the coroner or M.E. shows up and will also conduct an investigation into the cause of death. This can take days before a cause of death is ruled on. So just the fact a statement is made of suicide so soon after the crime just screams a problem with the reporting.

2. Article says "a woman who lives at the house found her husband dead in the garage". Well, that would be THE WIFE. If that is an example of the reporters ability, then likely he or she screwed the pooch on writing the rest of it.

3. For such an event, the article is lacking any real detail a normal article would have like what the neighbors had to say about the couple, etc etc. Just seems odd to me.   

Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1218 on: June 19, 2013, 05:33:09 AM »

Maybe the guy had a makeshift guilitine in the garage?   Grin  Grin


The incident happened near 46th and Sheridan.

Police say a woman who lives in the home found her husband dead in the garage.

His hands and feet were tied and the body had been decapitated.

Tulsa police told KRMG news the death was due to suicide.

Cops gave no other details at the time but continue to investigate the matter


Couple thoughts here...

1. Just no way officers would determine suicide so soon with the way the body was found. Even if they suspected it, they would not announce their suspicion to the press because the chance of looking stupid if they are wrong is just too great. Typically officers seal off the crime scene and homicide detectives and crime scene specialists arrive. Eventually the coroner or M.E. shows up and will also conduct an investigation into the cause of death. This can take days before a cause of death is ruled on. So just the fact a statement is made of suicide so soon after the crime just screams a problem with the reporting.

2. Article says "a woman who lives at the house found her husband dead in the garage". Well, that would be THE WIFE. If that is an example of the reporters ability, then likely he or she screwed the pooch on writing the rest of it.

3. For such an event, the article is lacking any real detail a normal article would have like what the neighbors had to say about the couple, etc etc. Just seems odd to me.   


Report to moderator   Logged
Agnostic007
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3613



View Profile
« Reply #1219 on: June 19, 2013, 05:37:52 AM »

Maybe the guy had a makeshift guilitine in the garage?   Grin  Grin


Possible, maybe he was murdered and the reporter got it wrong. I find it very hard to believe cops told a reporter it was suicide when we even look at the obvious suicides was possible homicides initially until the facts bear out the conclusion...just sayin..
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1220 on: June 19, 2013, 11:06:58 AM »

http://rt.com/usa/fbi-director-mueller-drones-947

Move on sheep - FBI admits today using drones for domestic surveillance
Report to moderator   Logged
poldaktalos
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3581


You boob!


View Profile
« Reply #1221 on: June 21, 2013, 11:29:21 AM »

http://jalopnik.com/florida-cop-makes-young-mom-shake-her-bra-during-stop-t-531557395

"four days of paid leave as punishment"










"punishment"...
Report to moderator   Logged
avxo
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3431


I'm about to froth at the mouth!


View Profile
« Reply #1222 on: June 21, 2013, 02:32:43 PM »


Agnostic007, this is the sort of thing I was talking about before. Cops not only being allowed to violate citizens right, but to flat-out abuse them with little or no consequence. And let's be realistic: four days of paid vacation isn't a consequence.

What message does this send to other officers? What about to the public? It's that cops are bullies; that they can bully you under the color of authority, they can abide you, and they can walk away scot free. Their friends won't "turn" on them and the union will fight for them. So it's all good.

Abuse the public, then go on a short paid vacation.

This cop should have been fired on the spot. And anyone involved with the decision of giving him four days of paid leave should be fired on the spot.

[Sidenote: And you know just as well as I do that if there wasn't video ("the camera malfunctioned!") there's no way anything at all would have happened and this poor woman would not even be believed.
Report to moderator   Logged
Soul Crusher
Competitors
Getbig V
*****
Posts: 5300


Doesnt lie about lifting.


View Profile
« Reply #1223 on: June 23, 2013, 07:36:36 PM »

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/06/21/family-furious-after-police-shoot-german-shepherd-in-front-yard-plus-does-security-vid-contradict-cops-story/?utm_source=facebook&utm_medium=story&utm_campaign=Share%20Buttons



So sick f this shit.
Report to moderator   Logged
avxo
Getbig IV
****
Gender: Male
Posts: 3431


I'm about to froth at the mouth!


View Profile
« Reply #1224 on: June 24, 2013, 03:14:18 AM »


Good thing there's security footage. Although, it will at most result in a suspension without pay (a.k.a. a paid vacation) when all is said and done. The usual "feared for his life" bullshit will be uttered, additional and/or refresher training will be mentioned and that's that.

Frankly, any time a police officer files a report it should be, automatically, under sworn penalty of perjury, and if evidence contradicting his sword statement appears, he should be instantly removed from duty without pay and either investigated or, depending on the evidence, brought before a Court of Law to face perjury charges.

Bah.
Report to moderator   Logged
Pages: 1 ... 47 48 [49] 50 51 ... 64   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Theme created by Egad Community. Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.16 | SMF © 2011, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!