Author Topic: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"  (Read 9328 times)

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #75 on: April 27, 2013, 09:31:11 AM »




So, what makes you think if the cops went barging in under your hypothetical that the gunman wouldn't open up and kill everyone or try to?




Nothing makes me think that.. When deciding a course of action I would imagine they would weigh the pros and cons of doing nothing verses attempting to locate the bad guy who may be in one of the houses. Apparently they felt it was more prudent to clear the houses rather than not. Sometimes in these situations all your options carry some risk. You have to decide which is the least amount

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #76 on: April 27, 2013, 11:36:55 AM »
Yes, it would be disgraceful, if any of that were true.. It's only reality in your head Tu  ::)

You have already stated that your right to shoot me overrides my right to shoot you.

On numerous occasions you have either stated OR avoided questions regarding the public vs. the police.

You ALWAYS side with the Police... I have actually sided with citizenry and police in different instances.

In your mind Police Power > Citizens

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #77 on: April 27, 2013, 01:15:11 PM »
You have already stated that your right to shoot me overrides my right to shoot you.

On numerous occasions you have either stated OR avoided questions regarding the public vs. the police.

You ALWAYS side with the Police... I have actually sided with citizenry and police in different instances.

In your mind Police Power > Citizens

I don't ALWAYS side with the police, that's just what you want to believe. And if it makes you feel superior thinking that, have at it buddy. 

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #78 on: April 27, 2013, 01:50:14 PM »
I don't ALWAYS side with the police, that's just what you want to believe. And if it makes you feel superior thinking that, have at it buddy. 

Where are your statements stating so?

Name one topic we have discussed here where you flat out said, "The police were WRONG."

You can't do that... You always have some mitigating circumstance or caveat.

You have NEVER plainly said, THOSE POLICE WERE WRONG.

NEVER.

You skirt the issue and sidestep constantly.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #79 on: April 27, 2013, 02:20:44 PM »
Where are your statements stating so?

Name one topic we have discussed here where you flat out said, "The police were WRONG."

You can't do that... You always have some mitigating circumstance or caveat.

You have NEVER plainly said, THOSE POLICE WERE WRONG.

NEVER.

You skirt the issue and sidestep constantly.

Got this qoute from the police state thread... just a quick check and located this. I know there are more instances like it.

"The cop was very professional in his demeanor, I'll give him that. The yard issue is irrelevant though it weighs in the citizens favor. For example, I can chase a bad guy, tackle him in your front yard, and be handcuffing him. You can be in your own yard, looking over my shoulder, and I would be right in telling you to get back if I felt exposed to you while performing my job of arresting the individual.

IN this particular case, reviewing the tape, arrest would not be the likely result in most cases. If an officer felt concerned they may ask to frisk the person for weapons before continuing if the person refused to leave the immediate area of the activity. They may position an officer in an "overwatch" position to keep the bystanders in observation. In this case the citizen was in error by refusing the officers request, but the officer was also in error by resorting to arrest to solve the safety concern. "

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #80 on: April 27, 2013, 02:22:12 PM »
When I have time, I will go through more and post them if you really believe I have never said a cop is wrong. But here's what will happen if you hold true to your nature... I'll post them, you will come up with some reason why they don't count, then quickly move on to another rabbit trail.... ::)

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #81 on: April 27, 2013, 02:23:31 PM »
Got this qoute from the police state thread... just a quick check and located this. I know there are more instances like it.

"The cop was very professional in his demeanor, I'll give him that. The yard issue is irrelevant though it weighs in the citizens favor. For example, I can chase a bad guy, tackle him in your front yard, and be handcuffing him. You can be in your own yard, looking over my shoulder, and I would be right in telling you to get back if I felt exposed to you while performing my job of arresting the individual.

IN this particular case, reviewing the tape, arrest would not be the likely result in most cases. If an officer felt concerned they may ask to frisk the person for weapons before continuing if the person refused to leave the immediate area of the activity. They may position an officer in an "overwatch" position to keep the bystanders in observation. In this case the citizen was in error by refusing the officers request, but the officer was also in error by resorting to arrest to solve the safety concern. "


As I just said, you sidestepped the issue completely.

You didn't on any level just plainly say, yes... the cop was wrong.

You mitigated the circumstance and then skirted an actual statement saying the police were wrong.

Hell, it even sounds like you're making up excuses.

So what was your post supposed to prove? That I'm correct in my assessment of you?

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #82 on: April 27, 2013, 02:30:07 PM »
As I just said, you sidestepped the issue completely.

You didn't on any level just plainly say, yes... the cop was wrong.

You mitigated the circumstance and then skirted an actual statement saying the police were wrong.

Hell, it even sounds like you're making up excuses.

So what was your post supposed to prove? That I'm correct in my assessment of you?

You threw down the guantlet.. I'll gladly pick it up. If I post 6 instances where I disagreed with the police, didn't side with them like you say I ALWAYS do, which is 6 more than you say exists, what happens then? I'll wager you if I find 6, I don't know, you owe me $100 or you can leave Getbig for 30 days, if I can't find 6, I'll leave for 30 days or send you $100

Sound like a bet?     

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #83 on: April 27, 2013, 02:33:11 PM »
You threw down the guantlet.. I'll gladly pick it up. If I post 6 instances where I disagreed with the police, didn't side with them like you say I ALWAYS do, which is 6 more than you say exists, what happens then? I'll wager you if I find 6, I don't know, you owe me $100 or you can leave Getbig for 30 days, if I can't find 6, I'll leave for 30 days or send you $100

Sound like a bet?     

First off... I will be happy to bet  you 30 days away from getbig. It's not like it's that big a deal to me either way, with the caveat that you ABSOLUTELY PLAINLY STATE. "THE COPS WERE WRONG" on 10 different instances. None of this bullshit you type out where you give all of these if, buts, and shit like that.

You wanna step to that bet?

I have no problem leaving getbig for the next 30 days because I have tons of other shit to do with my life.

You think that's even a wager?

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #84 on: April 27, 2013, 02:36:09 PM »
First off... I will be happy to bet  you 30 days away from getbig. It's not like it's that big a deal to me either way, with the caveat that you ABSOLUTELY PLAINLY STATE. "THE COPS WERE WRONG" on 10 different instances. None of this bullshit you type out where you give all of these if, buts, and shit like that.

You wanna step to that bet?

I have no problem leaving getbig for the next 30 days because I have tons of other shit to do with my life.

You think that's even a wager?

Figured you would back out... to find 6 instances that you'll accept as saying "THE COPS WERE WRONG" and now its 10 different instances? It looks like you are admitting you lied when you said there wasn't ONE. If I locate even 1, that should be enough to show you were wrong , do you disagree?

Obviously we would need an independant opinion as to whether I was saying the cops were wrong in a particular post because we can't obviously trust you now can we..

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #85 on: April 27, 2013, 02:38:49 PM »
Figured you would back out... to find 6 instances that you'll accept as saying "THE COPS WERE WRONG" and now its 10 different instances? It looks like you are admitting you lied when you said there wasn't ONE. If I locate even 1, that should be enough to show you were wrong , do you disagree?

Obviously we would need an independant opinion as to whether I was saying the cops were wrong in a particular post because we can't obviously trust you now can we..

Wait. You're saying I backed out?

Fuck... Can you even find 6 instances? I highly doubt it... and again, it must be plainly said that they were WRONG, not the shit you always do where you post mitigation constantly.

You always have some "reason".

I use my real name on here, I'm easily found, I'm not anonymous... You think you are more trustworthy than I am?


Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #86 on: April 27, 2013, 03:44:18 PM »
Wait. You're saying I backed out?

Fuck... Can you even find 6 instances? I highly doubt it... and again, it must be plainly said that they were WRONG, not the shit you always do where you post mitigation constantly.

You always have some "reason".

I use my real name on here, I'm easily found, I'm not anonymous... You think you are more trustworthy than I am?



I don't think that at all. And I will find 6 instances.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #87 on: April 27, 2013, 03:52:33 PM »
#1

"Jack, the question is loaded to a certain extent. I don't agree they are widely despised and distrusted. I've seen local polls that back me up. I'd be living in a dream world if I wasn't aware that there are people that despise and distrust the police. In my opinion, some of them have reason to feel that way because of personal experiences they have had. When I was 16 I had a horrible experience with a small town police department that disgusted me. Completely unprofessional and abusive. Then there are those who have grown up in a culture that distrusts and hates police, and while they have no personal experience one way or the other, they hate the police. Then there are people wired to dislike authority of any kind. Parents, police, teachers, government etc. Not a thing you can do to change their minds.

I don't think the police did themselves any favors over the last 50 yrs as far as building trust. It seems everytime we take a step foward, some moron with a badge sets up back 10 yrs.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #88 on: April 27, 2013, 03:54:16 PM »
#2

"Dude, did you even read my post? Baggie are often times shoved down butt cracks and under testicles. females carry them in their panties. More likely than a cavity search on the side of the rode, it was verifying there were no drugs hidden in those areas. Regardless, the act was in poor judgment, likely violated their policy and should be stopped. It is intrusive and in my opinion, highly offensive. "

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #89 on: April 27, 2013, 03:56:42 PM »
#3  Posted by 333

Trooper Accused of Stealing from Victim of Fatal Crash [CT]
 www.nbcconnecticut.com ^ | Thursday, Nov 29, 2012 | Updated 2:48 PM EST | Staff
 
Posted on Thursday, November 29, 2012 3:59:44 PM



A 43-year-old state trooper has been charged with larceny, accused of stealing jewelry and cash from the victim of a fatal crash on Route 15 in Fairfield on Sept. 22.

Trooper Aaron Huntsman, an 18-year veteran of the department, has been suspended from the department, according to state police.

Police began investigating when the victim’s family determined that jewelry, clothing and cash were missing, state police said.

The Connecticut Post is reporting that Huntsman is accused of stealing $3,000 in cash and a gold chain from the victim's body.

The family obtained the victim’s clothes from the hospital, but were not able to find jewelry.

As State Police investigated, they determined that no jewelry was logged into evidence and a large amount of cash was found in the trooper’s police cruiser.

Police obtained an arrest warrant on Wednesday charging Huntsman with two counts of third-degree larceny, interfering with police and tampering with or fabricating physical evidence.

Police arrested Huntsman on Thursday.

He was released after posting a $5,000 bond and will be arraigned in Superior Court GA #2 Bridgeport on Dec. 10.

According to the state Web site, Huntsman's state police salary is $80,000 and he made almost $112,000 in 2011.



My Response
Life in prison should about do it.. in gen pop

tu_holmes

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 15922
  • Robot
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #90 on: April 27, 2013, 03:58:02 PM »
So far I accept 2 and 3.

1 is your typical deflection.

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #91 on: April 27, 2013, 03:59:24 PM »
Man Loses $22,000 In New 'Policing For Profit' Case


 Posted: May 09, 2012 9:52 AM EDT

Affidavit from $22,000 seizure in Monterey

By Phil Williams
Chief Investigative Reporter



 
MONTEREY, Tenn. -- "If somebody told me this happened to them, I absolutely would not believe this could happen in America."
 
That was the reaction of a New Jersey man who found out just how risky it can be to carry cash through Tennessee.
 
For more than a year, NewsChannel 5 Investigates has been shining a light on a practice that some call "policing for profit."
See previous stories:
"NC5 Investigates: Policing For Profit"
 
In this latest case, a Monterey police officer took $22,000 off the driver -- even though he had committed no crime.
 
"You live in the United States, you think you have rights -- and apparently you don't," said George Reby.
 
As a professional insurance adjuster, Reby spends a lot of time traveling from state to state. But it was on a trip to a conference in Nashville last January that he got a real education in Tennessee justice.
 
"I never had any clue that they thought they could take my money legally," Reby added. "I didn't do anything wrong."
 
Reby was driving down Interstate 40, heading west through Putnam County, when he was stopped for speeding.

A Monterey police officer wanted to know if he was carrying any large amounts of cash.
 
"I said, 'Around $20,000,'" he recalled. "Then, at the point, he said, 'Do you mind if I search your vehicle?' I said, 'No, I don't mind.' I certainly didn't feel I was doing anything wrong. It was my money."
 
That's when Officer Larry Bates confiscated the cash based on his suspicion that it was drug money.
 
"Why didn't you arrest him?" we asked Bates.
 
"Because he hadn't committed a criminal law," the officer answered.
 
Bates said the amount of money and the way it was packed gave him reason to be suspicious.
 
"The safest place to put your money if it's legitimate is in a bank account," he explained. "He stated he had two. I would put it in a bank account. It draws interest and it's safer."
 
"But it's not illegal to carry cash," we noted.
 
"No, it's not illegal to carry cash," Bates said. "Again, it's what the cash is being used for to facilitate or what it is being utilized for."
 
NewsChannel 5 Investigates noted, "But you had no proof that money was being used for drug trafficking, correct? No proof?"
 
"And he couldn't prove it was legitimate," Bates insisted.
 
Bates is part of a system that, NewsChannel 5 Investigates has discovered, gives Tennessee police agencies the incentive to take cash off of out-of-state drivers. If they don't come back to fight for their money, the agency gets to keep it all.
 
"This is a taking without due process," said Union City attorney John Miles.
 
A former Texas prosecutor and chairman of the Obion County Tea Party, Miles has seen similar cases in his area.
 
He said that, while police are required to get a judge to sign off on a seizure within five days, state law says that hearing "shall be ex parte" -- meaning only the officer's side can be heard.
 
That's why George Reby was never told that there was a hearing on his case.
 
"It wouldn't have mattered because the judge would have said, 'This says it shall be ex parte. Sit down and shut up. I'm not to hear from you -- by statute," Miles added.
 
George Reby said that he told Monterey officers that "I had active bids on EBay, that I was trying to buy a vehicle. They just didn't want to hear it."
 
In fact, Reby had proof on his computer.
 
But the Monterey officer drew up a damning affidavit, citing his own training that "common people do not carry this much U.S. currency."
Read Officer Bates' affidavit
 
"On the street, a thousand-dollar bundle could approximately buy two ounces of cocaine," Bates told NewsChannel 5 Investigates.
 
"Or the money could have been used to buy a car," we observed.
 
"It's possible," he admitted.
 
NewsChannel 5 Investigates asked Bates if Reby had told him that he was trying to buy a car?
 
"He did," the officer acknowledged.
 
"But you did not include that in your report," we noted.
 
"If it's not in there, I didn't put it in there."
 
So why did he leave that out?
 
"I don't know," the officer said.
 
Bates also told the judge the money was hidden inside "a tool bag underneath trash to [deter] law enforcement from locating it."
 
"That's inaccurate," Reby said. "I pulled out the bag and gave it to him."
 
And even though there was no proof that Reby was involved in anything illegal, Bates' affidavit portrays him as a man with a criminal history that included an arrest for possession of cocaine.
 
That was 20-some years ago," the New Jersey man insisted.
 
"Were you convicted?" we wanted to know.
 
"No, I wasn't convicted," he answered.
 
But Officer Bates says that arrest -- which he acknowledged was old -- was still part of the calculation to take Reby's money.
 
"Am I going to use it? Yes, I'm going to use it because he's been charged with it in the past -- regardless of whether it's 10 or 15 years ago," he said.
 
Attorney John Miles said he's frustrated with attitudes toward Tennessee's civil forfeiture laws, which make such practices legal.
 
"We are entitled not to be deprived of our property without due process of law, both under the Tennessee Constitution and the federal Constitution -- and nobody cares," Miles said.
 
"Nobody cares."
 
This year, state lawmakers debated a bill to create a special committee to investigate these "policing for profit" issues. That bill died in the last days of the legislative session.
 
After Reby filed an appeal, and after NewsChannel 5 began investigating, the state agreed to return his money -- if he'd sign a statement waiving his constitutional rights and promising not to sue.
 
They also made him come all the way from New Jersey, back to Monterey to pick up a check.
 
He got the check, but no apology.
 
"If they lied about everything in the report, why would they apologize?" Reby said.
 
And, with that, he was ready to put Tennessee in his rearview mirror.
 
"I really don't want to come back here," he said.
 
As for the appeals process, Reby was able to provide us and the state with letters from his employers, showing that he had a legitimate source of income.
 
It took him four months to get his money back, but it usually takes a lot longer for most people.
 
And that, Miles said, works to the benefit of the police.
 
He had two clients where police agreed to drop the cases in exchange for a cut of the money -- $1,000 in one case, $2,000 in another. In both cases, that was less than what they might have paid in attorney fees.
 
Miles called that "extortion."
 
E-mail: pwilliams@newschannel5.com

My response

Sounds like extortion to me

Agnostic007

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 14890
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #92 on: April 27, 2013, 04:07:08 PM »
I'll find some more later but remember recently someone posted a video of a cop and a citizen by a car? The cop originally claimed the guy tried to run over him and charged him with a felony. A camera caught the episode and the cop lied?
 I recall saying that the cop should get the same amount of time in prison that the citizen would have gotten had he been convicted..

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #93 on: April 27, 2013, 05:10:05 PM »
Actually Agnostic sounds like a fairly reasonable cop to me.  He's been honest when I've asked him questions curious about shit. I don't think he's right about some of the stuff he says but that's just the nature of it all and why we make points back and forth on a board like this.

Jack T. Cross

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4098
  • Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #94 on: April 27, 2013, 06:46:14 PM »
My response

Sounds like extortion to me

Hadn't you been aware of cash seizures like this, 007, where there was absolutely no indication of wrongdoing?

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #95 on: April 27, 2013, 06:59:31 PM »
Hadn't you been aware of cash seizures like this, 007, where there was absolutely no indication of wrongdoing?
those fuckers in Tennessee are out of control.  There's a zillion cases going on where they just rob people of their cash and leave it up to them to prove it was honest money.  That's so assbackward from the constitution Bugs Bunny should cut them out of the states next.  But that kind of crap is going on all over unfortunately and the feds are getting in on it too.  Cha ching...


Jack T. Cross

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4098
  • Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #96 on: April 27, 2013, 07:09:53 PM »
those fuckers in Tennessee are out of control.  There's a zillion cases going on where they just rob people of their cash and leave it up to them to prove it was honest money.  That's so assbackward from the constitution Bugs Bunny should cut them out of the states next.  But that kind of crap is going on all over unfortunately and the feds are getting in on it too.  Cha ching...



It's all over the place, Hugo.  It is fucked.  There's a method among cops, where they'll actually follow drugs into the country in order to seize the cash on the way out.  It is absolutely crazy, and barely a word said about it.

Jack T. Cross

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4098
  • Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #97 on: April 27, 2013, 07:11:51 PM »
Cash seizure is huge business.  Innocent people left and right have had their life savings stolen by police, and it's only getting worse.

Hugo Chavez

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 31866
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #98 on: April 27, 2013, 07:13:03 PM »
Cash seizure is huge business.  Innocent people left and right have had their life savings stolen by police, and it's only getting worse.
The fact that there were instant cases of corruption when the practice first started should have been an indication that it was a really bad idea.  But here we are today.

Jack T. Cross

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 4098
  • Using Surveillance for Political Subversion(?)
Re: So much for the theory that it was "Just That House"
« Reply #99 on: April 27, 2013, 07:24:04 PM »
The fact that there were instant cases of corruption when the practice first started should have been an indication that it was a really bad idea.  But here we are today.

It's heartbreaking to think of good people who have lost their life savings to police theft, and no longer have the power to fight back.

But I'll tell you, when it comes to cops sneaking after drug money, it is a clear-as-day, UNDENIABLE link showing an incentive to allow drugs into the country.  Flat out.