Author Topic: Arrest mistake (Read 5464 times)

Airhead · « **Reply #165 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:19:57 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Martlet
Then stop dropping your hat.

Or stop bending over to pick it up.

Maverick · « **Reply #166 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:22:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TweetyBird
Martlet you get gross at the drop of a hat.

En4cer - you creep me out. I picture handcuffs and mannequines.

Maverick, are you claiming to be Robert Barr raising the bar yet again?

I am not claiming anything. My name is not Robert either.

TweetyBird · « **Reply #167 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:48:33 PM »

>>I am not claiming anything. My name is not Robert either.<<

Just checking..

TweetyBird · « **Reply #168 on:** March 09, 2005, 08:53:44 PM »

>>Or stop bending over to pick it up.

Yea really, a parculiar fascination in orifices here. Some people's mind goes to the argument, others go to the butt.

Sure impressed me:rolleyes:

Martlet · « **Reply #169 on:** March 09, 2005, 09:19:29 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TweetyBird
>>Or stop bending over to pick it up.

Yea really, a parculiar fascination in orifices here. Some people's mind goes to the argument, others go to the butt.

Sure impressed me:rolleyes:

What argument? You have no argument.

BS has already been called on you. You refused to respond.

Now we're just laughing.

TweetyBird · « **Reply #170 on:** March 09, 2005, 09:34:11 PM »

>>What argument? You have no argument.

BS has already been called on you. You refused to respond.
<<

No, you're talking about butts or being a drama queen pretending to reveal an identity without posting first name, dates on the Tucson PD, precinct, rank or badge number.

I've already responded. And you've revealed your main interest in a few posts (like the donkey cartoon a while back - don't druel over the word " back").

maybe its the anavar - that monkey blood will make you nuts.

Martlet · « **Reply #171 on:** March 09, 2005, 10:06:39 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by TweetyBird
>>What argument? You have no argument.

BS has already been called on you. You refused to respond.
<<

No, you're talking about butts or being a drama queen pretending to reveal an identity without posting first name, dates on the Tucson PD, precinct, rank or badge number.

I've already responded. And you've revealed your main interest in a few posts (like the donkey cartoon a while back - don't druel over the word " back").

maybe its the anavar - that monkey blood will make you nuts.

Can't say I understood a word of that.

I did enjoy watching Maverick show you to be a fool, though.

DoctorYO · « **Reply #172 on:** March 09, 2005, 10:16:25 PM »

Btw fellas Im not taking sides.... I appreciate law enforcement, I appreciate the freedoms in the good ole USA also.. I just want whats fair..

I think alot of good points came up here..

there is always two sides to a story.. and we only have tweety's so i cant vouge for its accuracy...

lawenforcement (without we would be in anarchy.. no doubt about it...)

tweety... (i would just ask for a written apology and drop it.. mistakes happen.. now if it was pattern then thats something else... and take action)

DoctorYo

PS now kiss and make up....

Del · « **Reply #173 on:** March 09, 2005, 10:22:05 PM »

( o )

Airhead · « **Reply #174 on:** March 09, 2005, 10:34:31 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by DoctorYO
Btw fellas Im not taking sides.... I appreciate law enforcement, I appreciate the freedoms in the good ole USA also.. I just want whats fair..

I think alot of good points came up here..

there is always two sides to a story.. and we only have tweety's so i cant vouge for its accuracy...

lawenforcement (without we would be in anarchy.. no doubt about it...)

tweety... (i would just ask for a written apology and drop it.. mistakes happen.. now if it was pattern then thats something else... and take action)

DoctorYo

PS now kiss and make up....

Thank God for DrYo's sage guidance- after all, he's been registered a long long time so he must have credibility.

Come back again any time Yo- whenever you see an impasse in a debate don't hesitate to tell all of us what to think. And thanks also for setting the record straight about those 13th TAS scallywags- here I had thought Rude, Toad, Bodhi and the rest of them were honorable men, albeit a bit misguided politically... I had no idea they were co-conspirators in Voss's flight sim scam, as you suggest. In fact I had interpeted their silence on the matter here as not wanting to engage in gossip (as you have done)...

But..like I said, you've been around a long long time, and sometimes tenure gives one an inflated opinion of their real value.

jEEZY · « **Reply #175 on:** March 09, 2005, 10:45:05 PM »

look up a "Bivens" action this one seems ripe for it

TweetyBird · « **Reply #176 on:** March 09, 2005, 11:32:16 PM »

There are no damages or reason for anything but an apology, which was given. Even the officers who were repsonsible for not following proper procedure were nowhere nere as junvenile as whats been posted here. It was a mistake, and as someone posted in the first day, a normal reaction to try to cover a mistake. But in the end, it was just a mistake. I'm just glad it wasn't a mistake about a felony warrant.

The irony is this whole incident came from video taping a high school religion project and the initial officer was not a regular police officer (actually a k9 handler). "Do you all have any weapons?"

"Er, a crossbow , a sword, and an apple."

Your "ripe for it" remark is apt

And Dr.Yo you are exactly right - I can only give my side. I'm sure the officers involved saw things differently - different perspective.
But there is one objective fact. My nephew was arrested only because a number was either spoken wrong or typed wrong, and no name or dob was called back to verify. The disposition of his case was a matter of tearing up the paper work. Now thats usual eh?

Lazerus · « **Reply #177 on:** March 10, 2005, 01:45:57 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Martlet
Uh huh.

I get 6 days off a month, one day in the middle of the week and every other Sunday. Gotta be there by noon on the Sundays I work.

for martlet only

I was in court for a traffic ticket very early, a mistake I made after losing my ticket. I was lucky that I remembered the date, I just kinda showed up. They were hearing DUI, CDV, public drunkeness cases, etc.

There were about 20 people that had been ticketed at a party down by the college for underage drinking. One lucky young lady had a lawyer. The officer began to present his case. He stated, again(she was about the 12th one up from the same incident), the circumstances surrounding his summons and arrival at the property. He had instructed her to stay on the porch of the house after confiscating her ID and then walked into the front yard to talk to another officer. He went back to her and began questioning her. This is where her lawyer stopped him. He asked for the opportunity to ask a few questions, the judge said OK.

He asked the Defendant if she felt that she was able to walk away from the officer that was questioning her. She said no. He asked if the officer told her that she was under arrest. She said no. He asked if the officer advised her of her rights to not answer his questions. She said no.

He proposed to the court that she was being held and questioned and that constituted an arrest of her civil liberties, and that she had not been advised of her right to not answer the officers questions.

The judge agreed.

The officers only evidence against her was what she told him in that conversation. It was not allowed as testimony. The charges against her were dropped.

The argument here is only a matter of semantics. "Arrest" as defined by procedure is not the same as "arrest" as defined by the liberties granted to all Americans. I agree with the semantics, but the stubbornness exhibited here by everyone is absurd.

Recognise this argument for what it is.

Lazerus · « **Reply #178 on:** March 10, 2005, 02:06:01 AM »

And by the way, if I didn't mention it last Sunday morning, I have family members in law enforcement. I have nothing but respect for the guys and girls that put their arses on the line every day so we can all exist in relative safety. I hold great contempt for those that abuse that trust and respect and blemish the image of an overwhelmingly honorable group of people.

I have been held in jail for a falsely filed warrant. A simple traffic violation that had been dismissed was mistakenly reported as unpaid and a bench warrant was issued. I was stopped for something else, my license was run, and I was taken to jail. It was on a weekend and it took them awhile to contact the judge and verify that I was telling the truth. It was a simple mistake. Careless, but human. The judge did me a favor by dropping the original ticket. I just figured that I paid for that mistake that night. The phone call apologizing was nice too.

It did take me a few days to get to that point, but I got there, and there I still am.

It's a great feeling to have several friends raising hell to get you out of jail all night.

Martlet · « **Reply #179 on:** March 10, 2005, 02:26:33 PM »

Quote

Originally posted by Lazerus
I get 6 days off a month, one day in the middle of the week and every other Sunday. Gotta be there by noon on the Sundays I work.

for martlet only

I was in court for a traffic ticket very early, a mistake I made after losing my ticket. I was lucky that I remembered the date, I just kinda showed up. They were hearing DUI, CDV, public drunkeness cases, etc.

There were about 20 people that had been ticketed at a party down by the college for underage drinking. One lucky young lady had a lawyer. The officer began to present his case. He stated, again(she was about the 12th one up from the same incident), the circumstances surrounding his summons and arrival at the property. He had instructed her to stay on the porch of the house after confiscating her ID and then walked into the front yard to talk to another officer. He went back to her and began questioning her. This is where her lawyer stopped him. He asked for the opportunity to ask a few questions, the judge said OK.

He asked the Defendant if she felt that she was able to walk away from the officer that was questioning her. She said no. He asked if the officer told her that she was under arrest. She said no. He asked if the officer advised her of her rights to not answer his questions. She said no.

He proposed to the court that she was being held and questioned and that constituted an arrest of her civil liberties, and that she had not been advised of her right to not answer the officers questions.

The judge agreed.

The officers only evidence against her was what she told him in that conversation. It was not allowed as testimony. The charges against her were dropped.

The argument here is only a matter of semantics. "Arrest" as defined by procedure is not the same as "arrest" as defined by the liberties granted to all Americans. I agree with the semantics, but the stubbornness exhibited here by everyone is absurd.

Recognise this argument for what it is.

Could you post a link to this?