Where's the 'fiction writing'?

-----------

The fiction is you writing about what I would do.

All your silly posts about the judge and the prosecutors, the investigations being BS, the policeman looking 'bored' and YOU telling us what happened when you weren't even there, and how a car isn't a weapon, is the fiction. Oh, and let's not forget one of the most stupid comments you posted, how they would have been gunned down over a bottle of water. Sheesh.

Reading his cv, it sounds like he moved from his hometown in another county to Cleveland for a job.  If that makes him a local, I guess I'm a local as well.

-------------------

The site you referenced said the judge went to school at Miami University. It didn't say he was from the Miami county area. The judge went to high school at St Joseph school. There is a St Joseph school in Lakewood, Ohio. The article also said that he currently resides in Lakewood, which is in Cuyahoga county and Cleveland is the county seat of the county. Despite the fact that he lives in the same county as Cleveland, he is not local. That seems to be what you are telling me.

Best, the bottle of water was referenced because of the deadly weapon charge against the car. They shouldn't have run after the backfire, but does everyone who runs from the law get shot.

The investigation seems to have been very well done. 137 shots in 9 seconds and the time was kept in thousands of seconds. The judge said so.

I can dig about 1 1/2 inches of a ditch, I stand by that statement.

Best, the bottle of water was referenced because of the deadly weapon charge against the car. They shouldn't have run after the backfire, but does everyone who runs from the law get shot.

The investigation seems to have been very well done. 137 shots in 9 seconds and the time was kept in thousands of seconds. The judge said so.

I can dig about 1 1/2 inches of a ditch, I stand by that statement.

---------------

Only an idiot would try to make fun of a car being called a deadly weapon. Many people are purposely killed by people in cars, others kill when they are drunk and take off in cars, others kill when they are high on drugs and run from cops. Others kill when they steal cars and run. You need to grow up. You may be an older man, but you are one of the most childish acting/posting people I have ever seen with your foolish statements. You have not said ONE word about the two not giving one **** if they killed someone while they were running. I have no idea what your '137 shots in 9 seconds the judge said so' is about. I can't believe you think you know more than the judge, who saw all the evidence and heard the details.

'Murder by Mercedes': Clara Harris knocks hubby down with luxury car then uses his body as speed bump as stepdaughter looks on from passenger seat in horror  

She was sentenced to 20 years in prison, but many in Houston sympathized saying her cheating spouse had it coming

=====================

I don't know about 'had it coming' but I read the book and I couldn't sympathize with him or his skanky mistress. So sad she killed him and ended up in prison. He wasn't worth it.

http://www.nydailynews.com/new...by-article-1.1259905

Car as a deadly weapon jt.

Jt, it must have dawned upon some rappers that gangsta style shooting is inefficient, so they are using better weapons:

The rap mogul allegedly hit two men with his truck and then backed up over them as he fled the scene in California on Thursday, cops and witnesses said. One person was killed, another injured. The deadly incident occurred after Knight drove onto the set of 'Straight Outta Compton' and got into a fight. Longtime rival Dr. Dre was believed to have been on the set that day, along with Ice Cube and The Game. The dead man was reportedly a former business partner of Ice Cube.

http://www.nydailynews.com/ent...et-article-1.2097153

if they killed someone while they were running. I have no idea what your '137 shots in 9 seconds the judge said so' is about. I can't believe you think you know more than the judge, who saw all the evidence and heard the details.

---------------

Best, what do you think the judge said?

==============

What do I think the judge said about what?

==============

What do I think the judge said about what?

------------------------------------

Best, you aren't that dumb. In your efforts to bad mouth me, you put yourself out there to be the most stupid person on this forum.

Quote from you, "What do I think the judge said about what"?  You are so into the elementary school bully act.

Best, what do you think the judge said?

--------------------

Answer the question.

======================================

if they killed someone while they were running. I have no idea what your '137 shots in 9 seconds the judge said so' is about. I can't believe you think you know more than the judge, who saw all the evidence and heard the details.

------------

Best, that is your post. Answer the question. I listened to the judge, did you?

What do I think the judge said about what? Do you want me to post the entire transcript of what he said, since you won't post which part you want me to address? What do I think he said about-lunch? What? What do I think he said about what jt? Try hard jt, try real hard and see if you can finish your 'thought'.

Judge John P. O’Donnell, who rendered Saturday’s verdict himself after a multiweek, nonjury trial, spelled out the reasons for his decision:

• The officers’ first round of gunfire was permissible because they had reason to believe they and the public were at risk, in part because other officers told them the pair had weapons, that one of them had fired, because Russell led them on a chase for so long, and because of the ramming.

• Brelo’s second round was permissible because a reasonable police officer could decide that, even after the 100 shots, the threat might not have been over in part because the pair might still have been moving.

• Evidence shows Brelo’s gunfire caused at least one wound each to Russell and Williams that would have killed either of them. But they suffered other lethal wounds, probably from other officers’ guns.

• Since evidence doesn’t prove Brelo’s shots were the ones that killed the pair, he can’t be found guilty of voluntary manslaughter.

• Brelo also is not guilty of a lesser possible charge, felonious assault, because it wasn’t necessarily clear the threat was over.

http://q13fox.com/2015/05/23/j...illing-unarmed-pair/

Now you have finally posted what the judge said. Now you don't have to accuse me of knowing more than the judge. I only posted what the judge said. Now, you have done some research. That wasn't so hard, was it?

Believe me, I would never 'accuse' you of knowing more than the judge or anyone for that matter, and I didn't post that. You have a real hard time comprehending. Read it again.

I can't believe you think you know more than the judge, who saw all the evidence and heard the details.

When we watched the judge deliver his verdict, it was less than an hour long presentation / summation of two weeks of evidence and testimony.

Such as

http://www.cleveland.com/court...officer_micha_2.html

Cleveland police officer Michael Brelo's trial begins second week

If anyone struggles to comprehend the summation, imagine how confused they would be if they had heard it all.

Searching is easy for me, you're the one that claims they can't do a simple search. You still didn't answer the question. What did you want to know that the judge said, and what does "137 shots in 9 seconds and the time was kept in thousands of seconds. The judge said so" mean? Where did the judge 'say' that?

-----------------

What took you so long to search. If you really search, you can listen to the judge giving his decision. Then you will know about the thousandths of a second in this investigation to find the cop innocent.

===============

The statement is yours, not a statement of the judge. So, once more you made a nonsensical post and instead of even trying to explain it you play the dumb game. Well, I'm not so sure you're 'playing'. So, once more, where did the judge 'say' 137 shots in 9 seconds? If you heard or read it, it should be easy for you to say where it is.

 "137 shots in 9 seconds and the time was kept in thousands of seconds. The judge said so

Your entire off the wall statement is posted below. What statement were you standing by? What is there to search jt? Why can't you say? Are you or were you trying to say the judge was saying one police officer fired 137 shots in 9 seconds? Try real hard jt, see if you can make a tiny bit of sense. How deep, long and wide is that ditch you can dig in 9 seconds? 1 1/2" by what?

====================

The investigation seems to have been very well done. 137 shots in 9 seconds and the time was kept in thousands of seconds. The judge said so.

I can dig about 1 1/2 inches of a ditch, I stand by that statement.

The judge listened to the evidence for a couple of weeks. Unlike a jury, he may begin to come to  a conclusion much sooner.

Jt sez:

Local police with local investigators helped the local DA's write up a statement the local judge read when the cop was found not guilty of homicide.

The timing of the various shots was down to thousands of a second (.792 I think it was)

A lot of BS in this investigation.

==================

Then apparently you changed your mind and said the investigation was well done. BTW, what part of the judge's statement did the local police, local investigators and the DA write?

JT is retreating into conspiracies. Not a good sign.

Jt is a typical lefty cop hater.

No, I am not retreating, no, I am not a cop hater.

Go on line with yahoo. enter judge O'Donnells Scott Brelo case verdict.

Click on Judge John O'Donnell announces not guilty verdict

Click on read judges decision

That will get you to the transcript of the entire case.

First, it tells how the chase came to be, then it tells of the judges words in deciding the verdict.

Make sure you read to page 19, thats where the judge mentions Brelo took 7.392 seconds to fire 15 shots through the windshield and into the victims. Keep reading and on page 29, the judge tells how cops can kill. Keep reading to page 32 and he mentions the 7.392 seconds again.

If you want more, I'll try to find you something more.

Make sure you read to page 19, thats where the judge mentions Brelo took 7.392 seconds to fire 15 shots through the windshield and into the victims.

That is not what you posted.

What you posted:

 "137 shots in 9 seconds and the time was kept in thousands of seconds. The judge said so

You can't seem to remember what you posted. Again, what part of the judge's statement did the local police, local investigators and the local DA 'write up'?

================================

Local police with local investigators helped the local DA's write up a statement the local judge read when the cop was found not guilty of homicide.

A lot of BS in this investigation.

The investigation seems to have been very well done. 137 shots in 9 seconds and the time was kept in thousands of seconds. The judge said so.

Make sure you read to page 19, thats where the judge mentions Brelo took 7.392 seconds to fire 15 shots through the windshield and into the victims.

JT,

If you can't figure out how to copy a link, you're going to have to quit leaning on your shovel and type one in.

What lesser charges was he guilty of, JT?

I listened to the judge telling that the state proved the lesser charges and didn't listen close enough when he said that those charges were OK because he was a policeman.

===============================

You can't seem to remember what you posted. Again, what part of the judge's statement did the local police, local investigators and the local DA 'write up'?

-----------------------

Did you read the transcript?

Why don't you just post it jt?

What part of the judge's statement did the local police, local investigators and the local DA 'write up'?

 137 shots in 9 seconds and the time was kept in thousands of seconds. The judge said so.

Why don't you just post it jt?

-----------------------

Why don't you read it?  The report is thirty something pages long. It would be hard to post. I did post how to get to the transcript of the case and judges decision. Go to it and read it. 

I've got it, you don't know how to research or follow instructions.

A woman is behind bars in California, accused of killing a U.S. Navy sailor in a fit of road rage.

Darla Jackson sobbed Tuesday during a court appearance, pleading not guilty to first-degree murder in the May 28 death of Zach Buob, 39. Investigators say Jackson and Buob were in rush-hour traffic when they began arguing.

Police say Jackson chased after Buob and rammed his motorcycle -- pushing him 300 feet until he fell, then running over him.

“We are talking about something that went from a simple traffic violation to a murder,” San Diego CHP Public Information Officer Jake Sanchez said.

Stephen Cline, Jackson’s attorney, said video from the scene doesn’t tell the whole story.

“He kicked her car,” Cline said. “She chased after him and they collided at the end when they ran into traffic.”

According to court records obtained by ABC affiliate KGTV, two of Jackson’s ex-boyfriends filed restraining orders against her, and one accused Jackson of stating that she would run him over with her car.

Buob’s friends, such as Britney Morrow, packed the courthouse, hoping to send a message.

“Even if you’re angry, never use your car as a weapon, 'cause it can turn deadly,” Morrow said.

https://gma.yahoo.com/woman-ch...news-topstories.html

Did the police shoot her?

===========

Yes jt, they shot her. The picture of her alive and crying is a reenactment with an actress.   (Get someone to explain sarcasm to you)

They weren't there jt, they weren't chasing her. They hadn't chased her for 20 miles thinking she had a gun. Had they been there and chasing her for over 20 minutes and 20 miles, they might have shot her after she ran the man down. That would have been what she deserved too, since she used her car as a murder weapon.

Best, I sorta agree with your last sentence.

She used her car as a lethal weapon, the Cleveland guy only could of used a car as a lethal weapon